BaldProphet

Your arguments aren't really addressing the points that OP made, though. They aren't saying they expected everything to work just like Windows, they are saying they expected everything to just work. Any system that requires tinkering for basic stable functionality should be considered experimental and not ready for production.

If you disagree you are falling prey to dogmatic OS fundamentalism. Acknowledging insufficiencies helps improve Linux, while rejecting such criticism prolongs the amount of time the majority of people write it off as unusable as a desktop operating system.

It may in fact be possible to protect bridge supports from ship collisions. Bridges in the San Francisco Bay have some state of the art protections that have worked in the past: https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/bay-area-bridge-safety-collapse/3493000/

I had to do a write-up on the Deepwater Horizon disaster for my organizational leadership class a couple weeks ago. Same thing, a corporate culture that downplayed safety and emphasized profit led to poor maintenance, woefully inadequate equipment inspections, and choosing the worst options because they were cheaper.

It's past time for these corps to learn.

Seems like this sort of anti-safety corporate culture is behind the majority of industrial accidents.

You are more intellectually honest and open-minded than the majority of people in the Fediverse.

Okay, but you're talking about an entirely different doctrine now: Deification.

Regardless, I consider myself a Christian because I worship Jesus Christ. Every religious service or act I have ever participated in has been done in His name. The most significant doctrines I believe in were preached by Him.

I find the idea that because I don't believe in the Athanasian Creed I am therefore not a Christian to be absurd and impossible to support authoritatively. You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion on this matter.

I reject your opinion entirely.

There is one God. Jesus is God. Jesus always existed. The Holy Spirit is God. The Holy Spirit is referenced in both testaments. The Father is God. The Father always existed. Jesus prays to the Father. The Father and the Holy spirit are both present alongside each other at Jesus’ baptism. Jesus flat out equates the Father, Son and Holy Spirit together when talking of Baptism.

This is exactly the same doctrine as the Godhead. God the Father is God. God the Son, Jesus Christ, is God. The Holy Spirit is God. Three together in unity, all present during the baptism of Christ. All eternal.

I don't see a disagreement here.

God’s doctrine is supposed to be unchanging, and yet it changes continuously.

The doctrine is pretty unchanging. You sound like you have a misunderstanding of what is "doctrine" and what is not. I have no interest in convincing you of anything, but I will address some of what you have stated just so other people do not get the wrong idea. Much of what you have stated is incorrect.

The November 2015 policy was prophecy and the will of god, and then just a couple years later it wasn’t.

The November 2015 policy change was never prophecy. It was never characterized as prophecy. It was always merely policy.

Temple ceremonies are supposed to be directly from god, and yet those have changed massively over the years.

Temple ceremonies have never been directly from God. From the very beginning, the first time they were introduced in Nauvoo.

Polygamy was supposed to be the everlasting covenant, but then it wasn’t.

Nope. The everlasting covenant was about our doctrine of eternal marriage in general; polygamy was only included as far as it involved a sealing in the temple. The words describing this are the same as they were when Joseph Smith wrote them in 1843.

…Which is claimed to be doctrine and the will of god by the prophet, and then changes with the change in leadership.

Incorrect. The Church makes a clear distinction between its policies and its doctrine. See here: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2021/12/come-follow-me/why-does-church-policy-sometimes-change?lang=eng#title1

Then you aren’t following the guidance of the prophet for every member to be a missionary.

What, do you think missionaries go around baptizing people at gunpoint? I'm no longer a full-time proselytizing missionary, but even when I was, forcing people to join the Church against their will was never a part of the program. What I'm doing right now is being a missionary, by rebutting the misinformation you are posting. Since you've clearly got no interest in coming back, all I can hope is that you will find peace in your heart and stop spreading misinformation about us.

The concept of the trinity defined by the Nicene Creed is vastly elaborated compared to the verses in the New Testament that refer to it. At the same time, there are several instances where the trinitarian view of God is nonsensical, such as when the Father announces His acceptance of Jesus' baptism, or the numerous times Jesus stated that He was "returning" to "His Father". How would a single being return to Himself? Why would He engage in ventriloquism at the scene of His baptism?

Regardless, we both believe in Jesus Christ, even if we believe in different things about Him. We are therefore both Christians.

I don't think anything that you listed is a secret. And yes, I am an active member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I'm not sure your talking points are made in good faith (you sound like you have a massive chip on your shoulder) but I'll try to address them anyway.

Every prophet is a prophet until a new prophet says something that contradicts the old one, and then the old one was “speaking as a man”.

This is a mischaracterization about Latter-day Saint beliefs regarding contemporary prophets. Unlike most Christian sects, we believe in an open canon and that God actively communicates to humankind via a prophet today just as in biblical times. A prophet can say one thing and then another prophet can say something else, and both can still be speaking the word of God authoritatively.

They used to print notices of excommunication in Desert News. Literally. So this idea that “oh no, we can’t tell people about this, they need their privacy” is utter nonsense.

It is not "utter nonsense", it is the policy of the Church. Your logic is faulty, because it could be used to define any improvement in any organization or group as "utter nonsense". One could just as easily say that because slavery was once legal in the United States, the emancipation proclamation is "utter nonsense".

So, here’s your fundamental problem: the beliefs are un-falsifiable.

From where I stand, that is your fundamental problem. You sound like you feel personally affronted when someone has faith in something that you can't observe with your natural senses. That's okay, I get it. It's not for you. Why spend so much energy arguing with an internet stranger whom you identify yourself as being obviously an adherent to such a faith?

I am comfortable with my faith and have no interest in forcing anyone to believe like I do. However, it sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder and are heavily prejudiced against religious people in general and Latter-day Saints in particular. I can't envision a productive outcome to continuing this discussion, but should you have questions about my beliefs and are willing to listen with an open mind, my DMs are always open.

I wish you a joyous day.

Ah yes, the continuously exhausting tradition of Christians who believe in one doctrine introduced hundreds of years after the death of Jesus Christ (trinitarianism) denying the beliefs of Christians who believe in other doctrines introduced after the death of Jesus Christ.

Our beliefs have much more in common than you think.

Christianity in no way encourages abuse of children or even people who are demon possessed.

Neither does the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints or its members, who read and believe in the same verses you quoted.