john doe

So you left Utah and took the "T" with you? Well, some of us Utahns want it back.

And there's the rub, isn't it? Just because someone's religious beliefs in Christ makes them a Christian, their actions many times are not very Christ-like. But we need to be very careful about taking away someone's Christianity, simply because it doesn't jive with our definition of what being a Christian is. To tell someone who professes a faith and belief in Christ that they have no right to follow Christ is like telling them that they have no hope of salvation. It's the ultimate slap in the (religious) face. For instance, is it really very Christian of us to tell earnest people who believe in Jesus as their Savior that they really don't qualify as Christians simply because they interpret his teachings and words differently than we do? Or would Christ suggest that we celebrate our common belief in Him and engage in civil discourse in an attempt to come to a common understanding of His truth? On the other hand, I also think that it is fair to point out the inconsistencies of one's stated faith in Christ and their actions showing that perhaps they don't really understand His word. I guess my point is, you can embrace Christianity, and be a Christian, but that doesn't necessarily translate to conducting yourself in a way that would make Christ claim you as one of His. In the end, we can't make Christ accept us, but we can try to live our lives to such a degree that when He comes, He will say 'Well done, my good and faithful servant. Enter into my Rest'.

Splitting hairs, I guess, but here goes: I would say in a broad sense, that anyone who believes in Jesus as the Savior of the world and men's souls probably qualifies as a Christian. Agreed, just because they acknowledge that he existed and even go to the point where some will accept that he was a great prophet, that does not make them a Christian. It is when they express a faith in Him as being the Savior of all mankind and as the 'gatekeeper' if you will, to heaven, that they should be recognized as Christian.

Is this one of those things where you really didn't need something until the salesman convinced you that your life was empty without it? Will it give me inner peace and happiness with just the click of a mouse? Will it pay all my bills off no matter how much money I have or how much I owe? Will it automatically clean my house every morning for free? I hear a lot of buzz about how great google+ is, but no one has ever really stated what it will realistically do that I can't do now.

These days, essentially you can't tell which numbers are mobile and which are landlines. The only way you can really tell is to know the historical landline exchange numbers from the old days when they used to be geographical in an area. As cell phone use has exploded, the cell phones have taken up a lot of prefixes, to the point where the average person can't keep up with it anymore. You can tell by the area code the general area where the person activated the phone number, but that's about it. And the numbers made available to the cell companies varied by region and area code. There is no magical prefix that is common to all areas of the US that will tell you whether you are calling a cell phone or a landline. And as Pam said, now in the US you can carry a cell phone number with you when you switch carriers, so there is no way for the layman to know for sure what network you are calling. You need to remember that our population is approx. 5 times that of the UK and the UK in land mass is smaller than Oregon, which is only our 9th largest state. Our systems will necessarily be more complex, different, and varied than what you use there, just to meet the needs and demands of our citizens.

We in the US have a different philosophy. If we don't want to talk to you, we say goodbye and hang up the phone. If it is a vendor, we can tell them to put us on their 'do not call' list, and they are not allowed to call again. If it's your mom, and you just don't want to waste your minutes on her, tell her you are driving and will call later, then conveniently 'forget' to call back. So BT charges the landline user for calling a cellphone? How do they know? Are cell numbers different?

I think the idea is if you are using the company's cell tower and equipment, you should pay for it. If it were a caller-pay plan, I can envision people with few minutes making a short call to someone with a lot of minutes on their plan and having them call back, thus putting all the charges on the second person's plan. I don't know UK rates vs. US rates, but it seems to me that if both the caller and receiver are paying for the calls, the rates for both would be shared, and thus flattened overall, instead of having the initiator of the call get stuck with a large bill and the recipient paying nothing, when the call was likely for the benefit of both people. It seems to me that when cell phones were new to the market, most plans were similar to what you describe, the caller paid the charges, the recipient didn't pay for calls not dialed. That has largely disappeared from the US market at this time in favor of the current system where everybody pays for their airtime. I think the main problem was that if someone called a cell phone from a landline, they would not get charged for a call to the cell phone, and the cell phone call recipient would not get charged for a call they did not dial, thus enabling them to use the cell phone company's resources without anyone paying the cell phone company for using its equipment. This would put an unfair burden on the cell company.

Land line? People still have those in their homes?

It depends on the plan. My plan is for a certain amount of minutes, no matter who initiates the call. However, nights, weekends, and calls between myself and others with the same carrier are free and unlimited. I also get free roaming inside the US. Some carriers have 'rollover' minutes, where you can carry your unused minutes from one month over to use in another month. Generally though, you will be charged for the minutes you are on a call on that phone. It does not matter who called whom, it counts against your plan.

He was fired 6 years ago for drug and alcohol abuse. I wouldn't be surprised if those were factors in his death.

Cool. Good luck in getting started.

Try hitting up your local community fitness centers. I know the one I go to has a couple who are like contract workers. The trainer I have had works at 2-3 places teaching classes and is on-call for individual training sessions at the center. She doesn't work regular hours there, people call her and the fitness center collects the money and pays her per session as she gets them. She also goes to private gyms owned by companies and teaches classes/training sessions for groups or individual employees.

So faith and/or priesthood are nothing? You are partially right in your assertion, I wonder if you know which part you are right about.

My wife and kids will be up late tonight saying goodbye to Dunderdork, Snipe, the Half-Baked Prince, and Malfeasance. I'll be sleeping soundly, and hope they don't wake me when they get home.

Two tragedies today involving boys at different Boy Scout camps. Links here: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/52184249-78/rowberry-lake-diving-scuba.html.csp and here: Lightning hits two Boy Scouts in Scofield; one dies | The Salt Lake Tribune I spent a day at the Bear Lake camp last year when my son was there. It seemed to be very well organized and safety was taken very seriously, especially in and on the water. Such a sad thing to happen.

It should also be brought up that just because people in the early days of the church were sealed to Joseph, does not mean that they were actually married to him. Plural marriage was not necessarily the same as being sealed to a person. In fact, there is evidence that many men were also sealed to Joseph. I don't have the documentation for that, but a person doing a little digging should be able to find that info.

I'm of the opinion that while Joseph did practice polygamy, his heart may not have been in it. He did, after all, have to be threatened until he finally instituted it. I'm guessing that he did the bare minimum required in that sense, and that he was fearful of losing Emma if he did any more than that. It may possibly turn out that, in order to spare Emma's feelings, he never consummated those plural marriages. Or it could be that any children produced died at young ages. All we really know at this point is that no offspring other than those he had with Emma have yet been identified. And that the best known rumored offspring have so far been shown to be not his seed.

Okay guys, let's try to remember to play nice together. Since this is the internet and we can't see each other, it is sometimes hard to get a point across without seeming harsh. Let's all make an attempt to be fully understood without giving or taking offense as much as possible. Before pushing the 'post reply' button, ask yourself how you would react if someone addressed you in the same way and tone you are addressing them. And then try to be a little nicer. Please, let's be kinder and gentler in our words.

Check with your credit cards, many companies automatically give some basic insurance when renting using their card.

So, you're saying you'd pay to see it?

I disagree. He was fully human. And fully God. He was and is both, completely.

It might be good for a laugh.

Let's try to keep it civil in here. There is no reason for this subject to create friction.

How about a certificate of live birth?

I got to meet Pam once. It was the highlight of my day.