askandanswer

If Korihor believed that what he was teaching was true, should he be punished for that, or should he just be re-taught? Perhaps there may be some similarities between Korihor and Paul - both were acting to the detriment of the church and in accordance with what they believed to be true, yet Paul saw an angel and was re-educated, while Korihor was struck dumb and killed by the crowd. Alma and the sons of Mosiah were behaving in a manner similar to Korihor but they had a very different experience. Alma 30 The devil had appeared to Korihor as an angel and taught him what to say—Korihor is trodden down and dies. So now they are the people of Ammon - not the people of Lamoni, or of Aaron, or the people of Lamoni's father, or the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's but the people of Ammon. And its only now, after having read the Book of Mormon many times, that I've noticed that Lamoni's father is not named. Alma 30:1 1 Behold, now it came to pass that after the people of Ammon were established in the land of Jershon, Is the prefix Anti here being used in the same way, or have the same meaning, as Anti-Nephi-Lehi? Alma 30:6 and he was Anti-Christ, I wonder if there were any new prophecies in here or if they were just repeats of old, known prophecies. Alma 30:6 he began to preach unto the people against the prophecies which had been spoken by the prophets, concerning the coming of Christ. This seems to be very advanced and enlightened. I suspect that in England up until maybe even the 19th century, discrimination on the grounds of religious beliefs was still legal and widely practiced. Alma 30:7 Now there was no law against a man’s belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds. On the other hand, to conclude that all men were on equal ground simply because there was no law against a man's belief suggests a very simplistic or narrow kind of thinking. Alma 30:11 11 For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man’s belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal grounds. What total nonsense! God can reveal anything to any person. The Nephites knew that if you dropped a stone, the next thing which was to come was that the stone would fall. If you released an arrow from your bow, the next thing that would come was that the arrow would move forward. There were a great deal of things to come that the Nephites, and Korihor, knew of. Perhaps Koriohor's complaint had more to do with ways of knowing what would come to pass rather than the content of that knowledge. Alma 30:13 13 O ye that are bound down under a foolish and a vain hope, why do ye yoke yourselves with such foolish things? Why do ye look for a Christ? For no man can know of anything which is to come. Did Korihor provide any evidence of this or is it just a claim he asserted, with no support? Alma 30:14 behold, they are foolish traditions of your fathers. This claim that you cannot know what you cannot see leaves absolutely no room for things worked out solely on the basis of logical deduction. Most of what we know about the quantum world and sub-atomic things is about things we cannot see. This idea that you can only know what you can see advocates a very narrow, restricted way of knowing. There are more ways of knowing than just seeing, or what we can discover through our senses. And as Descarte pointed out, our senses are not completely accurate or reliable. And no doubt many Nephites knew of Jerusalem, despite having never seen it. Alma 30:15 Behold, ye cannot know of things which ye do not see; In fact, I would go further and say that Christ, and the things of the spirit cannot be known through our senses, they can only be known through the workings of the spirit. Alma 30:15 15 How do ye know of their surety? Behold, ye cannot know of things which ye do not see; therefore ye cannot know that there shall be a Christ.

This seems to be inconsistent with how the prefix anti is used in Alma 30:6. 6 But it came to pass in the latter end of the seventeenth year, there came a man into the land of Zarahemla, and he was aAnti-Christ, for he began to preach unto the people bagainst the prophecies which had been spoken by the prophets, concerning the coming of Christ.

Its a great blessing to be able to assist in someone else's conversion. Alma 26:1 behold I say unto you, how great reason have we to rejoice; for could we have supposed when we started from the land of Zarahemla that God would have granted unto us such great blessings? This reminds me of the hymn count your many blessings. Alma 26:2 2 And now, I ask, what great blessings has he bestowed upon us? Can ye tell? Some evidence seems to suggest that they were actually pretty close to the light if all it took for their conversion was the conversion of the king followed up by later preaching. Alma 26:3 3 Behold, I answer for you; for our brethren, the Lamanites, were in darkness, yea, even in the darkest abyss, Outside the salvation of one's self and own family, there really isn't much greater work than missionary work. Alma 26:3 3 Behold, I answer for you; for our brethren, the Lamanites, were in darkness, yea, even in the darkest abyss, but behold, how many of them are brought to behold the marvelous light of God! And this is the blessing which hath been bestowed upon us, that we have been made instruments in the hands of God to bring about this great work. The symbolism paints a picture of something that was standing, being cut down to the ground and separated from that which gave it nourishment and strength and enabled it to stand. This idea that the field was ripe is not consistent with the idea that the Lamanites were in the darkest abyss. Alma 26:5 5 Behold, the field was ripe, and blessed are ye, for ye did thrust in the sickle, and did reap with your might, yea, all the day long did ye labor I'm not quite into the barn yet, or not as far in as I should be. I need to get a move on. Alma 26:6 Yea, they shall not be beaten down by the storm at the last day; yea, neither shall they be harrowed up by the whirlwinds; but when the storm cometh they shall be gathered together in their place, that the storm cannot penetrate to them; We need to place ourselves in His hands. It must be an informed and voluntary act of surrender and submission. Alma 26:7 But behold, they are in the hands of the Lord of the harvest, From what Ammon says here, giving thanks to God for the outcome, I don't see how it can be said that Ammon was taking glory unto himself. Alma 26:8 Book of Mormon 8 Blessed be the name of our God; let us sing to his praise, yea, let us give thanks to his holy name, for he doth work righteousness forever. God wrought the miracles. Alma 26:12 behold, many mighty miracles we have wrought in this land, Is there a time when any of God's children are not encircled with His love? Alma 26:15 15 Yea, they were encircled about with everlasting darkness and destruction; but behold, he has brought them into his everlasting light, yea, into everlasting salvation; and they are encircled about with the matchless bounty of his love; This is not fully consistent with my note in verse 7. Perhaps on some occasions, God does snatch us into His hands rather than waiting for us to place ourselves there. Alma 26:17 Who could have supposed that our God would have been so merciful as to have snatched us from our awful, sinful, and polluted state? There is nothing that is more meaningful, more important, more satisfying and more necessary than being an instrument in the hands of God in bringing about His work. Alma 26:15 15 Yea, they were encircled about with everlasting darkness and destruction; but behold, he has brought them into his everlasting light, yea, into everlasting salvation; and they are encircled about with the matchless bounty of his love; yea, and we have been instruments in his hands of doing this great and marvelous work. This is exactly what Saul was trying to do and he went through a similar experience as Alma. As I've noted many times before, this is behaviour that I just don't understand. Why not live and let live? If you disagree with someone's belief, so what? You should not seek to interfere with that belief except in the case where you can offer them a higher belief, ie, the gospel, in which case the higher belief should be extended as an invitation for the other person to accept. Alma 26:18 18 Behold, we went forth even in wrath, with mighty threatenings to destroy his church. Crossing over to and being on the right side of the gulf is only the beginning. Its not a one-way trip, its far easier to reverse direction and cross back to the other side of the gulf than it is to continue going forward. Much easier, and much less rewarding. Alma 26:20 20 but in his great mercy hath brought us over that everlasting gulf of death and misery, even to the salvation of our souls. Here is the way whereby anybody can come to know everything. The pathway to revealed knowledge is open to all who will follow these steps. This is something that I truly believe, and why I reject the notion that our capacity to know and understand God and His actions is limited. Alma 26:22 22 Yea, he that repenteth and exerciseth faith, and bringeth forth good works, and prayeth continually without ceasing—unto such it is given to know the mysteries of God; yea, unto such it shall be given to reveal things which never have been revealed; yea, Are they still calling it a strange land even after 500 years of occupation? Do they still feel that Israel is their home land despite not having lived their for a dozen or more generations? Alma 26:36 36 blessed is the name of my God, who has been mindful of this people, who are a branch of the tree of Israel, and has been lost from its body in a strange land; yea, I say, blessed be the name of my God, who has been mindful of us, wanderers in a strange land.

I was thinking camule

So they were so angry that they had killed their own people that they decided to kill someone else. It doesn't make much sense. Alma 25:1 now it came to pass that those Lamanites were more angry because they had slain their brethren; therefore they swore vengeance upon the Nephites A great example of the wicked slaying the wicked. It seems as if the only motives for this unprovoked attack was a desire for revenge and an expression of anger/hatred. I guess this destruction could be interpreted as divine vengeance for how the people of Ammonihah had behaved towards Alma and AMulek and the people who believed on their message. If that is a correct interpretation it would raise questions about all the other times when divine justice has been delayed or invisible or absent. Alma 25:2 2 But they took their armies and went over into the borders of the land of Zarahemla, and fell upon the people who were in the land of Ammonihah and destroyed them. A similar event, in Alma 14:8 did not result in a the same reaction as recorded here. Alma 25:8 Now this martyrdom caused that many of their brethren should be stirred up to anger; and there began to be contention in the wilderness; and the Lamanites began to hunt the seed of Amulon and his brethren and began to slay them; and they fled into the east wilderness. If these Lamanites were the ones who had heard and began to believe on, and live consistent with, the teachings of Aaron and his brethren, this action of hunting and slaying the seed of Amulon and his brethren would have been directly contrary to those teachings. Alma 25:8 and the Lamanites began to hunt the seed of Amulon and his brethren and began to slay them; and they fled into the east wilderness. It took a long time, probably too long, for this prophecy to be fulfilled, considering how much trouble they caused. I'm not sure why the Lord suffered them to stay in power for as long as He did or what purpose was served by doing so. We don't know when this was written, but the idea indicating that they were still being "hunted at this day" suggests that they were not very good at their hunting otherwise they would have finished the job sooner. Alma 25:9 And behold they are hunted at this day by the Lamanites. Thus the words of Abinadi were brought to pass, which he said concerning the seed of the priests who caused that he should suffer death by fire. So after hunting and killing Nephites in the land of the Nephites, they returned to join those people who had recently been taught and coverted by Nephite missionaries. Alma 25:13 And it came to pass that when the Lamanites saw that they could not overpower the Nephites they returned again to their own land; I wonder how similar this process was to the amalgamation of the Nephites and the Mulekites. Alma 25:13 they returned again to their own land; and many of them came over to dwell in the land of Ishmael and the land of Nephi, and did join themselves to the people of God, who were the people of Anti-Nephi-Lehi. There's an awful lot that is not being said here. The missionary story of Aaron and his brethren took about 6 or 7 chapters, and this second round of Lamanite conversions gets a few verses. Alma 25:14 14 And they did also bury their weapons of war, according as their brethren had, and they began to be a righteous people; and they did walk in the ways of the Lord, and did observe to keep his commandments and his statutes. I think it would have been more useful if they had beat their swords into plowshears. They didn't renounce war or bloodshed, they just took steps that would delay their preparation and give them to time think should war ever become necessary. Alma 25:14 14 And they did also bury their weapons of war, according Finally, a group of people who understood the purpose of the Law of Moses and that it was not an end in itself, but merely a means of pointing them to, and preparing them for, something much greater. It seems as if this greater purpose was completely lost on the Jews in Jerusalem. Alma 25:15 15 Yea, and they did keep the law of Moses; for it was expedient that they should keep the law of Moses as yet, for it was not all fulfilled. But notwithstanding the law of Moses, they did look forward to the coming of Christ, considering that the law of Moses was a type of his coming, and believing that they must keep those outward performances until the time that he should be revealed unto them What modifications to the Law of Moses would have been necessary to make up for the absence of any descendants of Levi? And what was the relationship between the priests of the church, as appointed by Alma and others, and the priests required for officiating in Mosaic ordinances? Alma 25:15 Yea, and they did keep the law of Moses; for it was expedient that they should keep the law of Moses as yet, for it was not all fulfilled.

Isn't that the whole purpose of fountain pen day? We collectively gather round the bonfires and melt our fountain pens.

I'm puzzled about why Ammon would water the king's sheep using a green snake that's spitting venom.

No mention of the resurrection or repentance here. Alma 18 King Lamoni supposes that Ammon is the Great Spirit—Ammon teaches the king about the Creation, God’s dealings with men, and the redemption that comes through Christ Sounds very similar to what happened to Lamoni's father. And to Alma the Younger and to Saul and to Zeezrom. These experiences may provide support for the conclusion that intense spiritual experiences can have a physical impact. If that turned out to be a supported fact I wander if that would then help to support any conclusions about the relationship between the physical and the spiritual, or between the spirit and the body? It sometimes seems to be the case that when we give more preference to wants/needs of the body, the influence of the spirit declines, and when there is an intense spiritual experience, the ability/functionality of the body declines. One example of this is fasting, where there is thought to be a close correlation between denying the body to feed the spirit. Lamoni believes and falls to the earth as if dead. Is this indicative of a belief in some sort of divine justice and of a moral code in which some things were right and some were wrong? And does it indicate a formalised system of religious instruction being carried out across generations? Alma 18:2 Behold, is not this the Great Spirit who doth send such great punishments upon this people, because of their murders? So they knew that Ammon was not the Great Spirit and they believed that he was not a man. It sounds like they didn't have a clear idea of what their Great Spirit could do, or know of any powers that the Great Spirit had to protect a person. And now, O king, we do not believe that a man has such great power, for we know he cannot be slain. In this instance, the Lamanite understanding of who or what their Great Spirt was sounds pretty thin and undeveloped. Alma 18:4 Now I know that it is the Great Spirit; and he has come down at this time to preserve your lives, I guess if this is indicative of the kings attitudes towards his subjects - that he was willing to kill them because they stole his sheep - it might help to explain why they were willing to steal his sheep. It seemed like neither the king nor his people had a high regard for each other. 4 Now I know that it is the Great Spirit; and he has come down at this time to preserve your lives, that I might not slay you as I did your brethren. ' Its interesting that one of the early corruptions of the truth in the early days of Christianity was the nature of God and the idea that He is a spirit. It seems like the same thing, and probably from the same source, happened to the Lamanites. Now this is the Great Spirit of whom our fathers have spoken. Their religious beliefs, such as they were, do not seem to have had much of an impact on their behaviour. Alma 18:5 Notwithstanding they believed in a Great Spirit, they supposed that whatsoever they did was right; It seems to be unwise to keep bringing your flocks to a place where it was known that they could be scattered and stolen, Alma 18:7 Now it was the practice of these Lamanites to stand by the waters of Sebus to scatter the flocks of the people, that thereby they might drive away many that were scattered unto their own land, you'd think that after it had happened the first few times, they would have found a new way, or a new place, of watering the king's sheep. And if there was no new way, you think they would have taken an armed escort with them. Before Ammon it sounds like being assigned to be the shephards of the king's flocks was like sending lambs to the slaughter, but it was the shephards, and not the sheep, who were slaughtered. Alma 18:6 For he had slain many of them because their brethren had scattered their flocks at the place of water; The normality of Ammon's behaviour here, in contrast to his previous abnormal behaviour of killing 7 people in defence of the king's flocks, coupled with his comments in verse 17 create the impression that Ammon feels he hasn't done anything unusual or particularly note-worthy. If that was the case it would raise some questions about the nature of Nephite society. Alma 18:9 9 And they said unto him: Behold, he is feeding thy horses. Isn't this just standard behaviour for a servant? If the king is suprised at what should have been ordinary behaviour by a servant he must have had a bad bunch of servants. It seems as if the king here is confusing obedience with faithfulness. Alma 18:10 10 Now when king Lamoni heard that Ammon was preparing his horses and his chariots he was more astonished, because of the faithfulness of Ammon, saying: Surely there has not been any servant among all my servants that has been so faithful as this man; for even he doth remember all my commandments to execute them. The king seems to be quick to come to conclusions on the basis of limited information. Does he not even consider the possibility that Ammon might have been sent by the Great Spirit? This is an undesirable trait in a national political leader. Alma 18:11 11 Now I surely know that this is the Great Spirit, Not only does the king appear to be hasty in his conclusions but he also seems to lack courage. Alma 18:11 11 I would desire him that he come in unto me, but I durst not.

I played this clip in one of my lectures a few months back. The lecture was on culturally safe care and I used it to illustrate the point that people feel and react to pain in different ways.

I know very little about Cockney rhyming slang. Its rarely heard or used here. My grandmother was born in inner city London but I don't know if it was that tiny part of London where Cockney slang was common. About the only other example that I can recall of cockney slang - and who knows, it might be an Australian variant of Cockney slang - is dog and bone - phone.

Mosiah 29 adds some further light. 3 Now Aaron had gone up to the land of Nephi, therefore the king could not confer the kingdom upon him; aneither would Aaron take upon him the kingdom; neither were any of the bsons of Mosiah cwilling to take upon them the kingdom. To me, this verse indicates that Aaron (and we know from Alma 17 that the brothers travelled together to the land of the Nephites, so Aaron probably wasn't alone) had already started his journey to the Lamanite lands before King Mosiah announced his proposal for shift from a monarchy. The idea of an interregnum that @CV75refers to probably took place after the judges started work while Mosiah was still alive. 9 And they atook their journey into the wilderness to go up to preach the word among the Lamanites; and I shall give an baccount of their proceedings hereafter. I think the most reasonable conclusion from this verse is that they started their journey in verse 9 of chapter 28. Quite possibly, and maybe even likely, everything referred to after verse 9 - the translation of the plates, the gathering of the people for Mosiah's address, the election of new judges, and the installing of the new judges into their new jobs. all of which may have been quite time consuming, - took place after they had already left.

Thanks @CV75for your correction, I've amended the thread tag to correct this.

I vaguely remember a post about the Barbie movie and whatever you wore to that being a trial for Halloween?

trouble and strife - wife

This reminds me of Revelations 10:10 10 And I took the little book out of the angel’s hand, and aate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter.

Fountain pen day? Sounds like a good enough reason to destroy all calendars.

The sons of Mosiah had a right to the kingdom? I think one of them might have had a right before their father changed the system but I'm not sure if all of them would have had a right. Given the problems that Alma had with preaching the gospel to the Nephites in Zarahemla, as evidenced by Alma 5, it may have been better if the sons of Mosiah had preached at home. Alma 17 An account of the sons of Mosiah, who rejected their rights to the kingdom They go their several ways to declare the word to the Lamanites— When Alma was preaching in Alma 5 - 7 he seemed to do that on his own, but when teaching in potentially hostile territory, he had a companion The sons of Mosiah have the spirit of prophecy and of revelation— Wed, 1 Nov 2023 I think that almost anyone can have this gift if it is a) needed, b) sought with sufficient faith and c) the recipient is worthy. Luke I think 27 For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that aserveth. Alma 17 Ammon goes to the land of Ishmael and becomes the servant of King Lamoni— The implication here is that the King's own subjects were his enemies. It also suggests a fairly weak centre of government if the king couldn't protect even his sheep and a lack of respect for either the king or the government if some people felt comfortable with stealing from the king so blatantly. Alma 17 Ammon saves the king’s flocks and slays his enemies at the water of Sebus This surprise hints at a lack of written communication or mail system, but given how much Alma moved around, it would be understandable if he missed a letter. Alma 17:1 behold, to his astonishment, he met with the sons of Mosiah journeying towards the land of Zarahemla. It would profit me, and potentially others, if I did more of this, and with a more humble and sincere attitude. Alma 17:3 3 But this is not all; they had given themselves to much prayer, and fasting; 3 therefore they had the spirit of prophecy, and the spirit of revelation, and when they taught, they taught with power and authority of God. Wed, 1 Nov 2023 These spirits are a big part of the difference between lecturing and teaching. This is quite a contrast to 3rd Nephi 27:9 9 And again, ye shall not have pain while ye shall dwell in the flesh, neither sorrow save it be for the asins of the world; and all this will I do because of the thing which ye have desired of me, for ye have desired that ye might bbring the souls of men unto me, while the world shall stand. Alma 17:5 for they had many afflictions; they did suffer much, both in body and in mind, such as hunger, thirst and fatigue, Its certainly a different time when all you needed to be self sufficient was your hand weapons. Alma 17:7 7 Nevertheless they departed out of the land of Zarahemla, and took their swords, and their spears, and their bows, and their arrows, and their slings; and this they did that they might provide food for themselves while in the wilderness. Would they have been less successful if they had fasted and prayed less than they did? Surely there was a close, perhaps even a perfect alignment between their will and God's will, so why was it necessary to petition His help as much as they did? At one point perhaps God didn't answer their prayers, hence they kept praying, and at another point He did. What determines how much prayer is needed in order to get a response? 9 and they fasted much and prayed much that the Lord would grant unto them a portion of his Spirit to go with them, and abide with them,

8 And it came to pass that Mosiah granted that they might go and do according to their request. 9 And they atook their journey into the wilderness to go up to preach the word among the Lamanites; and I shall give an baccount of their proceedings hereafter. 6 Now these were their journeyings: Having ataken leave of their father, Mosiah, in the bfirst year of the judges; having crefused the kingdom which their father was desirous to confer upon them, and also this was the minds of the people; My reading of this three verses suggests that the sons of Mosiah left on their mission before the reign of the judges commenced. Would it be more correct to say that the sons of Mosiah left on their mission during the last year of the reign of the kings rather than in the first year of the reign of the judges?

It was in the first couple of paragraphs, while he was summarising President Clarks' remarks. It was just a thought that came to me.

Jude 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, Unless its a really long train, I think its going to be pretty crowded

missions caries would be quite accurate if it refers to two people who care a lot as most missionaries do.

I was listening to Elder Bednar's talk yesterday. Do you think he might have had in mind while writing the talk, that the members of the church today are figuratively in the last wagon that is on its way to Zion, and that after us, all who will be gathered will be safely gathered in?

When Christ had people staying over for dinner, the only items on the menu were bread and fish

I think that using the words and actions of a prophet as a means of determining whether or not a person is a prophet is at best a secondary means of coming to know something. The best illustration of the fallacy of this approach is 1 King 13. I think the primary means of knowing something, which I feel is far more reliable means, is a spiritual conviction that something is either X or not X. President Nelson can say on Tuesday that the moon is yellow and I look at my window and see a blue moon. On Wednesday he can say the moon is not, and never was, yellow, but is actually purple and I look out the window and see an orange moon. Neither event should have the least impact on my testimony of whether or not President Nelson is a prophet. No doubt President Nelson has good reason for saying such things and its not for me to question. But if I am living worthily and doing all that is required to receive spiritual guidance, and the Spirit says that President Nelson is not the Prophet, then I would begin to be a little wary and to start asking a few questions. I might be inclined to adjust the weighting of my priorities away from President Nelson and more towards the Quorum of the Twelve. But before doing anything serious or making any serious decisions I would give prayerful consideration to Elder Uchtdorf’s talk about doubting your doubts. I’m in favour of the idea that a spiritual conviction can/should only be overcome by another spiritual conviction and that such convictions should therefore be impervious to, and uninfluenced by, the words or actions, or the logical arguments of men. I can't see any situation at all, ever, where logic would be sufficient to overcome the promptings of the Spirit. If President Young said the Priesthood ban is doctrine and divinely inspired, (which he didn't) and President Monson, through the essays, says that the ban was never doctrine and not divinely inspired, and that President Young was wrong to say so, (and President Monson or the essays don't say that) and then someone says look, two prophets have taught the opposite teaching, both of them can't be true, therefore one of them is not a prophet, that would look very much like a logical argument. And I would hope that even a spiritual conviction that President Nelson is not the Prophet would not be enough to turn me away from the church. That particular testimony that he is the Prophet would probably be considerably damaged, more likely destroyed, but I have always been wary of what I call the connected testimony, or the single pillar testimony, whereby our several testimonies of the truthfulness of the gospel, the plan of salvation, Jesus Christ, the reality of temple work, Joseph Smith, and all the other truths of which we have a testimony are all dependent on the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon. As stated in Doctrine and Covenants 93:30 "all truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it" and one truth should not be dependent on, or used to prop up, another truth. There is no reason why the destruction of a testimony that President Nelson is God's prophet should cause any damage to any other testimony of the truth. One truth does not depend on another truth.

This article suggests that every user of non-renewable energy is contributing to a genocide in numerous low-lieing under-deevloped nations. This particular genocide attracts very little attention because its non-violent and quite gradual. It's an odd form of genocide because while it doesn't kill all that many people, it will have devastating impacts on their places of residence and their history. It won't leave the smoking crates that JJ referred to, it will leave peaceful waves, washing over land where people used to live. It's happening now. https://www.change-climate.com/Islands_Nations_Genocide_Geographical_Oceans/Islands_A_Z_Index_Nations_Sea_Levels_Rising_Oceans_Genocide_Crimes_Criminals.htm