askandanswer

I thought you were that threat, with your plans for world domination?

Our lesson in Sunday School today was lesson number 6, about Doctrine and Covenants Sections 8 and 9. During the lesson, several questions about the translation process occurred to me. First, some context. In Doctrine and Covenants 8: the Lord response to Oliver Cowdery’s desire to be able to translate by giving him these instructions: (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 8:1 - 2) 1 OLIVER Cowdery, verily, verily, I say unto you, that assuredly as the Lord liveth, who is your God and your Redeemer, even so surely shall you receive a knowledge of whatsoever things you shall ask in faith, with an honest heart, believing that you shall receive a knowledge concerning the engravings of old records, which are ancient, which contain those parts of my scripture of which has been spoken by the manifestation of my Spirit. 2 Yea, behold, I will tell you in your mind and in your heart, by the Holy Ghost, which shall come upon you and which shall dwell in your heart. (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 8:9 - 11) 9 And, therefore, whatsoever you shall ask me to tell you by that means, that will I grant unto you, and you shall have knowledge concerning it. 10 Remember that without faith you can do nothing; therefore ask in faith. Trifle not with these things; do not ask for that which you ought not. 11 Ask that you may know the mysteries of God, and that you may translate and receive knowledge from all those ancient records which have been hid up, that are sacred; and according to your faith shall it be done unto you. If I was Oliver Cowdery, if given these instructions, I would think that what I needed to do in order to be able to translate, was to ask of God. I would further understand that if I did ask of God in faith, that the Lord would tell me in my mind and heart, by the Holy Ghost, what I was to write. There is absolutely nothing in these verses to suggest that Oliver needed to study in order to be able to translate, and a lot to suggest that what he needed to do was to ask of God. And yet, in Section 9, verses 7 and 8, Oliver was told that he had misunderstood the instructions about how to translate and that he was not correct in assuming that all he had to do was to ask of the Lord. He was also given additional instructions, after he had tried and failed to translate, that he needed to first study it out in his mind. And now for the questions. 1. Is there anything previous to verse 8, Section 9 that would have led Oliver to conclude that in order to translate he first needed to study it out in his mind, and is there anything that would lead Oliver to conclude that he needed to do something more than ask of God? Remember, that at this time, daily in front of him, Oliver had the example of Joseph Smith who never paused in his translation to study it out in his mind and who was constantly receiving, through the spirit of revelation speaking to his heart and mind, what he was to translate. 2. Did the Lord use a different method for translation for Joseph Smith than he did for Oliver COwdery? There is nothing to suggest that Joseph ever needed to do any kind of studying in order to aid his translation of the Book of Mormon, but studying first seems to have been a key requirement for Oliver COwdery. 3. Is anyone aware of any comparative studies on the similarities and differences between how Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon, the Bible and the Book of Abraham?

Dinner with Zil? Poor children indeed

We here on mormonhub are all used to it by now.

Decades ago. But I can't help wandering what happened to the wisdom that often seems to accompany old age.

You better get busy with your iron to get rid of the wrinkles

Last weekend we had a family trip to the far south coast of New South Wales and found some great camping places. How about you and me go camping there next Easter?

(New Testament | Luke 22:21 - 22) 21 ¶ But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table. 22 And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!

I think a bit of a back log is developing. Day 1 is still being discussed nine days after the inauguration.

Look at Australia as a case study. In about 2007, the Liberal government in power at the time had almost stopped the flow of asylum seekers to Australia. Then, in 2008, the Labour government in power at the time, perhaps to appease the left wing of their party, abolished some of the measures that the previous government had put in place to stop the refugee flow. As a result, over the next five years, almost 50,000 asylum seekers found their way to Australia through non-legal means. When the government changed again, in 2012, with the Liberal's back in power, a series of increasingly strict, some say harsh measures were put in place which gradually began to restrict the flow of asylum seekers to Australia. In the words of Australia's Minister for Immigration, these measures have been aimed directly at "breaking the business model of the people smugglers." Now, in the last year and a half, as these measures have began to take affect, we have had no "unauthorised maritime arrivals" (that's government speak for non-legal asylum seekers). I believe that of the many different components of the policies aimed at stopping the asylum seekers, the one that has had the greatest impact is the government's iron clad guarantee that no non-legal asylum seeker will EVER be allowed to settle in Australia, under any circumstances. Even if their claim for asylum is processed and it is found that the applicant is a genuine refugee, and does have a legal claim for protection, the Australian government has decided that that person will not be settled in Australia. Most NGOs and the United Nations High Commission on Refugees say that this policy brings Australia into breach of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, but the government's lawyers have been able to find a way to say that even with this policy, Australia is fulfilling its obligations under the Convention. Other components of the policy are off shore processing and mandatory detention. If an unauthorised maritime arrival did occur in Australia, the people on that boat would be taken into custody, then flown on a government chartered plane to a tiny failed state called Nauru, the second smallest country in the world after The Vatican, or to a remote island called Manus, in Papua New Guinea where they are held in a secure facility under guard. Their claim for asylum would not be processed in Australia or by Australians and they would not have access to the Australian legal system. Once a decision has been made concerning their refugee status, they are allowed out of the secure facility, but they have to stay in Nauru or Manus until a third country offers to take them in. This whole process has no definite time line and usually takes several years. These policies, combined with other deterrents, completely removes the biggest marketing tool used by the people smugglers. They have no product to sell if they cannot ensure that their "customers" will be settled in Australia. They have been effective in completely stopping the flow of unauthorised maritime arrivals for about the last 18 months. The following should be noted: These policies are aimed solely at people who try to come here by boat. They are not aimed at, or effective in relation to, those who fly here. As a nation that has a whole continent to itself, with no land borders with any other country, we don't have to worry about building fences. Many Australian people are concerned about how strict and harsh and inhumane these policies are and there have been many protests and demonstrations against them, but both the government and the Opposition support them, although the Opposition says they would try to enforce them in a softer, kinder way. Many people are uncomfortable with these policies but cannot see any other way to stop the flow of unauthorised maritime arrivals because the moment you open up a loop hole, the people smugglers will take full advantage of it. On a per capita basis, Australia has one of the highest intakes of legal asylum seekers of any country in the world. We accept and welcome legal asylum seekers but not the illegal ones. It can fairly be said that at the cost of great misery, and with some doubtful legal interpretations of the Convention and way too many dollars, we are in control of our borders, and our borders are secure.

Exactly. Be brave, don't be a chicken and show those chooks how to do it.

It only seems hard because of our fear and pride. It only seems easy because of His atonement. It wasn't so easy for Him. (New Testament | Luke 22:44) 44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. Just something to keep in mind, and to share with others while on your mission.

You might need to teach by example

Hurry please. While I'm generally in favour of police restraint, in this case I can't understand the reason for the delay.

You might also want to consider sending a personal message to another new member of this forum. He goes by the name of hzdbl5. He was recently released as a bishop after five years. He holds no keys concerning you, and is unable to receive inspiration for you as he could for the members of his ward when he was bishop, but he does have the wisdom and experience that comes from being a bishop for five years. Its quite possible that he has helped many young men prepare for their missions, and equally possible that he has helped and counselled young men in a similar situation as yourself. To send him a personal message, click on his name below, and a small pop-up screen should open up. In the bottom right hand corner of the screen, click on Message. Be strong, have courage and exercise faith. hzdbl5

Pen lover

The following quotation comes from the Sunday morning session conference talk by Sister Linda S Reeves, 2nd Counsellor in the Relief Society General Presidency, last October. She tells the story of two missionaries, one who repented before he commenced his mission, and the other who did not. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2016/10/the-great-plan-of-redemption?lang=eng I also recommend that you prayerfully read Elder Renlund's talk from the Sunday afternoon session. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2016/10/repentance-a-joyful-choice?lang=eng When I served with my husband as he presided over a mission, we went to the airport to pick up a large group of missionaries one morning. One particular young man caught our eye. He seemed sad, weighed down, almost distraught. We watched him carefully that afternoon. By evening, this young man made a belated confession, and his leaders determined that he needed to return home. Although we were very sad that he had been dishonest and had not repented before coming on his mission, on the way to the airport we sincerely and lovingly praised him for having the courage to come forward, and we pledged to stay in close contact with him. This great young man was blessed to have wonderful parents, great priesthood leaders, and a supportive, loving ward. After a year of working hard to fully repent and partake of the Savior’s Atonement, he was able to return to our mission. It is difficult for me to describe the feelings of joy we felt as we picked up this young man from the airport. He was full of the Spirit, happy, confident before the Lord, and anxious to fulfill a faithful mission. He became an outstanding missionary, and later my husband and I had the privilege of attending his temple sealing. By contrast, I’m aware of another missionary who, knowing her unconfessed sin from before her mission would surely cause her to be sent home early, made her own plan to work extra hard during her mission and confess to the mission president just days before completing her mission. She lacked godly sorrow and tried to circumvent the plan that our loving Savior has offered each one of us.

I'm not sure but its a question worth pondering about and it may have theological implications. Such strong and widespread changes in the public mood, particularly when they happen so quickly and across so many countries don't just pop out of thin air and their causes and implications are worth thinking about.

There's a club for fountain pen users as well. Its big and heavy and studded with 100 broken nibs from 100 broken pens. It is to be applied frequently and fervently to the fingers of fountain pen users in the hope of helping them forget their foolish traditions and forsake their forlorn fads.

Maybe this is it?

I'e been able to find a promo for the program on youtube but not the actual program. I'm sorry, but I have no idea how to post a tv program onto youtube.

I have no problem with paper, as long as it fits into my printer and hasn't been defiled with pen ink

The story they tell is that there is a wide spread, quite sharp swing to the right. This seemingly global trend is an interesting phenomenon and I'm still puzzled as to why it seems to have emerged right across the western world at roughly the same time. Similar trends are quite apparent in Australia, as indicated by the resurgence of Pauline Hanson and her One Nation Party. There also strong rumours that Senator Cory Bernardi and one or two other Members of Parliament from the Liberal Party are planning to split from their party and start their own party because they don't see the Libs as being sufficiently right wing. A lot of people are exasperated with the performance of the current Prime Minister, saying that he is a hostage to the right wing elements within the party and that his ability to govern effectively is significantly hampered as a result. I would argue that the story in England is not quite so straight forward. Despite the right wing sentiments expressed through the Brexit vote, the Labour Party has the most left wing leader they've had in decades. Although he was firmly rejected by the vast majority of the Parliamentary wing of the Labor Party, the ordinary members of the party have solidly supported him, mostly recently in a leadership challenge last September, when he was re-elected to be party leader by an increased majority.

I know this is a bit of a tease but I'll say it anyway The program is even better than I described. I didn't want to say everything about it in the description above because that would be a spoiler so I left out several good bits. The bit about singing with the Motab is not included in the actual program I believe that footage was only used in the promo material.

If I was an American, or if I was in America during the campaign, I'd probably have a better idea of why Trump won, but I'm not and I wasn't so I thought I'd ask those who are and were as they are likely to have a more informed view than myself.