LeSellers

Members
  • Content Count

    2354
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    LeSellers got a reaction from DennisTate in What Does Malachi 4: 5-6 Mean?   
    Not at all addressing the topic, but it is interesting to me that this is the only passage I know of that is quoted or cited in all five standard works: It's obviously in Malachi (Old Testament). It's in Luke (New Testament), and in 3 Nephi (Book of Mormon), Joseph Smith–History (Pearl of Great Price), and, not once, not twice, not even five, but six times in the Doctrine and Covenants.
    'Tseems important.
    In fact, it seems to be the whole focus of the Restoration: getting the family of Adam sealed together as an offering to the Lord.
    Lehi
  2. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from eddified in We're all gonna die!   
    Special pleading is a fallacy, you know that, right?
    Lehi
  3. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from Blackmarch in Great fiction books   
    Is there a limit? If not, then let the countdown begin.
    Almost everything by Clemens (Mark Twain), especially his Letters from Earth. I really like Connecticut Yankee and Puddin' Head Wilson. His slams on Brother Brigham notwithstanding, he was a good writer.
    All of Tolkein, The Silmarilian is great. Not as fond of Roverendum.
    Alice in Wonderland, etc.
    My Jacquie loves Sanderson. I'm fond of Card.
    Battlefield Earth, whose author I despise, was still a great read.
    They're not novels, but I owe a good deal of my French to Astérix and Obélix. Even in translation (Italian, German, Latin, and English), they're good stories and just plain fun.
    I've read Harry Potter dozens of times since 1991. The first book isn't great, and none reaches quite that level until Order of the Phoenix, but, as children's literature, especially modern children's literature, they're good books, and the good v. evil is done quite well. I wish Rowling had not used so much crass language, and there are holes in the plot that are irritating. But the story itself is really very good.
    The very first book I owned (a Christmas gift from my grandmother) was Terhune's Dog of the High Sierra. Not sure if I like it because it was the first with my name written in it, or because the story was good. It ended up with the heroine standing in a shower of gold dust from an ancient Indian horde. I can't even recall the dog.
    Charles De Gaulle said, if you ask me how I became who I am, I must answer that I am like a lion: the sum of the lambs I have eaten. I have been reading all my life.
    Lehi
  4. Thanks
    LeSellers got a reaction from BeNotDeceived in Which is Worse? How bad is sugar?   
    Those I rely on to understand sucralose have no vested interest in either sugar (which they don't like, either) or Splenda™.
    Have you read the primary research? I have.
    Lehi
     
  5. Thanks
    LeSellers got a reaction from BeNotDeceived in Which is Worse? How bad is sugar?   
    I just do a lot of research using the studies out there the contradict the main stream spin on a huge (and appalling) number of drugs and treatments.
    Statins: My cardiologist told me that statins were so effective that he takes them prophylacticly even though he has no heart condition. I have read more than a dozen studies that say that statins are dangerous, and do not affect cardiovascular outcomes because they treat a condition that has no effect on cardiovascular health. They reduce cholesterol, as advertised, but cholesterol does not cause heart disease. They also reduce Co-enzyme Q10. Both cholesterol and Co-Q10 are necessary for good cellular health, so statins make you sick.
    The only thing shown, scientifically, to improve cardiovascular health is intermittent fasting. Alternate-day, Modified Fasting (ADMF), where you eat "normally" for three or four days a week and skip breakfast the other days increases the diameter of the LDL cholesterol particles. No one is sure why this works, but two studies show it to be true.
    The cholesterol scam is based on dubious (at best) "science" that was made up to push a political agenda.
    Similarly, the low-salt (or low sodium) craze is equally false. I was on a low- (or no-) salt diet for about six months. It ended up nearly killing me. I now suffer from POTS (no, not "Plain Old Telephone Service", but "Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome"). Fifteen years later, I still have frequent bouts of light-headedness because I get extremely low blood pressure when I stand up abruptly.
    Glyphosate (Roundup™) is a poison, and it doesn't work unless the seeds are GMOed so it has no effect on them. It doesn't even kill the weeds as it did thirty years ago.
    There are dozens of similar drugs and dozens of "traditional" treatments that end up in the same way: the patient is worse off than before the treatment.
    I'd go into them in more detail, but it seems you don't want to hear it.
    The fact is, as my sister-in-law (the drug dealer, she's a "detail man") relates it, is that there is a lot of money, a LOT of money, in drugs and medical devices. Getting doctors to toe the line is critical to the profitability of the drug companies.
    I don't care about what drugs the doctors push (to get all those freebies the detail men offer them), but I do care that we do not get all the pertinent information we need to make intelligent decisions.
    Lehi
    I go to doctors. I follow their advice, but only after I research the proposal.
  6. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from BeNotDeceived in Which is Worse? How bad is sugar?   
    But you assume I know nothing about the "legit", mainstream medical community. That is false.
    Have you read Confessions of a Medical Heretic, and MalePractice? Please do so, then come back and tell us they are bunk. Robert S. Mendelsohn, M.D., wrote them to show that they are not based on science, but economics and false religion.
    Lehi
  7. Thanks
    LeSellers got a reaction from BeNotDeceived in Which is Worse? How bad is sugar?   
    There are hundreds of them. I don't have the time to find the m all again.
    Whatever you think you know about Mercola, his sources are the medical studies that get ignored because they don't support the big money in medicine.
    Further, why do you think he's a biased or unbelievable source? Because he doesn't push Florine and mercury like the rest of the mainstream medical world?
    Lehi
  8. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from Lindy in Crystallized Honey? - Food Storage suggestion   
    Butter goes rancid. 
    Betty Botter bought a bit of butter;
    “But,” she said, “this butter’s bitter!
    If I put it in my batter
    It will make my batter bitter
    But a bit of better butter
    Will but make my batter better.”
    so she bought a bit of butter
    Better than her bitter butter,
    Made her bitter batter better.
    So ’twas better Betty Botter
    Bought a bit of better butter.
    In any case, whipped honey is dead easy. The more fluid it is, the better. Then you, well, just whip it. It turns white, and I can't recall any that crystallized later. Probably because it didn't last long enough.
    Lehi
  9. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from person0 in God protects His temples   
    Wrong, my son.
    It's 68.7%
    I know because I did it.
    Lehi
  10. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from Jane_Doe in Is "vaping" harmful? What every LDS parent should know   
    It was much the same when wine coolers hit the stores.
    LDS children thought they were just fruit juice.
    Whereby they lie in wait to deceive.
    Lehi
  11. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from seashmore in Do I Confess Again?   
    I'd say it doesn't matter too much what his answer is. If the confessing one is sincere and follows the bishop's counsel, it will bring peace of mind. That's the nature of repentance.
    Lehi
  12. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from eddified in We're all gonna die!   
    One of the errors most people around the world have is that USAan science (and a host of other fields) is "corporate sponsored". That's only true in a fraction of cases.
    What the problem is is that USAan science is government-sponsored. Grants and direct funding from a host of tax money sources, including to and within universities, has tainted science  (from "global warming" – or whatever they call it these days – to AIDS) such that the vast majority of research must toe the government line of risk defunding. That is problem enough, but the government line so toed invariably leads to greater government involvement in whatever "problem" these "researchers" discover.
    Now, I must admit that government here is strongly influenced by corporations, so your point is true indirectly. Nonetheless, corporations are amoral: they are in it for the money, as they should be. But government is in it for the power. And that is most definitely not the way it should be.
    Our Dept Agriculture (among others, the EPA, for example) gets a lot of money from agribusiness. Congressmen get a lot of money from agribusiness. Agribusiness wants to "steer" the decisions, regulations, and laws so it can make money. And the ROI is impressive. But government is in it for the power, as noted above. And, if making laws that give money to the lobbyists also advances its agenda, everybody wins. Well, everybody who's just a taxpayer, consumer, or other outsider.
    Lehi
  13. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from eddified in We're all gonna die!   
    Only if it's good science. There's a lot of the other kind in serious publications.
    Lehi
  14. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from eddified in We're all gonna die!   
    Special pleading is a fallacy, you know that, right?
    Lehi
  15. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from a mustard seed in Special Snowflakes...   
    You might also point out that the slaves who went east (to Moslem countries) died of sexual abuse: the boys died when their captors castrated them without anesthesia or bandages, the girls after being raped repeatedly, during child birth (the children following the same paths), or beatings.
    There are almost no Blacks in Arabia, although millions were abducted. There are millions of Blacks in the West. The difference is that Blacks in the West reproduced, lived, while those in the East died.
    No one is advocating slavery, but there is a difference between slavery as practiced in the Americas and that still being practiced in Arabia and other Moslem countries.
    What also gets forgotten is that there were at least as many White slaves as Blacks in what would become USmerica: the term indentured servant doesn't carry the same weight as slave, but they were, for all intents and purposes, the same. In some ways indentured servitude was worse because the master had no vested interest in keeping the indentured servant alive toward the end of the indenture. A slave was going to be worth something to him in ten years, an indentured servant would not only walk away, but he was required to outfit him and give him some money at the end of the term. So, the indentured servant at the end of his tenure was expendable.
    And, finally, the first slave owner in what would become USmerica was a Black man who refused to honor the end of the term of an indentured servant he owned. The court ruled that the John Casor had to remain with Anthony Johnson. Both had been captured by Moslems in Africa and sold to slavers who brought them (at different times) to the colonies.
    Government, in this case, failed to enforce the terms of a contract. Just another indicator.
    Lehi
  16. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from NeedleinA in Why do you think God and Jesus have long hair and beards?   
    The standard of clean shaving started in the 1920s, following the return of USAan doughboys from France.
    Prior to that period, most men had beards or mustaches, or sideburns (named for Ambrose Burnsides, federal Civil War general, whose sideburns were phenomenal). But the Roman army was clean shaven because a beard gave the enemy a handhold he could exploit: grab and pull. The invention of gunpowder and firearms made shaving unnecessary, so for the next three or four centuries beards were acceptable for soldiers. The British army even made mustaches mandatory for officers.
    On April 22, 1915, the Germans attacked French, Canadian and Algerian troops with chlorine gas. From that time forward, soldiers were clean shaven so their field protective masks would seal and allow them to live.
    The soldiers came home to cheering crowds and adoring women. They were heroes. And David O. McKay saw them and admired them — he and thousands of other Saints. And it stayed the same for a half century: men were clean-shaven because it was cool.
    Then came Vietnam, and the protests; and one form of rebellion was the beard and long hair.
    Rebellion is the original sin. Satan rebelled. We are not a rebellious people. So, with David O. McKay and his beardless chin from WWI until today with your bishop and his beardless chin, we demonstrate our obedience to even the mundane.
    Lehi
    God didn't rebel against His government. He can have any beard He chooses. LS
  17. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from sevensonnets in Special Snowflakes...   
    I had the same thought. Because all of their "wants" are imaginary, just like the unicorn.
    Lehi
  18. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from Blackmarch in Great fiction books   
    Is there a limit? If not, then let the countdown begin.
    Almost everything by Clemens (Mark Twain), especially his Letters from Earth. I really like Connecticut Yankee and Puddin' Head Wilson. His slams on Brother Brigham notwithstanding, he was a good writer.
    All of Tolkein, The Silmarilian is great. Not as fond of Roverendum.
    Alice in Wonderland, etc.
    My Jacquie loves Sanderson. I'm fond of Card.
    Battlefield Earth, whose author I despise, was still a great read.
    They're not novels, but I owe a good deal of my French to Astérix and Obélix. Even in translation (Italian, German, Latin, and English), they're good stories and just plain fun.
    I've read Harry Potter dozens of times since 1991. The first book isn't great, and none reaches quite that level until Order of the Phoenix, but, as children's literature, especially modern children's literature, they're good books, and the good v. evil is done quite well. I wish Rowling had not used so much crass language, and there are holes in the plot that are irritating. But the story itself is really very good.
    The very first book I owned (a Christmas gift from my grandmother) was Terhune's Dog of the High Sierra. Not sure if I like it because it was the first with my name written in it, or because the story was good. It ended up with the heroine standing in a shower of gold dust from an ancient Indian horde. I can't even recall the dog.
    Charles De Gaulle said, if you ask me how I became who I am, I must answer that I am like a lion: the sum of the lambs I have eaten. I have been reading all my life.
    Lehi
  19. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from An Investigator in Mormons seen to be waxing strong to me   
    Yes.
    The Brethren already are. In a stake conference several years ago, one of them spoke and said that the rich kids from Sandy, Ut, were not becoming good missionaries because they couldn't do without their phone, computers, cars, and other toys.
    And that's just one indicator.
    But we should also worry about the "poor" Saints who have the same values and goals, the only difference being they can't afford them.
    Lehi
  20. Like
    LeSellers reacted to unixknight in A Baltimore Facepalm   
    I think you guys are talking past one another.
     
    @LeSellers is trying to make the point that, ultimately, all laws are backed by the threat of force.  Now, the chances of getting killed over a traffic stop are indeed minimal, and cops aren't going to shoot me over it.  That said, if I get a speeding ticket, and refuse to pay, I'll be assessed fines and penalties.  Ignore it long enough, and my wages may be garnished or, depending on the circumstances, a warrant may be issued for my arrest.  At that point I'm looking at imprisonment.  That's Government force.  Now, I could potentially be killed by Government force if I resist physically, but that isn't the automatic result of this scenario, which I believe is what @NeuroTypical is saying.
  21. Like
    LeSellers reacted to unixknight in Apple Refuses to Build iPhone Backdoor   
    Well this didn't take long.
    A satirical tweet from the article:
    Apple: If we're forced to build a tool to hack iPhones, someone will steal it.
    FBI: Nonsense.
    Russia: We just published NSA's hacking tools
    And yet there are still people who think we should trust Government entities when they say "don't worry, we'll totally take care of this..."
  22. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from An Investigator in Mormons seen to be waxing strong to me   
    Yes.
    The Brethren already are. In a stake conference several years ago, one of them spoke and said that the rich kids from Sandy, Ut, were not becoming good missionaries because they couldn't do without their phone, computers, cars, and other toys.
    And that's just one indicator.
    But we should also worry about the "poor" Saints who have the same values and goals, the only difference being they can't afford them.
    Lehi
  23. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from SilentOne in Visions of Glory   
    I don't know. John Pontus's narrator isn't in charge of doctrine.
    Lehi
  24. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from Blackmarch in Who do we worship and how?   
    And, without further light and knowledge, how could we possibly comment on these? And, with that light and knowledge, who would want to divulge* the sacred whisperings of the Spirit?
    * divulge, from the Latin, to make common or vulgar.
    Lehi
  25. Like
    LeSellers got a reaction from Edspringer in How come no one else translated the Bible?   
    The Community of Christ (the name was changed in 2001, aIr, by the first non-Smith from the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). The claim that Joseph III and his heirs would always run the RLDS/CoC was poo-pooed into oblivion at the time W. Grant McMurray took the office. He resigned under interesting, and unspecified, circumstances.
    When the Saints left Nauvoo, one of the important things they did not take with them was the JST manuscript. Emma had it in her possession, and refused to give it to the Church that was leaving her (by her own choice). As its custodian, she eventually gave it to the RLDS Church through her son, JS III.
    In the late 1860s the RLDS decided to print the JST (they call it the Inspired Version of the Holy Scriptures), and formed a committee to make that happen. But, when they got the manuscript, they discovered that Joseph didn't have a "manuscript", he had "notes". Putting it together for the printer (a process called "engrossing") took years for the seven-person committee. They made a lot of choices about what to include and what to leave out from among the three versions (called manuscripts 1, 2, & 3), and sometimes made what most might consider mistakes by choosing an earlier version over a more difficult-to-understand later version.
    However, one of the RLDSs sent Parley P. Pratt (who was intimately involved in the translation with Joseph) a copy of the first printing. He sat down and read it through, and said that those who had done it had done it well.
    Earlier, John Bernheisel (I forget how to spell his name), a doctor, was passing through and visited Emma in Nauvoo. He asked her to see the ms, and she allowed him to look at it and take notes. He produced what we call the "Bernheisal manuscript". It is useful, but he made copyist errors and didn't do a complete transcription, so it isn't as helpful as we might like, but it does (or did) give us a view into the text, and a touchstone to the printed version's accuracy. He included his own interlinear notes, at one point saying "this I not understand."
    Feelings between the LDS and RLDS churches were bad to horrid until the mid-70s, aIr. The only way for a Saint to buy a copy of the IV/JST was to get it from Herald House (the RLDS publisher). I got mine from Deseret Book in the mid 70s, but it was more expensive there than I could have bought it directly from the publisher. I think it may have been that HH wouldn't discount the cover price for DB. That's an assumption based on one experience: I haven't even tried to verify it. This animus abated about this time, and it was due to several factor, not least on the efforts of Robert J. Matthews.
    The most important LDS scholar to review the mss was Dr. Matthews (A Plainer Translation: Joseph Smith's Translation of the Bible--A History and Commentary). The thawing probably came about when he asked for permission from his friend, the RLDS Church historian, to examine the mss. This friendship had been on-going for years, so it was not a surprise that he granted it.
    Dr. Matthews examined every page of the extensive mss, and the Bible needed to "decode" the text. He made hand-written copies of the mss and made identical (as far as possible) marks in his own copy of the Bible. See his book for more details.
    Following the change, and when the Brethren decided we needed a better edition of the Bible, we got permission to use the IV/JST in foot- and end- notes in the LDS edition of the AV.
    I could go on (and on, and on), but I hope this will suffice.
    Lehi