

zil
Members-
Posts
10186 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
199
Everything posted by zil
-
JojoBag, I don't agree with everything you post (on the forums, pretty sure I do in this thread), but thank you for being a man making concerted efforts to hold other men to the highest standard, and rejecting their "can't help it" -type excuses (apparently, when women make this attempt, we're acting like mothers - and apparently there's something wrong with acting like mothers). I would add, in response to those who seem to object to getting the bishop involved: why is it that when we see people struggling with other trials, that we're all in favor of enlisting external aid, but not with this trial (and it is a trial)? If we see behavior in someone that we fear will lead to that person harming others, we asked (and most of us expect ourselves and others) to act early. I see behavior that is already harming the actor and others. While it's true that one must be a willing participant in repentance, sometimes the external exposure, or the external pressure, or the external perspective is needed to open the sinner's eyes to just how bad their behavior is. Then, being denied the option of hiding behind self-deception, one _begins_ to feel those stirrings that lead to repentance. I have experienced this myself with negative habits and behaviors of my own, and I am grateful to the people in my life who have helped me overcome self-deception so that I could choose to do better. Sometimes that person was a friend, who had the guts to tell me I was behaving badly. Sometimes it was a bishop who received inspiration regarding a 5th-Sunday lesson topic. Sometimes it was a ward member who followed the Spirit in preparing a talk or lesson. No matter who it was, they were acting as Saviors on Mt. Zion.
-
Blame PC - his choking in another thread reminded me of the following joke... :) One day at a local cafe, a woman suddenly called out, "My daughter's choking! She swallowed a nickel! Please, anyone, help!" Immediately a man at a nearby table rushed up to her and said he was experienced in these situations. He calmly stepped over the girl, with no look of concern, wrapped his arms around her and squeezed. Out popped the nickel. The man returned to his table as if nothing had happened. "Thank you!" the mother cried. "Tell me, are you a doctor?" "No," the man replied. "I work for the IRS."
-
I assume you're speaking of J. K. Rowling, but I've never read any of her books (have seen the Harry Potter movies that have been on free TV, but apparently wasn't paying close enough attention).
-
Hmm. Minister Said at work again! (You know, he doesn't like chaplains - you should keep a low profile!) (PS:: I'm glad you survived, but I have to go back to the bad joke thread now.)
-
Now look what you've done! The back of my brain has already begun working. Minister Said is wearing a tie at the moment (not sure why that's important, but he is wearing a tie), and is quite pleased with his recent success in convincing the world that "evil" is just "live" spelled backwards.
-
Other people say "Everyone is not a programmer." I say: "Not everyone is a programmer." Because some of us are programmers, and the other wording makes it sound like no one is a programmer. Other people think I'm weird. :) I think your teacher should get over it. Sometimes, IF NOT at the start is the way to go. For example, I never do: IF {condition} THEN ;do stuff ELSE ;don't do stuff ENDIF ...when I could do: IF NOT {condition} THEN ; return ENDIF ;do stuff ...the second way is just more efficient and easier to read. :) Also, I will put the IF NOT first if the block of code between it and ELSE is smaller than the block between ELSE and END - again, because it's easier to read that way.
-
I'm a programmer. And I'm perhaps the most passionately opposed to this of all of us. I'm also a writer. Programming is just another language. That said, there are a fair number of programmers who don't seem to know English, despite it being their native language. And I think your teacher gave good advice.
-
And this link is an interesting read on the idea (of tolerance leading to intolerance). And here's a book that was recommended to me, haven't decided whether to buy it, but it looks good: The Intolerance of Tolerance
-
Mine says I liked Jarduli's "surreal" paintings so much that I made a little doodle like them on an artist trading card (2.5" x 3.5").
-
Through Christmas We Learn of God's Humility
zil replied to prisonchaplain's topic in LDS Gospel Discussion
That made me laugh out loud. -
Through Christmas We Learn of God's Humility
zil replied to prisonchaplain's topic in LDS Gospel Discussion
No worries, PC - I always appreciate it when someone points out my type-os. I really did like your post, especially considering the audience. -
I've never had it, but right now, it's only $10.19 on Amazon.
-
Step 1: Dig a really long tunnel (try not to burn up as you near the earth's core). Step 2: Transit said tunnel using any "vehicle" other than a horse. Seems pretty easy to me. And I'm thinking the horse might appreciate not having to traverse a tunnel that goes through the world. That said, I do think everyone should try riding a horse at least once - I always enjoyed it (haven't done it more than a few times, all ages ago).
-
Through Christmas We Learn of God's Humility
zil replied to prisonchaplain's topic in LDS Gospel Discussion
PC, Yes, it makes perfect sense. Here's a quote from "Beyond Politics" by Hugh Nibley (talking about scripture from the Book of Mormon): It's too long to quote here, and I couldn't really find a way to get the idea across without the whole thing, so, if you're interested, here's a section of 1 Nephi wherein an angel teaches Nephi of the "condescension of God" - condescension sounds like humility in this case (not the negative kind of condescension that implies arrogance). While I may have some doctrinal disagreements with your post, I liked it - and I think it will be a positive influence for those in prison. Free proof-reading: End of second paragraph: "his confinement would be worse that the tiniest solitary confinement cell" - "that" should be "than". Second-to-last-paragraph: "Then he endured death-by-torturous execution." This either needs to be: "Then he endured death by torturous execution." or "Then he endured death-by-torturous-execution." or "Then he endured 'death by torturous execution'." Same paragraph, but this may be a regional dialect difference, I don't know. The word "no" should be "any", in the dialect I'm used to: "Is it no any wonder that God the Father, and we, his followers, honor Jesus so?" -
Wow. This thread is older than I thought.
-
I hope you're right. (Please understand, I'm passionate about teaching writing well because writing is the one and only thing I have _always_ wanted to do (since 8th grade anyway) - my efforts right now are to reach a point where I can retire from my day job and write for a living. I'm one book away from that goal - which is the most difficult thing I have ever done - because nothing else was worth this much effort. So this is one of those things that hits me closer to home than it will ever hit 99% of the rest of the population.)
-
While they became mortal either shortly before or upon leaving the garden, and while one could call that, technically, pre-mortal, it's not what the church manuals mean by "pre-mortal life" - which was living _as a spirit_ without a physical body, in the presence of God. Adam and Eve had physical bodies in the garden, thus, not pre-mortal in that sense. I've noticed a trend toward "pre-earth" life, thus avoiding the confusion.
-
At least in this case you were given a valid invalid reason (valid in that if that's the game, you may as well play to win - no point losing something important just because the game has stupid rules; invalid cuz, well, the rules are stupid). The article doesn't seem to be making this point (unlike Vort's "artificial exercise" example above somewhere).
-
And this is the concern for me (and I suspect anyone who is passionate about language, reading good literature, and writing): it stuck with you. While what your teacher taught was a good thing to stick with you, what that article describes is not a good thing, and if it sticks with the students, the end result will not be good.
-
"When one hundred fifty you are, ancient you will feel," Yoda said.
-
You people need to go read (more) good (better) books.
-
I'm not talking about porn, I'm talking about the combinations of words used in some of the posts in this thread. You seemed to be too, for a couple of posts. I think I've said enough, so I'm moving on.
-
1. We are spirit children of God. Thus, there can be "children" without "babies". What we don't know (remember?) are the mechanics around creating spiritual offspring. 2. Until one has become like God (omniscient), there can be growth. Thus, no matter how much we knew in eternity past (and I believe we knew an awful lot* but not all), there is room for growth until such time as we are perfect (or have reached our personal limits). My dad once explained his thoughts on why we have time and why with God "all things are present": if I explain something to you, it takes time for me to explain it and time for you to understand it - it starts in the past, is happening in the present, and won't finish until the future. God knows it before I start - it's already present. :) (My dad has lots of interesting things to ponder.) *I personally don't worry about my lack of understanding of modern theories related to physics, because (a) there are so many other things to learn, and as long as I'm learning, I don't think whether I learn physics matters, (b) mastering the Gospel is more important and thus gets priority on my time, © for all I know, I already understand the nature of the universe and how worlds are created; but I'm 100% certain I don't fully understand how to have Charity for all - so I'm more worried about that at the moment.
-
I disagree with the way this (from the article in the OP) is presented - ban "boring"* words and replace them with "interesting" or "colorful" words. A) We should not teach anyone to ban any speech (excepting the filthy in polite society) B) Replacement with a synonym does not teach the nuances of the words so that the right one can be used in the right place, it teaches that a word is "boring"* all the time and that other words are (more) "interesting" all the time - nonsense. I remember when "colorful" was how we described "foul" language. Not sure we want to encourage this in children. There are other ways to teach children to use a variety of words, they're just going to be a lot harder and all of them take time. How about the teacher picks a common word, listing some synonyms selected for their nuances in meaning, then constructs a sentence with the common word. First, the teacher teaches about the synonyms and their nuances. Then the teacher has the students change the sentence, once for each synonym, in a way that makes the synonym is the best word to use in that (now changed) sentence. A lot more work for everyone! A lot more effective, IMO. When I was in 9th grade, we had to write a paper (essay, short story, poem, whatever) where the first letter of the first word in the first sentence was "A", the first letter of the first word in the second sentence was "B", and so on to "Z" at least once. In addition to teaching us to think about what words we used, it taught us to use alternate sentence structures. I managed 4 times through the alphabet, less 4 letters. (Short story, set in Greece - made the X easier. :) ) It may not be much better, but it's better than simple ban and replace. *Boring is in your head, not in a word. My boss once handed out this little motivational card (before he knew us all well - he was the newbie in the group). It had clipart of a dog and said something along the lines of, "If you're never the lead dog, your view will never change." (as in, your view of the butt of the dog in front of you). He thought it would encourage us to take the lead sometimes (on projects or whatever). My very first thought, within milliseconds of reading the quote was, "If your view depends on what's in front of your eyes, you need to work on developing your imagination."