JohnsonJones

I actually read the national review on occasion. Not sure that's a good reason for outrage though. I tend to get more outraged at things from the Daily Beast (or Huffington) than the National Review. Another decent site is military times though it's more focused on things dealing with the military. Off topic but you get gems like this story which could create interesting debates on who is right and who is wrong in the context of the story and/or event. Man who crashed snowmobile into black hawk sues government for 9.5 million

I have heard about the cave with the records. I think there could be MANY explanations. WE have probed the Hill Cumorah and also done sonic and radar on the hill (from what I understand) to show that there is no chamber inside the Hill. Now, I do NOT think we've probed DEEPER (and how deep it could be how far...who knows. It could be a chamber under the hill...thus in the hill...by hundreds if not thousands of meters!). It could ALSO be various other explanations other than a physical location in the Hill Cumorah itself. For example, there is an idea that this Earth is where the Telestial and Celestial Kingdoms are. It is also where the Spirit World is. Some who have this idea also have a belief of something akin to multiple dimensions, where you have several different dimensions occupying the same space at the the same time. Hence, the Spirit world is also here in the same spot, but in a different dimension (or way of existing) than ours. Hence, in that light, there could be a chamber in the Hill Cumorah but you will only be able to see or enter it via spiritual means until we have a higher spiritual existence as it resides in the same location, but a different existence (if that makes sense with what I said above). Another idea is that it is there, but just as the plates (which were in the Hill for hundreds of years and yet no one had discovered them) lay hidden, that the Lord concealed the plates from normal individuals and people...and in this same way the chambers with the other records are also concealed. There are many different ways it COULD work with a chamber or cave being within the Hill Cumorah, but if this is where the records are or how they are concealed for now is obviously not revealed to the general membership of the church.

The CoC SHOULD BE A WARNING about the dangers of trying to go with mainstream Christianity. The Churches that are staying with their more traditional teachings and values are (in general) staying stronger with their membership (though most are also still declining if it is a larger church) than those that have tried to "modernize" and "mainstream" their various religions. I think the Temple in Missouri (theirs) will be one of the last things they would let go, and 190 million will keep them going for a good while at least. Interestingly enough, this is similar to one of the original divisions within the Islamic religion. The question of whether the successor to Mohammad should be his son Ali or a council of others. This caused a division in the religion that has animosity between the both sides from back then during the division to the present day. At least we are not angry and violent towards each other like the divisions of Islam caused.

I think Angles = Angels in the original post above. I remember I saw part of the Cokeville miracle film a few years back. If the film is accurate it spoke of several of the children seeing and identifying relatives that had passed away that the children had not met, but saw during the crisis that they were in.

I have a room booked. I am going to see it. It may be the last chance I have to see it in the US during my life! Really?! I didn't know that. That does raise some interesting thoughts and questions I suppose.

Well, I'm glad I'm not in Texas right now, at least the panhandle considering the smoke and flames going on there.

Well, Pocahontas was very special in Disney's version...she somehow talked to all the plants and trees and such. She probably had some tranquilizer dart effect with her voice which paralyzed MaMa bear there or something. Either that or those shrooms she had were pretty strong to affect both her and John Smith at the same time.

The Funny thing Rashida Tlaib is that if elected, this time Trump is not going to miss his shot at her. If she's lucky she'll still remain a US citizen. He tried banning Muslims and people like her last time. IF she thinks he's going to be nicer to her this time around...ha....hahhahahahahahah. I don't know how she reverses the trend she's pushing for those to not support Biden, but as it stands, if it's down to Biden and Trump...a vote of uncommited is going to be basically a vote for Trump. I think when Trump wins (IF he wins) every Arab American and every Palestinian American are going to be sorely wishing they had done things differently. If they think Biden is bad...they have very short memories. (For example...who do you think moved the embassy...it wasn't Biden...)

I'm not a big fan of Fox News. I read several different sources (though normally start with Yahoo News) and find that they generally are one of the less reliable news sources at times (though they are not at the bottom of the list by far, there are some that are far worse than Fox News, there are also some that are Better. I generally prefer AP and Reuters more for example). This is an instance where I completely agree with Fox News and their support of their reporter. I am against Chen being able to force the News Caster to reveal her sources, and from what it appears, as the argument is not that the article is incorrect, but rather that they are pushing for sources...it would seem to me that Chen may actually be ADMITTING that the article is actually correct on all counts in many ways...at least that's how I would read it. Judge holds veteran journalist Catherine Herridge in contempt for refusing to reveal her sources Here's at least one of the articles that they are wanting sources for DoD-funded school at center of federal probes over suspected Chinese military ties Of interest ON sources...this is telling... The actual APA page on Yanping Chen Yanping Chen The relavent RCFP page The privacy act and media leaks Seeing it is taking the slant more of a civilian case I'd say that Zerilli v. Smith HOLDS precedence even more strongly on this than other cases and as such, the judge is in the wrong here. I also think it is suspicious in regards to Chen and their connection and proximity to the US government considering her past and the allegiances and oaths Chinese military officers (not just enlisted...MILITARY OFFICER) need to make to China when inducted into their military. Even if she is completely innocent, keeping a decent arms length away from Chen probably would be wise...IN MY OWN estimation...for US services and government applications.

Pray and choose the best one according to your conscience. To me, Trump is apologetically a liar, thief and adulterer. If nothing else, Joe Biden goes to church, has not committed adultery as far as we know, and loves his family. That's not to say Joe Biden is a great or perfect person, he's not. There are many that are much more moral and righteous than he is, but of the two, he seems to me to be the more righteous individual. It has nothing to do with the policies in this, just pointing out that this is one factor behind my decision of who I'll probably vote for. The other is that there are comments from Trump that sound scarily like what Hitler said before he seized power and some of the things Trump has inferred sound scarily as if he would do away with democracy and other items if he could. Whenever he says something he points a finger, but three fingers are pointing back at him and normally that's because what he is accusing others of is what he WANTS to do or has tried to do (In my opinion). From what I've read and seen, that's untrue. An example of what Trump really feels about Ukraine probably can be seen from the first attempt to Impeach him (individuals call it an impeachment, but only the house called the impeachment, but as he was not convicted by the Senate and acquitted, he wasn't really impeached IMO). He attempted to withhold aid from the Ukraine for his own personal gain (a futile attempt as the President doesn't hold the purse strings in the way he was trying, Congress does, so it really doesn't make sense that he could be charged under that idea as he didn't have the power to do so in the first place...once again...IMO). I think Ukraine would be under Russian control today if Trump had been President at the time of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. His initial response to the Russian invasion before his people got him to backtrack says it all to me... That's my personal opinion. Trump didn't seem to show much spine when he was talking with Putin and Putin seemed to almost always have the upper hand with Trump...almost as if Putin had something over Trump. That said...my vote will be for Biden if it is between those two most likely...BUT for many who vote that way I expect it's not going to be so much that they are voting for Biden or support him, but that the are voting against Trump. I honestly think that if the Republicans were being honest with themselves, they'd realize Nikki Haley has a much better chance of winning against Biden than Trump simply for that factor alone. Many will swallow their dislike of democrats just to vote against Trump, but that sentiment isn't there if Haley was running.

So, I still am not buying the picture is the same as Joseph. For starters, the parts which would NOT change do not match. For example, the brows and brow line, whether reveresed or not...do not match. The bones that marcate the brow do not change in death. The BIGGER mark though is that the entire theory seems to rely on the fact that Emma misidentified what her own husband looked like and called for paintings and pictures of him that did not look like her husband. That's the part I think I find the hardest to believe out of what they are saying.

I'd agree with voters showing up to vote with ID (come on folks, it's not THAT hard to get an ID, it takes TIME though), with the caveat...they NEED to open more voting places if they want everyone to vote in person...INCLUDING the areas that do not lean towards your party (there's been a move in some states to get rid of voting locations in large urban areas....and try to restrict how many can vote in those urban areas). Also, make it so that an employer can be FINED if they try to make it so that their employees do not have time to vote...OR try to mandate (same with unions) or force their employees to vote a specific or certain way. Ensure every US citizen who has the right to vote has the opportunity to vote...and I'm right there with you in saying that making sure those who vote have identification and show up in person at the polls is the right thing to do.

Okay, reading various news feeds and stumble across this on Yahoo News. Jack Posbiec calls for the end of Democracy at CPAC WHAT IN THE WORLD IS THIS!!!! I immediately tried to find a conservative slant or report on this as I can't believe this story has the entire context of what was being said. If it is...what in the world!!!??? Certainly there had to be an uproar in the audience shouting down such a statement? I can't believe ANYONE in US politics would say something like this and get away with it!? Something is seriously wrong with the party if they are having speakers that are allowed to say such things without a TON of pushback and then proclamations against such statements if the article states it in context (I can't believe it is saying all there is, there HAS to be more context to this type of statement than what the article shows...I can't find it though...hopefully someone here can find it where it doesn't sound as bad as it is made out to sound in the article).

Ironically, Biden (left of the Reagan Republicans, but still probably one of the more moderate Democrats today) has that same problem. We see him called a far left liberal by one side, and yet his own people are unhappy with him due to him being far too conservative for them. Haley is probably right on some things. I don't know who would win today between Trump and Biden, but I think Haley would have a far better chance to win over independents if she actually got the nomination.

Which is why I always claim to be a far left looney liberal here on these forums. In real life I have normally been considered somewhat conservative (even if I am officially an independent). I suppose you could call me a Reagan Republican/Conservative in some ways. But, compared to those who are on the Far right I'm as loony left as anyone else, including those on the Far left...or at least that's what those on the Far Right probably consider me as. In truth, today, I'm probably more moderate, and probably center right as far as political leanings are concerned, but in relation to the things expressed on these forums at times...I'm the enemy of everything Conservative as far as I can see of my reputation. I actually prefer Biden to Trump. Biden is actually pretty moderate all things considered and is the best that the Democrats probably can offer in that regards these days. That's also why he stood a chance against Trump. It's not that he's liberal or conservative, but that he appealed more to the middle last election than Trump did. We will see if that is still the case of if Trump (or someone else, who knows, strange things can happen) gets elected. I don't actualy see Trump as left or right (though ironically the right sees him as conservative). He's more looney and in it for himself than anything else I think. He has conservatives that surround him and thus why many of the policies he had were conservative (because those conservative republicans were the ones enacting them), but he, himself...he has switched back and forth between parties and opinions. He just works for whoever he thinks will get the most for him, himself, and his own.

I think it depends on how much People are looking at what Republicans are doing vs. common sense. The Republicans are trying to impeach Biden and cause trouble for his son...and one of their star witnesses and who they relied on for a LOT of their information was just revealed to be a Russian stooge (and possibly spy/agent to cause disruption and chaos). The Republicans say they want to stop what's happening at the Border but then vote against the strongest border bill in decades, one they helped craft even!!! And then go on to have a House impeachment of someone else saying he isn't enforcing the Border...well...you bunch of fools...the same could be said of YOU!!! They have talked a LOT about the budget and cutting spending...but one of the BIG reasons we are in this mess is because those tax changes you made under Trump (which are expiring for the Middle Class in many ways, but NOT those who actually help PAY a LOT of the Taxes previously) are causing us to have a smaller amount of money and go deeper in DEBT! How about actually putting your actions where your mouth is, undo those tax cuts for the wealthy and in general and get a sensible monetary policy (that most others do) where you actually need to have an INCOME to pay the bills, rather than constantly trying to cut your income and then blame someone else for all the bills?? I'm probably a conservative leaning independent, and in the past I've loved some of the Republican lawmakers, but I'm about sick of the clown show they've been running in the House. They are chasing away a lot of moderate who are now choosing to retire rather than re-run for election. They are making those left even less desired as those I would like in office. I don't know who will win or won't win, but I say let's be done with the conspiracy theories and just kick out the Do NOTHING Republicans who hypocritically say one thing and do the exact opposite (for example, the border...let's be realistic...that bill was the BEST bill they could have hoped for since they don't fully control their OWN HOUSE because they are split and they don't control the Senate...a vote against it was a vote for do nothing because anything THEY come up with that is stronger won't stand a chance of passing and THEY KNOW IT).

Not lost scripture or revelations, but there are some biblical revelations on the matter Isaiah 29: 9-14 (and more if you read through the end of the chapter). Ezekiel 37:15-19

We may have to reorganize the wards in our stake. While I think we have 20 priesthood holders in each ward that fulfill the requirements, I'm not sure each ward currently has 250 members in it. Last time I looked at our roll I think our ward had sub-200 members which I found...interesting.

Not a doctor, so obviously this is NOT from a medical perspective or a professional's perspective on the matter. Regarding Humans... From my little understanding, in THEORY it is possible. It has never happened. If one was born with a FULL set of Gonads and the chemical makeup was just right...it MAY be possible. There may need to be some medical work to make it possible (IVF). Normally only one full set of gonads are there with another incomplete set. Even then, with a complete set the estrogen or testosterone being produced could be too much for a chemical balance of the individual for a fertilized cell to survive. So, in theory...possible. In reality...has not happened (that we know of) yet, and hasn't seemed viable in those we know of. Even if it is possible, the question is if it doesn't occur naturally (needs medical intervention to occur), should we allow such a thing. We already have laws against incest for a reason. This would probably be several times worse than incest in regards to a genetic result and their medical difficulties.

I don't deal with recruiting or with a bunch of young fellows (or ladies") who are jumping over themselves to join the military today so I don't know the exact reasons why some of them join, but I HAVE heard that in today's environment, the Military actually pays exceptionally well for those who graduate with degrees, and even for those who join out of high school IF they finish their technical training and stay on track to be promoted on the regular by the time they graduate that training. As pay goes up in relation to inflation, it's kept track of pay increases much better than most jobs in the civilian world. That said, there also seems to be a thought among some of the young people I teach that serving in the military is a thing of last resort when one cannot do otherwise. This, of course, is not shared by those I know who are currently serving in the guard or reserves as they go to school (and more rarely, the ones who have already served [more rarely because they are rarer to come across], though sometimes their opinions vary on the matter) who seem to do it to help them get through school and have it paid for. (And if I may, this is ALSO a reason to try to go to a school with in-state tuition. With some of the tuition fees today, if you are out of state you would still need far more money to pay tuition and fees, whereas in-state you could probably afford the entire thing on the G.I. Bill). I don't know about the military currently, but in civilian life it can sometimes be harder than that. There is a MINIMUM Quota for them to meet. If they have less then the minimum then they need to recruit more woman (or minorities) of sorts, but if they have exceeded that there is no requirement to get to a specific percentage. They can keep hiring woman and minorities at the expense of the White Male. There is no set percentage for White Males in general, so if you only have woman and minorities and no White males then you are good in the eyes of those who wish to have those percentages. This is also no representative of the population. This is because they associate white men with what they call the white male privilege. This can make it harder for some to gain employment. On the otherhand, I see where they are coming from. Even at our university we have a greater portion of the professors as White men. There is something to the idea that white men still have an upper hand at attaining certain things in our western society. This doesn't mean that EVERY white male will ALWAYS be seen as superior to other social groups, or that even most white men will be able to reach unprecedented heights of wealth and power. it merely means that all things being equal, that if you have to equal candidates, that those who are white will be given the better opportunity. If you have a white man from poverty and a minority from middle class, it would still mean that minority from middle class probably will have a better opportunity than the other. BUT in general, if they are both from an equal point, than the white man will still, in general, have a better outcome in equal situations. I can see this reflected in our various positions at the University, and as you get higher in the ranks/promotions you see it more starkly. The Deans and members of the University boards tend to have more white men than anyone else. I think that woman and minorities would probably enjoy the pay and leadership opportunities just as much as others in these instances, but with how society works, in general they tend to be less represented the higher in position you go. Sure, we have one woman on the university board (out of many positions), but that is one in relation to many. So, CURRENTLY I tend to agree with the idea that there is an idea of privilege in our society and that something probably should be done to equalize things out (which means I CAN be persuaded to think differently on it if one has a persuasive enough argument), but I also agree that sometimes it seems a bit unfair on how we try to do it.

Hmmm. Sometimes, just because you CAN DO A THING, does not mean you SHOULD DO A THING.

This sounds like it would be hearsay (I heard it from someone else who heard it from the witness). I'd say if you are truly still concerned, tell the Mission President as @laronius mentioned above and let him handle it from there.

In another thread there was a post about the necessity of each member of the Godhead. In it, there was a thought that all three were needed as the task each had to do would not be able to be accomplished (necessarily) by the others. In this, someone asked if this means that they are suggesting that the power of the Father in the trio is limited. That's a good question. In the Bible it never says that The Father or the Son are Omnipotent (and it does not say they are Omniscient or Omnipresent either). It does state that they are Almighty. What does this mean? Does it mean or imply that they are Omnipotent? Many times it comes from the Term El Shaddai...which when they translated it into Greek was Almighty...but that word doesn't mean Almighty in hebrew. It means the Breasted one, or could also mean the Mountain or the Sufficient one. Other verses carry the implication that he has great power, that he is able to do things because HE IS (or I...or I AM). He is power. It can also mean that he is the mightiest of them all, but not necessarily Omnipotent. We know as a fact that he actually has chosen to limit himself in his power and what he can do. He has given us our free agency, which in turn means that he does use his power to control what we choose. We have the freedom to choose for ourselves. Thus the old question, could he make a rock he could not lift...and thereby making it so he was no longer Omnipotent? The answer could be...yes...he chooses to limit his Omnipotency in order to allow certain things to be able to happen (like us being given the freedom to choose for ourselves and make our own choice). It could also be, if we read the King Follet discourse and believe in it, that though he is the Mightiest of them all as far as we are concerned, he also has a Father and rules which he also must obey or pay heed to. Thus, he also has laws and rules which let him do things, and perhaps also limit what he might be able to do. For example, we read that he does not allow any with any stain of sin into his presence. This is something he does not allow. This is a limitation on him, then, that would require someone who CAN have those who have sinned be recognized and reconciled before him, so that they can be cleansed and be presented before the Father in a sinless state. This would be the Savior's role to take upon him our sins. The Holy Ghost also has a role in this and also helping us and teaching us (as well as comfort). So, I suppose it's a good question...is the Father Omnipotent? Is that any different than Almighty? Does it really matter as far as we are concerned?

That is known as the Star of Abraham. It is used a lot in Islamic construction and symbolism. Ibrahim or Abraham is one of their most Holy Prophets. Not only was he the father of Ishmael, but he also supposedly purged the world of idolatry and showed them the correct way to worship. He also built the Kabbalah (sp?) and was the Holy Prophet of his time. Some Hypothesize that Israel anciently may have also used this symbol originally. Of interest, it would be then that both groups who claim to be descended from Abraham may have used this symbol As for it being the Seal of the Melchizedek Priesthood...I don't know. The Islamic religions do not make that claim as far as I know and neither do the Jewish religions or scholars that have the hypothesis about it's prior usage in the region. If I had to hazard a guess, IF IT IS the Seal of the Melchizedek Priesthood it is due to Abraham. He received the Melchizedek Priesthood most likely from the Priest of Salem, or Melchizedek. In this it could be that this symbol was originally used BY Melchizedek and as Abraham became the rightful heir of that lineage and it's blessings, which in turn blesses the entire earth as we also must trace our lineages back to him, it also became his symbol. Hence, this symbol not only would be the Star of Abraham, but also a symbol tracing it's heritage to Shem and then to Noah and from there to Adam eventually. That's just a wild guess on my part though. The Star of Abraham is a well known Islamic symbol used prolifically today. I'm not sure why it doesn't show up on Google searches or other things (I did a quick check so I could post some references for everyone, but I couldn't find one on the internet via google...which is surprising to me. It is such a well known symbol in the Middle East and it's symbology I am surprised that it isn't something that is easily found via google).

Take the idea of if you were not a member, what would you do? If it is something that you would normally report to the police or a lawyer, then you probably should report it to the police or authorities. If it is not, then probably keep out of it. Same would apply to whoever you would report it to. Simply being a member does not grant any special immunity or rights beyond other citizens as far as I know. At the point that the authorities are made aware of something, and you have said all you know, than it becomes something between the lawyers, authorities, and the mission president. He is the one that probably would be who decides whether missionaries get involved or not. Missionaries get tickets, they have car accidents, and unfortunately, sometimes have legal matters. The individual who presides over the mission and thus the missionaries is the one who gets to decide how to handle these matters. Of more interest is how you KNOW the missionaries were actually witnesses to an event or not? Were you also a witness? In that case, it would probably be easier if you just told them what you saw and who was present. If you are not a witness a question would arise how you would know who was or was not present? Is it hearsay? Is it Gossip? Both are not good reasons to try to get involved (in my opinion). Unless you are positively absolute about the information you wish to give out, you probably should think harder about whether to give it out or not. If you are a witness in some way to the event though, you should probably tell them what YOU saw and heard and let the lawyer or authorities take it from there.