JohnsonJones

This week I was reading in Hebrews. In it for scripture study are chapters on Faith. I always like to add to it that Faith is not just the hope of things, but the belief in things that are also true. Verse 21 in Chapter 32 addresses this even better, and what I think is a prime example of Faith. I can believe all I want that the moon is made of Swiss Cheese. It doesn't matter how hard I believe that, it is still a false belief. The important facet of Faith is that you have a hope or belief in something that is TRUE.

I don't think it's a plot twist per se. The entire book is apocalyptic. It is talking about the end of the world. The Children in this instance were already dead. For them, it was fortunate that apparently it happened so quickly they did not even realize they were dead. Their lives were obviously important to them, and they were thinking they would go back to them. However, when you realize the representation of who Aslan is, you probably can also understand their disappointment (as shown in other books as well) to be separated from him. This, then is the representation of what will happen in the afterlife. It is also a message to each of us that we may not be the ones to wait for the millennium or the second coming. Our time for judgement may be much sooner. When we die, that is the time we need to be prepared for. At that time we can either be consigned to misery or happiness. In the purpose of the Children, it was happiness. OF interest as well, at least some of them had already LIVED a lifetime in Narnia already, or at least a sizeable chunk and then gone back to be children once again afterwards (which is bound to have been somewhat awkward I imagine at times).

Did something happen recently? The last news I heard, Trump was 5 points ahead in the polls recently (and I am NOT a Trump fan, as I think most of you would know by now, so me saying this is not trying to falsely prop him up either). That does not indicate to me that he is necessarily going to lose the election or is in dire threat of losing it currently. In fact, it could be the opposite of that (which is NOT something I actually want to hear). If something else has happened that goes counter to what I have heard recently, it would be interesting to hear about it.

The above is from Section 132. I was deep in thought upon these things this week while attending the temple and had the following thoughts. I would remark, THESE ARE JUST my thoughts on the matter and a few of my opinions. They are in NO WAY to be confused with the doctrines of the Church nor construed as being stated as doctrine. They are MERELY what thoughts occurred to me and my postulations thereof. On this, there has been in the past, questions and remarks regarding other ordinances beyond the Sealing Ordinances of the Temple. I am not going into detail on it (if that is what people thought I was about to do, I am sorry but that is not what this post is about). I am going to perhaps discuss it more indirectly in a way in relation to the Temple in general (but, I also will not be talking about those ordinances directly, or at least, explicitly in detail regarding them either). There has been some consternation about other ordinances that people postulate about. It occurred to me this week that this was for naught. There is no reason for people to be concerned about it or whether they or others receive it in this lifetime. The reason, is because of what is referred to in the verse above. The verse above, as far as I can tell, is DIRECTLY referring to Temple Sealings, specifically Temple Marriage/Sealing between a Husband and a Wife. Specifically verse 19 where it states This then would be covered in the Sealing Covenant, at least as we read it from the Doctrine and Covenants (or that is my interpretation of section 132 and what it is talking about). As with ANY ordinance, it needs to be sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise (and this would ALSO apply to any ordinance that we recieve). If it is, then, as the verse says above, we have our sealing and our promise right there. Beyond the ordinance spoken of in verse 132, which appears to be the Sealing ordinance of Marriage, there is NO NEED for one to fret or to covet beyond this. IF they fulfill the crowing Ordinance spoken of in the verse above (which I assume is the Sealing ordinance of Marriage as that is what I feel section 132 pertains to in this portion), they have already received blessings sealed upon them with the promises of such things according the Doctrine and Covenants (Verses quoted above). Of course, it is all pertaining to it being Sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise which is also (as one could put it) reliant upon their faithfulness. As I said, just my thoughts that occurred to me and I thought I'd write them down. They may be of no use to anyone. I think though, that the verses above are of interest in what they promise in regards to the what I feel section 132 is discussing (the Sealing Ordinance, specifically that of a Temple Marriage/Sealing). I may be wrong, of course, just my thoughts on the the matter in relation to the verses above.

This sounds terrific. It sounds that you have been working hard and found a great and fulfilling way to stay fit. It is good to take care of your body. It used to be taught that our bodies were temples. They are special places for our soul and the better we treat and take care of it, the better it can be for us. I'm not sure why working out would be in conflict with the church's doctrine. As long as you are keeping other commandments and able to support yourself, I would think working out could go hand in hand with the gospel. As I mentioned above, taking care of ourselves can actually be seen as part of the Word of Wisdom (a part that is ignored in many instances). I'm not sure why you would be ridiculed for exercising. In times past, man had far more physical labor in general throughout their lives to keep them physically fit. In today's society, though there ARE jobs that do this, many occupations are more inside based. Exercising in a gym can make up for part of this loss, but we still are trying to make up a deficit of physical activity. Now, as you will die (as we all do) the muscles that you build up in this life will probably decay as your body decays and decomposes. That's just how nature works once a body is dead. The good news is that this is not permanent. We will rise up in a perfected body. The body you have in the ressurection will probably be even better than the one you develop on the Earth. I expect that you will have muscles in the resurrection, and even better, if you have any maladies that you suffer from now, those will also be gone and you will have a perfect body. That said, the focuses that you learn in this life, such as how to take care of yourself and to keep fit, will also be of benefit to you in the next life with your resurrected body. The way it is applied and the applications may vary from individual to individual, but what we learn in this life we can take with us into the next. One of the things we are here to do is to learn, and hopefully you are learning many things about the gospel and about yourself. I can tell this is a difficult decision for you. How much you could or could not exercise will be mission dependent if you go on a proselyting mission. I've known missionaries that spent a great deal of time working out and exercising. I've also known those who didn't have much time to do so. I think it depends heavily on what mission you go to, who your mission president is, and what availability you have in your areas to exercise or workout. Even in areas where you will HAVE to exercise a lot, it may not be the type of exercise you wish to do. A prime example would be an area I knew of where the missionaries covered an area around 50 miles wide and 75 miles long. It was a rural area and they were on bikes. They biked for hours each day. They got a LOT of exercise and a LOT of workouts with biking. That's not the same as lifting weights in a gym though. If you choose to go on a proselyting mission, it would be a gamble on whether you would be able to end up in one where you can workout as you desire. I would still highly encourage you to go on one, but you should know that if one is honest, the odds probably are not in your favor on this one for being able to continue to workout as you wish. It comes down to a personal choice on your part as to whether you would be willing to give up the amount of workouts you do for two years and serve the Lord, having faith that he will make all things possible if you have trust in him, or whether you will choose a different path. LUCKILY, a proselyting mission is NOT the only way to serve a mission these days. There are many that do not wish to serve a proselyting mission or cannot serve a proselyting mission. Instead, many are chosen to go on a service mission. A service mission is still a mission and you would still be a missionary. The amount of time you spend doing service varies depending on the mission. The advantage this would give you is that you could still be a missionary. You could still serve the Lord and be a missionary in the Lord's service. At the same time, you would almost definitely have enough time to continue your workout regimen at the gym at the same (or greater if you so desired) pace that you have been having. I would suggest that if you decide a proselyting mission is not for you, that perhaps investigating to see whether a service mission would be the right fit for you or not. Take a look at being a service missionary. As a service missionary and serving a service mission there is no reason why you could not continue being a "gym-bro" if you so wanted to be. As far as your gains later in life, I hope you luck. It can get harder to keep up the muscles and tone as you get older. You have a different body at 70 than when you were young. However, you can still be physically fit. The lessons that you learn about exercise and remaining fit should stay with you throughout your life. It is up to you to continue to be focused enough to practice it. If you remain dedicated, even as your body ages and the changes of age come upon you, the lessons that you have learned and what you have built upon can help you remain in good shape and healthy for a long time. In the same way, in the eternities, you can take the lessons you learned here. It WILL be a new body. It will be a better body. The lessons you learn in this life that help with eternal growth will remain with you. I think it is a mistake to think that just because you work out that you think you cannot serve a mission. There are different types of missions. If a proselyting mission (what most think of when a person goes on a mission) is not for you, look at some of the other forms of missions that you can go on (and I've know several young men that have gone on service missions. They are considered just as important as proselyting missions and those who serve faithfully are just as much returned missionaries as any other missionary when their mission is over). Now if there are OTHER reasons besides just a desire to work out that prevent you from going on a mission, you should probably bring those items up and be honest about them. Blaming it all on the gym and your focus there is not really a good reason for not going on a mission. As I said, there are different types of missions and most (of the types of missions besides proselyting) would accommodate even the most extreme gym workout schedules. However, there may be other reasons one does not want to go on a mission. If it is another reason, be honest about that and approach it in that manner rather than blaming the innocent gym and gym-bro culture. If it is another reason, explaining that to others (though your parents may still not like or want to discuss these things, others might) could be a better way of understanding what it is about a mission that you do not want to experience or go with. If it is truly just the gym and workouts that you do not wish to lose, once again, I'll stress for you to look at other types of missions which still allow you to become a missionary and serve the lord, but also allow you to do the type and quality of workouts which you so desire to do.

Well, I obviously do not have the answers you are looking for, BUT, I did find an interesting history article pertaining to Angels and how they got their wings (no, it's not when someone rings a bell). How Angels found their Wings --------

It looks to be at one of the Marriott locations in Killeen, one of those which sponsors military or is friendly to military. It looks to be near the junction of I-14 and 195 I think.

If you consider Chiefs and Sub-Chiefs, it isn't uncommon elsewhere either. In the Book of Mormon we have Kings, but we see that many of the tribes of North America had tribes and Chiefs of them when the colonists from Europe came. If we look at some of the Larger Tribes they would at times have a Grand Chief or a Chief of Chiefs that was over the entire tribe. Over smaller groups you would also have Chiefs. This is not uncommon for other places in the world as well.

Probably something like #3 PS: Edit - It is Waaay to early. Daylight savings time fools me again.

Supposedly my Son-in-Law booked us in a Hotel in Killeen, TX but, though the reservation is in place, it didn't require him to prepay for it. I am a little concerned about that as getting out there with no room would be a little off-putting...to say the least.

This is leaping ahead just slightly. So, as the Rulers of this group of Lamanites is converted they establish the religion of the Nephites among them. However, then we see that others come up to kill them and the Anti-Nephi-Lehies do nothing. Knowing how murderous we see some groups in our modern world are, I wonder how the events of Chapter 24 would occur. In our world, groups would be more than happy to murder them all, or to murder them and take the rest prisoners to be re-educated or otherwise. I would think the Lamanites who were opposed to the Anti-Nephi-Lehies being converted would have similar ideas. Instead we see many of those Lamanites also converted.

I hadn't even heard of it until now. Looks to be a documentary type film. It looks like there is a VAST difference between the film critics reviews and the audience reviews (Critics going down as far as 22% approval and Audience reviews on some sites going up as high as 88%).

Not all the supporters of Hamas are driven by that. Many of the main monetary funders are actually living in luxury in other nations. In Gaza it seems you are either for or against them. If you are against them, expect that they and their supporters will take everything from you. The Hospitals, for example, have enough to support themselves, or they DID. Hamas stole fuel and supplies from them. Even with the neutral medical parties (such as the UN medical staff) saying they were neutral and trying to say what Hamas told them to say, Hamas still stole all their stuff. This is why Israel had the siege...because anything they sent to help people in Gaza would simply be taken (or given in many cases) from them to help Hamas. Another hope was that those in Gaza would hear the appeals to take on Hamas and either convince them, or take the hostages and send them back to Israel. The People of Gaza did not do this. Gaza itself is on a beautiful area where if the people had actually CHOSEN to pursue making money and getting a better life, they had the prime area to do so. Instead...well...we see where we are now. A LOT of what has happened in Gaza is by CHOICE of those who live there. Hamas is only in power today because people choose to allow them to be in power. The reason things are as they is because those in Gaza have managed to make everyone else in the region (including Israeli Palestinians and Arabs) from the surrounding nations (such as Jordan and Egypt) have no desire to deal with the ramifications of what the Palestinians do in their nations (aka...try to disrupt or overthrow their governments as well). Even when they are given food, nice things, and helped in other nations, these attitudes to disrupt the other nations and local governments seem to erupt. This is also part of their problems and why Gaza is like it is. No one wants to help out anymore there (or the help has been greatly reduced) due to them biting the hands that try to help...repeatedly. However, it's gotten much worse as we saw with the recent incursion to Israel. They have sworn to commit another holocaust and kill all the Jews (and why people support such an idea is beyond me...Hamas preys on the idea that they are poor and downtrodden by Israel, but they are also perhaps some of the most ardent pushers of a Holocaust since the Nazi's...perhaps even more so), but HOW they would try to do such things were not so horrific in appearance (they appear to approve door to door and torture now) as they have become. It's not just the attack that is bad. It's not just their doctrine which is bad. (And both of those would be horrific in and of themselves). It is also HOW they perpetrated that attack upon innocent civilians (and not just Jews in this case, and not just Israelis) and bragged about it. It's HOW they seem to relish in it, and are proud of what they did and seemingly are supported by those around them as well. They seem to have no regrets about what they did and if given the chance, have seemingly pointed that not only would they do it again, they'd do worse if they could. This is why Israel is doing what they are doing. Is it self-defense?...I'd say so...but others may have different opinion.

I'm not sure what the difference between 2, 3, and 4, are, but combining the music and spiritual quotes and scriptures I think is great!

Off Topic. But on the thoughts of Texas... I expect I'll be traveling to Texas this coming April in order to see the Eclipse (everyone, pray that it is clear enough so that we can actually see the eclipse while there). I'm not sure whether I'll be coming in from the East side via Houston yet, or coming in from the North via Oklahoma yet though.

It seems (And Alma the Younger would have also had this occur earlier in the Book of Mormon), that upon having the Spirit testify to them, people tend to fall into a coma like state. Has anyone ever had anyone in this modern era fall into a coma like state upon having the "shock" of conversion fall upon them? I have a grandkid or two I'd wish would have this conversion come upon them, that they turn from the world like they have and come back to the Church.

It's running around $2.50 to 2.60 East of Texas. It seems the further West you get, the more expensive fuel gets. I wonder why that is? I think it's easier in the East Coast where a lot of urban areas are closer together. Out West, especially in areas past the Dakotas in the Northern Western areas, and past the Middle of Texas (into that wide barren area of West Texas where nothing seems to be) I don't know how someone could survive with only an electric vehicle. Things are so far apart out there it's ridiculous in comparison to the East. From Utah, from Las Vegas to California is a long barren zone where you even have to watch your fuel. Up north from SLC to Reno is even worse...a LOT worse! I don't know how someone would manage with an EV for that distance without turning an 8 hour trip into a multi-day event perhaps...if they could find charging stations along the way. I think Washington State also has a similarly long period of barren areas where even Gas can be difficult to find at times in the span going Westward out of Spokane (at least if memory serves right).

Tricky, this is not official doctrine that I am aware of... I have heard that the Patriarchial Order, or specifically, that Order of Priesthood that you cannot enter singly, but must enter with a spouse and obtain when you obtain a celestial Marriage, is the Highest Order of Priesthood. On that, I have the following sections from the Church's site on a quick look (I've had better sources previously, talks from apostles and such, but that would take a lot longer to search out and find). Blessings of the Patriarchal Order From Bruce R. McConkie From our own Prophet today, but before he was a prophet and was an apostle. From Ezra Taft Benson

Wow, you are a great singer! (at least I think some of those videos are you singing). Others on these forums should check out your videos if they haven't already!

Actually, it's normally not homophobia, but charity from the ones I've discussed it with. One of the more recent talking points we had prior to class (when some of these discussions go) was about states that want to stop giving out free lunches (and/or breakfasts) to children. It seemed that many of them felt that those states with higher Conservative/Christian groups that were Republicans were the ones who didn't want to have children fed at school for free, or were begrudging funds to feed children under the auspices that some who had wealthier families could get fed along with those in need. Many had a problem with the thought that those in these states felt the solution then was to just not feed the kids in general. Thus, those who were above the guidelines for free lunch, but poorer in general, should have children that didn't get fed and such. It seems it's normally along the lines of Jesus taught charity and that the poor were more humble than the Rich, but today's society in the US seems to be adverse to charity and praise the rich and put them on a footstool, with many Christians being the epitomy of this. Homophobia can be in there (normally under the guise of, one should love their neighbor as theyself), but the main thrust normally seems to center on Charity and concern and love for those less able than you...normally in the financial sense (as I said, my own thoughts at times on this...meaning not theirs...is this is because over half of them are probably also struggling financially. They are starving college students probably...and when you are struggling with money that probably occupies a lot of your thought process).

I guess it depends on WHY you think we were in Vietnam. Most today seem to believe the very liberal talking points of the Hippies from back then, and by that measure...of course we were not victorious. What that talking point misses is their idea of victory was never what we were after in the first place. ON the otherhand, We HALTED the advance of Communism overall, prevented world war 3 from happening in reality, won the Cold War, and preserved the freedom of many of the other nations in that sphere of influence. The only reason we got the North Vietnamese to the table in the first place was we bombed the heck out of them until they capitulated to do so. At that point, most of the reasons we had to even be there we over. Our purpose was never to actually take over or to force the other side to accept our way of life. That was a major difference in how we had fought wars in the past and Vietnam. But I digress. I see things very differently than many of the younger generations since then.

I think this is a problem that is not actually factored in to a degree. The point I've heard over this is that Church's regularly ignore the teachings of the New Testament. The most recent was actually in National News (so not from Young People at all) where it was pointing out that Church's were ignoring or outright trying to teach against what the Lord taught. The reason was that it was seen that the teachings of the Lord in the New Testament were too liberal and thus did not equate with the political ideas of the congregations. I've heard some young folks say that this feels like Churches today are hypocritical. They feel that the things taught in the New Testament are actually teaching something that's been termed in modern times as Religious Socialism or Religious Communism. I've said this before as well, though I am still deeply religious and hold strongly to my Church, that the things taught and lived in the New Testament as well as the early Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints during the 19th century equated to the same ideas of Religious Socialism and Religious Communism (not to be confused with Marxist Socialism which is where a LOT of conservatives get confused about and upon). There is something referring to a false image of our Lord but propped up by Conservatives where the Lord pushes the Supply Side rather than Charity. This is due to the idea that many young people actually LIKE what is taught in the New Testament but see it as teaching things such as feed the poor, help those who need help, love they neighbor. They feel that many of the people who are members of the Churches these days may pay service to those things with their lips, but in actual practice, do the exact opposite. This is where I think there is a dichotomy of thought in the Republican and Democrat parties. The Republicans tend to lean more towards Moral Chastity (being more Chaste in action, no homosexual relations, etc), which is where they win over many of the Church going members. However, they seem to be very against the idea of Charity in general as a society. On the otherhand you have Democrats that seem to focus more on the Charity aspects, but completely abandon Chastity. The best combination may be a combination of the two of those (Chastity AND Charity). Young people unfortunately (at least where I teach) seem to want to ignore the Chastity portion and try to make any and all excuses on not following it, but are all in their thoughts about the Charity parts (perhaps because over half of them are starving students). Hence, why they probably lean more liberal in some ways and see Church going members trending towards Conservative values as not following the teachings of the Lord or the New Testament. I see this as well. On the religious side though, we see in Genesis 2:15 that Adam was taken to the Garden to take care of it. He basically was told to be in charge of it and take care of it. We can apply this to the world as well. We should be doing our best to take care of the world as best we can (as well as other people). I think the bigger question is how we actually can do that. There is a lot of political raff to confuse the picture at times of what is actually true and what is not. There is a LOT of media sensationalism that fogs up the picture at times of what actually is occurring in regards to pollution and climate change. I think sometimes we do NOT focus enough on the more widespread sins of Fornication. WE also don't focus as much on Adultery which is terribly rampant, but fornication is far more rampant among our young folks. That said, many of the young folks don't want to be reprimanded for their own infidelities in these matters, and Churches don't want to make a lot of their young folks angry. It's safer to target the sins of Homosexuality and such because there are less of them out there. ALL the sins of immorality (fornication, adultery, homosexuality, etc) should be addressed, but I see a lot of avoidance in regards to fornication, though it is probably the most prevalent of all the immoralities practiced among young people today. I'm not sure that would bring them back to church though. They seem to already know what they are doing is against what is in the scriptures, and seem to want to make excuses on why it's okay for them to do so, or other such things. Yes, there are similarities, though overall I think we, as a Church are doing better to a small degree on the immorality, or WERE prior to 2015. More of our young people who were ACTIVE (in otherwords, were active in going to church and it's activities) were obeying the law of chastity (compared to a national average of less than 5% of US citizens were following the law of chastity, 95% were having pre-marital relations of that sort). That was when we actively taught about obeying the law of chastity and certain rules about not seeing certain films with a hard top set at R-rated movies and a hard bottom of the age 16 for dating (we have since gotten rid of those so, not sure how it will go in the future). We know this was going to occur though. It says in the Bible about the last days and how wickedness will only increase. It will probably only get worse as time goes on, up until the coming of the Lord to rule the earth comes.

Oh dear, my wife already says that to me quite a bit.

You could post links to it so we could check it out?

And I've been thinking more on it this weekend. I think it's not necessarily genocide that's the missing part, but submission. After World War 2, the reason the rehabilitation of Japan and Germany was possible was because they were so beaten that they were willing to be rehabilitated. In Vietnam, though we technically beat the tar out of them and won overall, we never forced the North to really submit completely. We may have accomplished our goals overall, but we didn't have the goal to have the enemy conform to our way of life and thus didn't bring it about. I think that for a drastic change to happen in Gaza the people of Gaza will have to be so beat down that they are willing for a change to what others want them to change to. That means the civilians would have to be so adverse to Hamas that they would literally choose something other than Hamas to support. They would have to be willing to do a complete and total surrender, they'd have to be willing to do whatever the Israeli's would have them do and be adverse to Hamas. As Japan and Germany show us, that doesn't have to result in a Genocide of the people, but it would probably mean the death knell for some of the organizations (such as HAMAS). I suppose the better question then is whether Israel would be able to do what is needed (or allowed to do so, if they wished to and the world would let them...which the world thus far has not been) in order to do this? How far would they have to go in order to get those who live in Gaza to actually surrender and submit (two different things)? Edit: Of course, part of that is the modern war and modern mores which try to prevent War from being as ugly as it has in the past. The problem is, War was ugly in the past to accomplish the submission of others. It's the ugliness that makes us want to finally be done with it. To get a submission the horror of it has to be so clear and so near that submission seems to be the only option for survival.