Traveler

Let me ask another question - In which society FLDS or non-FLDS - has the highest minor sexuality at the youngest age and most underage pregnancies? Are our Texas friends protecting children or straining at a gnat and swallowing camel? When it comes to sexual abuse of children. The Traveler

There is a obvious flaw in this prof. It is a common problem of ignorance that many have with the difference between complex numbers and real numbers. As soon as you attempt to take the squar root you must realize that can only have a complete solution if the number is complex. I submit that women are complex and therefore assuming all women are evil is flawed - especially for a male that does not understand the complex and real sets. :) The Traveler

If racial problems cannot be dealt with in a controlled environment – it cannot be expected in uncontrolled environment of that same society. The Traveler

One of the reasons the children were removed from the compound ranch in Texas was because of the accusation that the children were being taught (given propaganda) to prepare them for underage marriage and sexual contact). This was considered by the Child Protective Services to be acts of child abuse. I do not want to discuss if the FLDS church is guilty of child abuse – I want to look specifically at others. What I am wondering is this: If encouragement of underage sexual contact is child abuse – why has there been no effort or action against educational and entertainment materials (example – R rated moves) and those that distribute such materials where minor children have access and the parents that allow and encourage their minor children to participate in such entertainment and education? The Traveler

Satan wanted all the glory unto himself. I believe that he wanted all to believe that under his plan of salvation that all would be saved by his grece. Satan wanted to take away the agency of man. I believe that Satan wanted all to understand that under his plan that man was not think in any terms or to any degree that anything done by man is meaingfull. The Traveler

Paying a small amount for the poor is a great amount and should be considered greater than that which is paid by the rich. I would also add that it is my belief that G-d ask us to tithe because of the great benefit it is to us - not him. Thank you Sister Drew - it was a joy reading your post. The Traveler

I am not sure I continue to like the way many of us LDS look at this question. There are many things to consider in the manner we all live and are paid. Without question those ministers that live high on the donations of such as the widow's mite are living contrary to Christian principles. But one does not have to be in positions of responsibility within a "Church" to abuse and misuse the manner in which they are paid and the manner in which they live. I have come to realize that of all that post on this forum - it is I (because of my economic status) that is the most worthy of any criticism as to how I treat my fellow men concerning things of money – how I am paid and how I live. It is also my opinion that if we look to criticize others before applying such things to ourselves that we abuse our faith in Christ. We are all unprofitable servants and therefore it is unwise to criticize others for their unprofitability. I would also point out – for those that have not observed; that this is somewhat of a different direction in my thinking since I joined the forum some time ago. The Traveler

Before one can recieve the blessings in eternity of an eternal marriage - they must seek and covenant with G-d through his pointed proxy(s) to live by covenant - including and especially the eternal covenant of marriage. Please note that marriage and the eternal covenant of marriage is not only not the same thing but is some cases a marriage apointed by man is contrary to the sacred eternal covenant of marriage and disqualifies an individual of such covenant with G-d. The Traveler

Often when we ask the question of who will or who will not be in heaven we do so focusing on a single event in a person’s life. I personally think this is the wrong approach and I also think it displays a great deal of ignorance about the kind of place heaven is. To be honest – it is my belief that most people (including many on this very forum) will not be in heaven because it is not a place of their liking. For example, the once saved always saved approach to things – to me appears to be a perfect fit of Satan and his Kingdom. His plan is to take care of everybody. His plan was to save everybody by grace. So if you want to be saved regardless – then Satan and hell is the perfect place for you. Heaven is a place for people that are free. In other words heaven is for those that are responsible and take responsibility. Yes, I am well aware that there are tons of scriptures but I personally believe many times people read too much of what they want into scripture. G-d is not about mindless robots without personalities and abilities – G-d is about righteousness, covenants and responsibility. It is Satan that wants to fix “it” for everybody. So here is the deal. I believe that regardless of what is in a person’s past – if they want to be a saint, do what saints do and be responsible as a saint is responsible – they belong in heaven. I also believe that regardless of what is in a person’s past – if they do not want to be good – making fun of anyone that is good for any reason – they do not belong in heaven. But more than anything – if anyone wants a G-d and a kingdom where they are taken care of; do not have to lift a finger for their own salvation (or anyone else’s) then Satan and Hell is their perfect match. And yes – it is a choice – and from the posting – many have made their choice. The Traveler

Just thought I would throughout the possibility of the Japanese connection to Hagoth. This is for those that have some understanding of Japanese history. The Traveler

I would like to ask some questions: When is a government justified in using force? Is the use of force - in essence socialistic? Who decides what is best for the society and how that society is governed? What is the meaning of the word govern and what is a government? Who in any government is free? Who should be free? The Traveler

Just wondering - how are your sure that is no body associated with Lucifer? The Traveler

The only way to be sure that what you are doing is not influenced in some way by Satan is to do all things according to your covenants with G-d. Jesus is an example of one who did all things according to covenants and as commanded. Jesus also made reference to thoses that have eyes but cannot see and ears and cannot hear. The loss of sight and hearing is a direct reference to broken covenants that was well understood in ancient times. Few understand the role of covenants and such ignorance in demosntrated in various discussions on such topics of works and grace. But the point I intended to make is that anything a person does that they do not intend to be part of a covenant - is not part of covenant and is as according to the powers and priesthoods of Satan. Let us all know and keep our covenants. The Traveler

Good point Snow - I know a university that claimed to have initiated cold fusion. For those that think just because a university has claimed to have done something that it must have merit – you may send me what ever money you have and I will invest it in the cold fusion – and you can join the thousands of others that were beguiled by the titles of a prestigious university. I will guarantee that within a week I will return 1,000 times what other investors in cold fusion were awarded as a return because of a prestigious university. But keep in mind that 1,000 times Zero is still Zero. Anyone see the headlines that carbon dating is proven invalid? There ought to at least be a mag at the suppermarket check out. We all know that universities never "doctor" or "cook" their data. The Traveler

It would seem that with this question there is some misunderstanding. The difference between our Intelligence and our spirits is not at all what is projected in some post. That which is spirit is eternal by nature and is not created or made. (See D&C 93) - Note that Saten takes away intellignece through disobedience (verse 29 and verse 39). This is the means by which spirit become "subject to" and freedom of man is lost. The Traveler

Some things and some thoughts. First off: Satan and the various members of the G-dhead have almost nothing in common. It is my personal belief that attaching anger to G-d is a misinterpretation of scripture. I would point out that any need to suffer ill effects because of sins was paid for by Jesus. Jesus has gone through a lot of suffering himself to overcome the damage done by sin. It is important to note that not only did he suffer that you and I do not have to suffer for the ill effects of our sins but that we might also not be destroyed by the sins of others. I believe if someone is angry because of sin it is because they do not really believe that Jesus overcame sin – so their anger is really because they must think in some way Jesus did not really keep his promise. In other words any anger towards someone because of sin is an outward manifestation on one’s rejection of Jesus Christ’s infinite redemption of sin. Because of the atonement there is no need to condemn, damn, or be angry because of any sin. Next: I would point out that Hell was not created in order to enforce revenge on sinners. It was created by a loving and compassionate G-d for those that would not live with him – and living with him requires covenants. The only souls in hell are those that want to be there. Hell is exactly what heaven would become if those that do not covenant with G-d to become free like G-d, were accommodated in order to exist there. No one would be free. Next: Satan does not want to be in heaven – he wants everyone in hell; including G-d. He wants the power and control over ever thing. Those that do not want to live free in eternity – want everything taken care of so they do not have to worry – will find hell and Satan very much to their liking. It was Satan’s plan all along to turn heaven into hell. Those that want a free ride in heaven and a eternal guarantee to be saved regardless of what they do will find Satan’s hell much more to their liking than G-d’s heaven – where you cannot be forgiven unless you forgive – if you want to be forgiven based on your personal relationship with your G-d and/or without having to forgive – then Satan is your ideal G-d and hell is your ideal heaven. Next: Those that followed Satan out of heaven were not deceived. They understood the plan of salvation and did not like it. They liked Satan’s plan. The reason we think of them as demons is because they got angry when they did not get control of heaven and they are trying to punish the rest of us for that. I do not like the notion and doctrine that G-d treats those that do not go along with his plan in the same manner that Satan and his hosts treat those that do not go along with their plan. There is a very big difference. G-d is not angry or trying to get even or punish anyone for not playing his game. Please try to get past this idea and concept and you will understand G-d a lot better. Last: 1/3 of heaven did not follow Lucifer. The ancients did not understand fractions in the same manner as we do. The 1/3 part of heaven is an indication that heaven was divided by the rebellion of Lucifer into 3 parts. It is not required that the 3 parts be equal. There may have been 10 times as many in Lucifer’s part or only half as many as any other part. The point is that there were 3 parts and the part the followed Lucifer was sent away from heaven so that heaven would not be come hell. Dividing G-d’s children into 3 parts is a recurring theme in scripture. Thank for listening and enjoy your choices. The Traveler

So you believe that prior to the "creation" that G-d was a "nothing" G-d meaning a G-d of nothing? The Traveler

Sometimes the manner in which a question is asked - the answer can be affected. The greater one's abilities the greater one can serve good or evil. The Traveler

I I am touched by the understanding of "word". Most often we think of words as that which is spoken. The Gospel of John tells us more concerning "The Word". The scriptures often use symbols when talking about things like the "mouth of G-d". I think we do ourselves a disservice by narrowing our understanding of what the scriptures intend when we think in terms of what is spoken and written. I believe that those sent by G-d they are inspired beyond words – they are inspired by deeds and behaviors to be examples of G-d as well. If their behavior is not inspired – they words are empty. I do not believe it is enough to speak of the things of G-d – if one is not a proxy and example of G-d they are a false prophet and false teacher and should not claim that G-d has called or sent them. By the same token we should not seek guidance from those whose deeds are not a consistent example of what they teach – which leaves me without any political mentors or leaders to follow from any current campaigns. The Traveler

#1: Beginning. It is my understanding that a variant translation of this is “When G-d first established his covenant with man”. This would lead us to understand that Genesis is not about the beginning of time. The implication that this is the point of a beginning of all things is problematic. It would mean that there is nothing eternal and that eternal is a false concept – because there was a beginning before which there was nothing. #2: G-d. There is much more to this than most Christians (especially traditional Trinitarian Christians) seem to be willing to deal with. For example; most make transitive of the logic that G-d is the creator or in other words that the creator is G-d which defined G-d in terms of the creation. Genesis deconstructs this false and heretical notion. The point made in Genesis is that G-d was in existence and had defined who he was as G-d prior to the creation. This is a most important notion and cannot and should not be misunderstood – Genesis is crystal clear concerning this notion. It cannot be argued that G-d was G-d prior to creation if nothing existed for G-d to be G-d over or to. What Christians worship as G-d is not and was not ever a G-d of nothing but if there was nothing prior to the; what we understand as “The Beginning” in Genesis, then G-d was a “nothing” G-d and is not the same G-d yesterday, today and forever but is a G-d that changes the very heart and core of what we understand of G-d. #3: Created. Again Genesis is very problematic with science of our modern era as some try to interpret Genesis. From science we have learned that matter is not the simple physical that many in traditional Trinitarian Christianity have attempted to define. Einstein gave us understanding and knowledge that matter and energy are different states of the same thing {E=m(C*C)}. With an infinite source of power available to G-d – he could transform energy he has in his infinite reserve into the matter of the universe – which is, BTW, a very good explanation of beyond the horizon of the Big Bang theory. #4: Heaven. This cannot be an explanation of the Kingdom over which G-d resides for that definition of things cannot be created because for that there can be no beginning. If there was then a beginning that G-d himself and his existence would have beginning. The heaven referred to in the Genesis creation epoch is what we know of as the universe – comprised of many stars, galaxies and a great variety of things we have yet to become aware of. #5: Earth. This is also a most problematic notion based on modern science. To demonstrate the problem let we ask one simple question – Are dinosaurs a creature of Earth? The problem in science is that dinosaurs were too big and heavy to have existed with current earth gravity. Structural analysis of the very large dinosaurs indicates that their bone structure could not have supported their mass and mobility to allow existence in current earth gravity. I am not trying to prove any notion of creation or evolution – just state a simple fact. At what point the earth became the earth as we now know it is not addressed in Genesis. This problem or question is avoided in most religious discussions concerning the creation of the earth. Many Christians are having problems with their traditional notions and the advances of science. Someday the “earth” with be filled with knowledge but until then one of the greatest difficulties man faces in his relationship with G-d is overcoming and incredible amount of ignorance generating misguided faith brought about by poor understanding of science and scripture. I am grateful for the LDS notion that G-d has not yet revealed the wholeness of creation – we need to have faith to learn more. The Traveler

Some of your responses: The first critics of the Book of Mormon used the “why is there no evidence” argument concerning the vast Nephite civilization clamed by the Book of Mormon. At the time it was said that there were no signs of a civilization of millions of people living in vast cities of hundred of thousand of inhabitants using advanced beyond primitive technologies. It was argued that there were no signs or indications of advanced civilization. Let us look at this convergence or divergence. There are a lot of theories concerning indigenous peoples in the Americas. The prevailing theories purport two migrations in pre-historic times at about 60,000 years ago and 15,000 years ago. Nice theories but note that such theories disprove the Bible as much as the Book of Mormon. But let us continue. Prior to the Pre-Classic period of ancient American civilization the indigenous peoples of central and South America were very primitive. They were Stone Age hunter-gathers with limited use of tools and fire. They ate their food raw and did not hunt anything larger than a rat. According to experts these were the migrants of the most recent migration and are identified as the Dine peoples. At this point I give you the world famous and honored explorer and archaeologist – Thor Heyerdahl (no connection to LDS). He argued that it is a bit ridiculous to argue that the civilizations of the ancient Americas arose from such primitive indigenous peoples that in 100 years or so walked out of the pristine jungles and developed language, built large cities with stone and mortar, domesticated various plants and animals, developed education systems, science, art, vast trading (engineering bridges and highways) and many other things – when such developments took thousands of years every where else in the world. Yet these ancient peoples were successful for 10,000+ years prior as primitive hunter gathers – why did they suddenly advance? Thor argued that the sudden uprising in technology resulted from a migration. Based on the methods of building temples and other technology he theorized the first migration came from the Western Mediterranean to Persia area around 2,000 to 2,200 BC. In my studies I do not know of any rise of civilization in the Americas prior to this period and I would point out that this converges very quickly on the date, time and place provided in the Book of Mormon. Thor was most interested in a migration around 600 BC (we can talk about that later if you like) that triggered the rise of the Classic civilization. To prove his point and convince critics he built a boat with ancient technologies and sailed to the Americas. I would point out that since his expedition it has been proven that the ancients had more sea worthy vessels than what he was copying – in fact some of the vessels were 3 times the size and more capable than the ships Columbus used to come to America. I have documented close to 100 ancient facts concerning Arabia that was not know in America at the time of Joseph Smith but are referenced in the Book of Mormon; many of which critics have stated at one time or another; that because such facts were not forth coming and could not be proven at the time of criticism that the Book of Mormon could not possibly be true. And as there is continual convergence in time demonstrating the Book of Mormon to be more accurate than it critics - it should cause some to at least soften their view. But in all my experience I have not found once where such critics have been proven to be wrong that any such critic has ever modified their view or criticism. And so I ask you – what is the point of which you have the most concern that has you convinced that in the last 150 years there has been a divergence away from the Book of Mormon? Is it DNA evidence? Let us look at what was known on that subject and related theories through 150 years and compare that with what is known currently and see if there is convergence or divergence. Let us begin with any one single point of your choosing. The Traveler

It is not inspired or wise to tout an ability you cannot control. The Traveler

I have a friend that works for the church and they told me a while back that the church had just completed a study of what things the most effective families all have in common. This was a most important study because it was discovered that there seems to be a critical mass for wards to also be successful. In essence there is a minimum number of effective families that act a leaven to raise the rest of the ward. Anyway these effective families are valiant and supportive with callings, examples and strong. It surprised many to find out that these most effective families failed on many things the church pushes – like regular family home evenings, regular family prayer and family scripture study and even attending church together. There were two things at the very top of the list and it would seem that families with these two things did well despite doing or not doing other things. Guess what the two things were? I will not make you guess or wait but they were. Number 1. Regular individual personal prayer. At least twice daily. Number 2. Regular individual personal commitment to read, study and ponder the scriptures – at least twice a week minimum. I found it interesting it was not what parents push and/or demand but what individuals within the family seek on their own. I have a theory of how parents can best encourage their children concerning personal prayer but it is only my theory. Just one other thing. My next door neighbor is a highly respected doctor of physiology that says the number one thing most common with children and families with problems in getting along is certain vocabulary words and the one vocabulary word used the most often by failing families is the ever famous “F” word. The Traveler

When there are discussions about the Book of Mormon and about how it fits into our day I become concerned that many think it is inspired and directed towards those that do not reed it. I, on the other hand, believe it is directly pointed to those that read it. The warnings are specifically for us Later-Day Saints. And yes - I do not know about you guys but I struggle ever day with pride. The Traveler

I have found the institute manuals and Sunday School manuals to be of value – especially prior to discussions that take place at times designated through covenant for discussion. The Traveler