Traveler

When I lend money I require a contract and collateral. All the terms are written up by my lawyer and an escrow account is set up for payment. If payments are not made according to the contract the collateral is liquated and any remaining funds are returned according to the contract. When I loan money – especially to family and friends, I make sure I have nothing to do with collections or seeing that payments are on time. This way we can all remain friends. If any questions are asked of me personally – I respond that I have nothing to do with what happened or is about to happen. If it turns out that their collateral was short of the amount owed, I think nothing of it unless they ask for another loan. I would also add that this is how I was treated by my father whenever I saked for money. It goes without saying that I never asked for $5 for a date. The Traveler

This is the best example of Satan's view of the final judgment I have encountered - thank you The Traveler

In Deuteronomy chapter 6 verse 4 the ancient Hebrew word from which the English word “one” is translated is “ehad”. This word has two possible understandings. One meaning is a united plural meaning. An example of ehad as a plural united meaning is being “one” in marriage. The singular meaning of ehad is that of complete singular uniqueness even in expression without divisions. This singularity is in complete opposition to the doctrine of the Trinity and the divisions of G-d into persons of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. If ehad is to be understood in singular context and not a plural multiple context, then there is no Father, Son and Holy Ghost. If G-d was singular but having distinguishable and different addressable understandings such as Father, Son and Holy Ghost the correct Hebrew term would be ‘Yhead”. If you are a Christian and believe Jesus is the Son of G-d then you only have one option in reality with the oneness of G-d expressed in scripture. That is to believe that Jesus and the Father are one in the same way that a husband and wife are one in marriage. This is the same as the ancient covenant of citizens of a Kingdom. That is that the Suzerain and his Vassal heir are one. The uniqueness is in the entire structure of the Kingdom and all apointed and lawful representivies within that structure. Rejecting even the lowest citizen of such a Kingdom was considered a rejection of the very King. The oneness is in reference to everything associated or under the direction of that G-d. The Traveler

I think most of us are looking at this backwards. It is not about judging ourselves to determine if we will or if we will not make it. It is about how we judge G-d and our fellow man. If we learn to judge G-d and man through love and compassion we will likewise be judged by love and compassion. Quit worrying about yourself and become concerned with others. The Traveler

Here is my problem with gold or silver backed currency. If so much gold was backing the currency in 1913 and say for sake of the argument that was 1 billion dollars – that means that a given amount of gold was equal to 1 dollar. If the economy is able to grow to 30 billion dollars (GNP) then the amount of gold has to be 1/30th of the 1913 currency. This would make money worthless and the gold greatly inflated – by 30 times at least. So the government has a problem – does it print more dollars (30 times more) so the dollar retains its value in wealth or leave the value the same to match the value of gold? or does the number of dollars remain constant with the amount of gold backing it? Since everything that is growing is in reality growing does that mean that if a teacher was paid 100 dollars in 1913 and that there are 3 times as many teachers now that they only get paid $33.33 for the exact same work? When someone says gold standard works – would you please show me how??? I keep asking this question and no one answers – they just say it works. I would like to see how it works. If you cannot show me – I do not believe you understand the problem. The Traveler

I really do not understand your arguments here. Let us say that the gold available in 1913 would back 1 billion in dollars currency with a population of 50 million people - remember that gold cannot increase because it is a limited supply. How can that same gold support a 30 billion need for currency in a growing free economy with a 150 million population? The wealth of the free economy cannot grow beyond the gold that backs the currency. Ether something other than the gold or silver backs the currency (real and actual wealth) or the economy stalls and can no longer grow creating a ever increasing class of poverty which forces limited or no free trade. The Traveler

I would remind you that the gold backed wealth of the United States in 1913 would only allow 1 in 10 families to afford an automobile. Since the population has more than tripled since then – are you really ready to make that sacrifice in your home in order to have currency backed only by “scarce” gold and silver, which is also needed in our current electrical based society as a needed resource. The Traveler

On 9-11 a terrible tragedy was suffered as the twin towers in New York’s Wall Street district was destroyed. We were all struck with anger and frustration to learn that in many areas of the world there was dancing in the streets. As I talked to people (especially in the middle east) there was sorrow over the loss of life but joy and excitement over an effort to strike at the core of what many think of as a corrupt and evil financial institution of Western Civilization. At the time I really did not understand. The words of one friend caused to me ponder when he said that in time the good citizens of America would come to realize the evil that lurks beneath the surface of our banking system. Now we are staring into the eyes of what has become to be known as corporate greed. Many are calling this the failure of capitalism. As I have studied this problem I have come to the following conclusions. . This did not happen because of lack of regulation – It happened because of the wrong kind of regulation. . No laws were broken. In fact the failures of Fanny May and Freddy Mac are directly resulted from laws intended to give poor access to financial markets. This was not capitalism at work but rather the opposite – it happened because of social engineering at work. . The current financial problems do not come from interest rates. Interesting that the markets are not making very much profit off of interest rates but rather from fees and other charges. Banks have learned that much money can be made from fees associated with refinancing loans than can be made from the interests. So much so that banks could be profitable without any interest. Fees make the most money. Finding legal way to charge fees can result in as much as 20% per month (close to 250% annually) of invested funds. 5% or 6% interested on money invested is small potatoes. The point is that mortgages did not fail because people could not pay principle and interest. They failed because of excessive fees which was the great loop hole that would destroy the unwary. . Investing based on fees and charges are the great secret greed of current banking. Speculation based on such practices creates two problems. One because it depends on the fees being paid which offer no social or added value. And two because if the fees are not paid the entire house of cards comes apart. (which is what we are now seeing.) The point I want to make is that the falling of Wall Street Markets will have greater ill effect on western life than the destruction of the twin towers. It will do more to divide citizens, destroy confidence in freedoms and liberty and attract more corruption in corporate and political institutions. If I were an enemy that wanted to destroy the USA, I would realize that the citizens of the USA will destroy themselves more quickly, with less risk than open warfare. The USA has embraced business practices that are more effective method of ruin than thermal nuclear war. And politically our representatives cannot contain themselves over who can more surely guarantee that our enemy within remains intact. The Traveler

There is a problem when there is more wealth than there is gold or silver that gold and silver become overinflated. A simple example is a society living on a small island. They have one pound of gold that is held by one person. A very hardworking person builds a beautiful house for which the person with the pound of gold offers to trade the gold for the house which is done. Then another man comes and builds a much better house. Now there is more wealth on the island than there is gold; therefore the value of both houses and the gold must change. You are correct that for a stable economy there must be something of value that backs money. If we limit what can be value as a basis of money then the economy is likewise limited. In a stable economy there are several contributing factors beyond precious metals like skilled workers, education, usable natural resources and liberty. The Traveler

A testimony of Jesus (Revelation 19:10) Note that knowledge and understanding of scripture and the correct context of scripture or agreeing with scripture is not a requirement. The Traveler

Thank you again Maureen: However, I think there is much more going on than being free from sin. Jesus addresses freedom from sin in verse 34 but makes reference to something quite interesting in 35 and 36 that references servants in a house hold. This would indicate that instead of holding the status of “servant” that there will be a joint status of son or heir. Note also that the scripture refer to the covenant as joint (equal) heirs with Christ. Throughout history there have always been efforts to create a privilege class. Even in current politics at least one candidate promises a privilege class that will not be burdened with the responsibility of contribution to health care but will receive all the benefits – in other words a privilege class. In order to have a privilege class there must be a sub-privilege class to carry the burden for the privilege class. Most think of freedom as fun and being able to do whatever is wanted. I hope you are not of this thinking. I believe being free in not just making a choice but being able to pay the price for it. The Traveler

Until now. I am not sure how you have engaged the great flaw of traditional Trinitarian Christians. In every case you have used "one" to reference G-d from Biblical scripture the reference is the ancient Hebrew "Ehad" - yet you are using it as though it was "Yhead". The singularity of "ehad" excludes the differentiation of both a Father and a Son. Ehad implies a unity as a man and woman becoming "one" in marriage. A single individual would have been yhead. The Traveler

Much of the problem you have to do with the doctrine is that you employ logic intent on finding fault. This is the same problem the Pharisees and Scribes had in opposing Jesus. So I am not sure where to begin. Let us start with Genesis. Note that prior to the fall of man all references to G-d or g-d are plural. Note that after the fall of man all references to G-d are singular. Failure to engage this fact is a great flaw of traditional Trinitarian Christians. It fails to recognize the very core and basis of the fall and the only means for fallen man to return to the Kingdom of Heaven. In the most simple of terms if man deals with the exact same single G-d before and after the fall then there was in truth no fall. We learn from scripture that Jesus is the “only” mediator G-d with the Father. With this understanding of Jesus everything in ancient scripture makes sense. For example; as the “mediator G-d” for fallen man there are no other G-ds for consideration. All of the ancient references to G-d in Biblical scripture parallel the ancient covenants concerning Kingdoms and Suzerain rule as directed toward subjects of that kingdom. It would be most foolish to think that the ancient Egyptians thought Pharaoh was indeed the only Suzerain on earth – even though every ancient Egyptian manuscript referencing Pharaoh says exactly that. The LDS doctrine is that G-d the Father is the Suzerain of the Kingdom of heaven and that Jesus Christ his “begotten” Son is his servant vassal. We call the Father our father because he is the father of our spirits. LDS doctrine also teaches that the destiny of man is to evolve and become like G-d. To say this is impossible it to limit G-d and say he has no such power to do any such thing. Which in my mind is rather foolish since G-d gave all living creatures power to reproduce after their own “kind” and then to imply that G-d has no such power himself. I also submit that there is no character or attribute of G-d that is not worthy of man’s emulation. In every way G-d intended for man to be like him. To claim and pronounce otherwise is in my mind the worst kind heresy and makes G-d a creation of man and his logic rather than man the very intended image and likeness of that G-d that created him. The Traveler

If you read the context of the scripture, Jesus qualifies his means to become free. He said, "If you continue in my word then are you my disciples indeed." (note both the intent and extent of what he says) The interesting term here is disciple which in English has the same root as discipline. Therefore a disciple is someone who has disciplined themselves in the teachings of Jesus. Discipline implies that a person rules and controls themselves according to what they have learned from their “master” or teacher – just like a mathematician is disciplined in the art of mathematics. It is interesting to me that Jesus says that his disciples receive knowledge so powerful that it will make them free. The Traveler

Thank you Maureen for reading and considering my post. I am now trying to understand you are saying. How can someone be free and "ruled" by another at the same time. If there is a privlidge class, in this case the monarchy, how can we say that the citizens are as free as the monarchy? And if that is the case - how can there be "degrees" of freedom? This would mean that the monarchy was more free. Does not being free demand input into every possibility that can influence that by which a person is "ruled"? I do not understand how anyone can be free if someone else can determine anything for them. And if no one else can determine anything concerning them how can they be "ruled" by a monarchy or anything else? The only possibility as I see it, is that in a truly free society that each individual rules themself from within and all agree within themselves what values they choose to govern themselves. And the term that defines this is equality. If it is different it cannot be equal and what is not equal is not free. The Traveler

I believe in G-d and I believe that there are 5 eternal principles that govern man’s relationship with G-d. They indicate why I have complete faith in G-d and all his works. 1. G-d will not do for any man what that man can do for himself. 2. G-d will do for every man what they cannot do for themselves. 3. G-d will not do anything for any man that is not eternally beneficial for him. 4. G-d will do everything possible for all men that are eternally beneficial for each of them. 5. G-d will not do anything to any man without their concurrence. I believe that whatever G-d allows to happen will be for the eventual good – even those not saved. I believe if it comes from G-d it is both good and beneficial – even his “punishments” and his wrath. The Traveler

I believe that there was in reality a Noah's Ark. Exactly what the extent of understanding is concerning this scripture epoch is where I believe there is fiction. Without question there are things missing from the scripture account that many have added to this great message to distract from what the message may really have been in ancient times. I find it interesting that the Book of Enoch tells us that two of the greatest sins being committed as the cause of the flood was: 1. The order of marriage was changed. (I wonder what was meant by that – what other orders are there?) 2. That children were conceived only for carnal purposes. (I wonder if this was a free choice issue?) The Traveler

What does it mean to live "with" G-d? In John chapter 8 Jesus says something to those Jews that believed on his words. In verse 32 Jesus says, “And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.” Obviously as long as we are mortal we are not free. What is obvious to me is that we can only be free if we are “saved” and live with G-d in his kingdom. It is also obvious to me that as we currently understand things – G-d is the only free being possible as we understand things. This now bring me to my point in this post. As I have studied law and societies (on my own - it was not my college major or profession), I have come to the conclusion that in order for individuals to be free in any society there must be equality among all citizens of that society. We LDS are somewhat criticized for implying that G-d will make his “Celestial citizens” equal to him. And so my point is that if we are not citizens equal to G-d in that society of heaven that Jesus did not speak the truth concerning our state of being free. The Traveler

Several years ago I read an article that I have now lost. The basis of the article was the great depression and the concept that it was caused. The article claimed that most of the nation's wealth was in its farm land which was owned by individual familes. After the depression 50% of the farm land was lost by single families and was owned by large corporations. I think it is like 80% today. The article pointed out that the land grab allowed the land to come under control of individuals that did not work the land but were able to extract the most profit from it - rather than those that work the land. It is my personal observation that this has carried over into most business. Rather than the small business where owners actually work and take in the fruit of their labor the great profit is made by individuals that never work in the actual business. It will be interesting to me to see over the next 5 years what happens to small business. The Traveler

I sometimes think that we apply things in scripture incorrectly. Not judging is in my mind one of the biggest misconceptions of scripture. I think this is because we try to translate something from another time, culture and language to fit our current thinking. I believe that the scripture intends to warn us against condemnation rather than judgment. I have believed that G-d judges us but he does not condemn us. I also believe that we should respect and honor good judgments in others as well as not honoring bad judgments. Even the woman caught in adultery – Jesus made a judgment and then clearly stated that he did not condemn her. He also counseled her not to do it any more – ever. So I say – Judge everything all you want. There is not problem in judgment – just do not ever condemn anybody, especially those close to you; like your spouse, your friends and yourself. The Traveler

I just wanted to add my 2 cents worth about the current economic crisis. I will begin with a statement that got me in a lot of trouble at a company meeting where I use to work. The company I was working for declared a 680 million dollar loss after 9/11 and announced layoffs. I raised my hand and said that 680 million was a lot to lose and I suggested that we begins the layoffs with all the idiots in management that were involved in the loss. Of course that did not happen. What we need to understand with the current economic crisis is that there is not one cent that has been lost. We have accountants that live and breathe to track that stuff. Every dime went somewhere and someone has every lost cent in some pocket or account. It was not lost. There was a time when a ship would sink and money would end up lost at the bottom of the ocean – but that is not what is happening today. Someone – several someone’s walked off with that money. They took it and they have it. A lot of it. And no one in our government wants to get it back from the one’s that took it. The solution – let the dumb American tax payers pay the money back. The reason the tax payers should pay? Because if we don’t the one’s that took the money will create even more trouble and we will have to pay even more later; more better to pay the ransom. It is my opinion there are worse than Ben Lauden troubling our freedom. And no one in our government is willing to stop them or even suggest we look for them. The Traveler

Sorry to burst you bubble but NCAA Football is not about sport, or student athletes. It is about money. Therefore, your rankings are bogus - follow the money is a more accurate way of ranking conferences. The Traveler

It is improper to attempt to understand the gospel of salvation outside of the understanding of covenants. All things of G-d are done by covenant. The first covenant with G-d is baptism and it is through baptism that all blessings of eternity can be granted. We also know that baptisms without faith in the L-rd Jesus Christ and repentance will not constitute a covenant. In order for a person to become free from the bondage of sin they must: First - have faith in the L-rd Jesus Christ. Second - Repent Third - Be baptized as an ordnance of covenant. Forth - Receive by covenant and the laying on of hands, the Gift of the Holy Ghost. According to LDS doctrine all covenants and ordinances of covenant must be performed - either by Christ or his appointed proxy and the person or an appointed proxy. Without the covenant man must remain in a fallen state – forever. The “Good News” is that Jesus not only has overcome death (the only possible result of a fallen state) but he has provided a way of covenant where by all (not some but all) will be given the covenant to escape the bondage (spirit prison) that awaits all men at their death. The Traveler

I am impressed that when Jesus met with his apostles and talked about one that was not in harmony with the truths of his gospel that John did not turn to James and say, "I bet he is talking about Judas - he has been acting strange lately." I have yet to talk to anyone that thinks they have strange ideas - we all think that we are the one that is right and everybody else is just a little off in their thinking. But the example of the apostles is that when Jesus warned of someone not being right with their covenants -- that the apostles asked, "L-rd is it I?" Perhaps this is the best indication of who it isn't. The Traveler

I thought to bring up another point about covenant and the Eden epoch. In the Garden, Adam and Eve were made companions through a covenant with G-d. Because Adam and Eve were also given a commandment about the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil most readers of this epoch think that the problem with Adam and Eve was in the partaking of the fruit. I would point out that G-d and always planned for this to happen and Satan knew this as well. This was not the major problem that Adam and Eve had with their covenants. The major problem as I see this epoch is that Satan with his cleaver twist to things sought to damage the covenant of marriage and companionship between Adam and Eve. The temptation was not just to trick Adam and Eve into taking the fruit but to drive a wedge between their marriage covenant so that they would make the decision on their own, outside of each other’s council. Adam rejected the initial temptation but did not council with Eve – Eve was able to see the wisdom of partaking of the fruit but neglected to consult with her husband. I believe the scriptures hold great truths but that many are too lazy to look beyond the simple surface (literal meaning) to ponder the deeper meanings and hidden treasures that are only seen and understood through the spirit. The Traveler