Traveler

Jesus was treated as guilty while he was innocent. It was in God's plan that he die. Was it justice or injustice? G-d is not the one that brings injustice. I am sorry that you have dificulty understanding that because G-d's plan allowed for us to experience temporary injustice that he is the cause and the one guilty of it.The Traveler

A thought - Let's pass a law that states that it is a felony to be in the USA illegally. This would make all illegal immigrants felons under the law and end the argument as to their legal status. It is already a felony to assist anyone in breaking the law – therefore anyone that assist an illegal immigrant in staying in the USA can also be tried under the law. For examples, doctors or hospitals offering care to illegal immigrants can be tried. Lawyers suing in behalf can be tried. Land lords renting places to stay to illegal immigrants can be tried. Employers offering jobs to illegal immigrants can be tried. I like this idea because it puts the burden on those that are creating the problem. It puts those that contribute to the problem at greatest risk and responsibility to be prosecuted under the law. Remember too that we can allow anyone needed or that we want in the country to come in with legal status. We can and should define what is legal and expect both those coming to our country and those living in our country to be subject to the law. The Traveler

Of course, nobody is suggesting that we do nothing. IF capital executions are truly skewed against the poor and minorities, and IF more than a stray # of innocents are executed, than perhaps life-imprisonment ought to be imposed, at least until the process can be reviewed and improved, if such proves possible. No innocent person should ever be treated the same as a guilty person. Likewise no one that is guilty should ever be treated the same as an innocent person. That is not justice and to suggest otherwise is to hate justice - remembering that G-d is just. In our system of justice we define a person guilty as someone tried by the system and found guilty. It does not matter if a person is really guilty but acquitted in court - they are the same as innocent. Likewise it does not matter if they are really innocent - if found guilty in our courts they are guilty. It is how our laws define innocent and guilty. There may be a bias in our courts - that does not matter, because the law defines someone as innocent or guilty based on the outcome of the courts. We may not like the system but we ether believe in it or we change it. I for one am not yet willing to change the determination of innocent or guilt based on something else other that a trail by jury. With all the flaws of courts - I believe they are more just than other methods tried. Are there mistakes - yes - perhaps but if we ask the question of what to do with a someone guilty of murder??? - I believe that the death penalty must not ever be excluded as an option. Because it is the one option that will protect and prevent someone that murders from doing it again. I know of no other option that can make that guarantee. How many murders are there in prisions? This is the greatest failure. The first obligation of law is to protect but if punishment does not protect and the offender can still place others at risk our system has created the greatest of flaws. I would submit that prisions are a dangerious place and not a place of protection - lets not make it even worse. The Traveler

Some years ago I had a police detective friend – I asked him because of his experience how we ought to handle criminals. The responded that he thought a 3 step process is what we should do. Step 1. First offense – we should first use a parole option. This is where the criminal does community service and we attempt to rehabilitate the criminal by education and service training. Step 2. Second offense – we should remove them from society place them under highly structured environment, employ strong psychological training and brainwashing methods to attempt rehabilitation. Step 3. Third offense – execute the criminal. I was most astonished and asked if all offenders should be handled in the same manner. For example if the criminal was only steeling nothing above the value of a nickel. His answer surprised me. He said that if you cannot convince someone that their live is worth more that 5 cents of junk you will never be able to stop them in their criminal activity and if they do not value their own life over 5 cents they will never value someone else’s life any more than their own. It is not your choice to execute; it is their choice to be executed, He went on to explain that most people with a rational mind would catch on in step one but he pointed out that there are some that have no honest values and feel no moral plain ever. The Traveler

Not doing a thing for justice in fear of punishing someone innocent is a poor reason in my mind because any attempt at stopping the criminal could unjustly hurt someone innocent. No one - including G-d will get what they deserve out of life. I would rather error in attempting justice than to error in and doing nothing. Standing to defend society against the fear death is high courage and honor in my mind.The Traveler

Thanks mamacat for piping in here. It is not lost to me that all of the posters in this thread are male. The whole concept of Everlasting Covenant was never a concern for me until I started looking at it though my wife's eyes. I wonder if it were reversed (theoretically), that is if we had to share our wives with many men, but I got to be the "first husband", how our responses would be. I would be interested if you could expound on your above thought. It's OK if you don't, but I would like to hear from your perspective. hi, thanks wiley...lol, yes it seems males enjoy discussing polygamy more doesn't it? perhaps not so much, if as you mentioned, the issue were polyandry. in essence, i am trying very hard to understand why polygamy would be commanded by God if, as i believe without a doubt, that we are destined to be with a single twinsoul. beyond that, i don't have that much to contribute. it was interesting to see the perspective that God never actually 'commanded' it in the bible. Marriage is about service, sacrifice and covenant before G-d. Not about pleasing an individual's fantasies, attractions or desires. When viewing marriage as "what is in it for me" - nothing will make sense and greater satisfaction will always be found elsewhere. BTW - To accept what G-d offers is to live his commandments. If G-d offers or gives something it is the same as a commandment. But because G-d commandmended someone to sacrifice their first borne son does not mean that all must live by that same commandment. The Traveler

Exactly. I have a former SIL who follows that belief as well. Scary and sad. It appears that you and I have some things in common. Some times the things a person does thunders so laud that you can't hear a word they are saying. The Traveler

The Lucayans - Discovered by Christopher Columbus in 1492 on San Salvador (some historians think he landed on Cat Island), there were about 40,000 Lucayans living in The Islands Of The Bahamas. Columbus was the first to force many of these people into slaveryThe Traveler

My favorit quote is from Shakespear: "Nothing is as good or as bad as it seams - only that thinking makes it so."The Traveler

The general idea is that while one serves on a mission they serve and do G-d's will rather than their own. I had hoped to use my music talents while on my mission but I was told it was better to serve according to my call. I left my clasical gutar at home - played some on my mission but I do not regret at all my missionary service. - There is a time for all seasons.The Traveler

I do not believe this to be true. I do not believe there are any historical examples. There have been societies that did not have peace officers, judges, jails that had very little crime - one society I studied was so free of crime that there was in the language no word for murder. They had no weapons of war or defense. Their society had lasted for well over a thousand years - till the Christians discovered them.But they were not interested in the Christian religion and in one generation the entire society is gone. DNA research has found no trace that any of them survived. Not one Christian living at the time questioned their murder because their religion was considered inferior. For a few hundred years the Christians continued to refer to this society as savage and Satanic. Even today few study how they lived in peace - but I will give you a hint. No one of that society would ever talk again to someone that refused to live by their law. The law was a matter of honor. But when someone had a gun they would have to live by the power of that gun or die - but they died free. Some perfer to live free. The Traveler

I do not always agree with your posts - but I have learned to respect and value them. I think I agree with you on every point if I understand you. That is that our justice system has flaws. Though I know it is flawed - I cannot point to a better system - and it would seem that efforts to imporve our system leave us wondering if we have made an improvement.The Traveler

I have heard it said that it is better to let 99 guilty off than it is to put one innocent person to death for a crime not committeded. I am concerned with this kind of logic. Is a society really better off to have 99 murders free and knowing that they can get away with murder than it is for one innocent person to die? 99 murders verses one accidental death? I realize that human life is valuable. Irealizee that justice should not ever convict one person that is innocent nor should justice ever let one guilty person go unpunished. The point is that if society is not interested in attempting to end crime as best as it can - that society is not just. Yes as good as a society tries they will make mistakes. But what is the perception? If a crime is committed what do you believe the chances are that the guilty will be caught? What do you believe the chances are that an excape goat will be punished for something they really did not do? I believe the general impression is that our current system will not convict cleaver people with lots of money to spend on lawyers and that certain groups are more likely to be convicted of something they did not do. In other words - I believe our legal system has lost it mission of justice. The Traveler

"Oh My Father" - a personal favorit.The Traveler

Ashville NC is a wonderful place and is the stake Center - I would live any where in that stake in a heart beat. I know a couple of Baptist Ministers in Bavard NC that are as good and kind as anyone I have ever met. We use to talk about religion all the time. I attended their churches several times and they came with me to the local ward in Bavard. Good people. Wilmington NC is another great place. There was a branch there that never went to Utah and is still strong with many good members that have roots as far back as LDS roots go in Utah. It is my personal belief that you are just as apt to run into the anti nut jobs in Utah as you are on the East coast. The Traveler

America's best scientist and inventor, Nikola Tesla invented the radio brushless motors, alternating current, power generation systems, high voltage transmissions, the and gate and or gate (necessary for computers) and the concept of single power source for homes and industry and most Americans know nothing of him. The Traveler

Before we make that "conclusive" lets see what we come up with. :) Jesus said that the "Word of G-d" will stand down to every jot and tiddle. Do you agree with Jesus or no? The Traveler

This will be a slow process for me because I am away from my library. Once I can get a few things together we will start looking at ancient text and variations among ancient text. In addition I plan to look at variant readings on the text and finally the variations in modern versions. If there is anyone that reads other languages that can follow and give input to variations resulting from different modern languages that would also be most helpful. I can read some German but that is limited and there is a lot of work done in German - perhaps even more than in English. There are also some Spanish input but for whatever reason Spanish has not published all the much.Are we agreed that any variation on text containing “Messiah” or in Hebrew “The Anointed one” – would conclusively prove that the Bible is not “The Unchanging Word of G-d” even concerning core principles? What I think we can demonstrate quite clearly is that if the Bible is to stand alone that there is enough textual variation to demonstrate that unlike G-d the Bible does change over time. But if we consider that the Bible is a brick in the wall of the word of G-d that we have a much better case in demonstrating that there is no variation. Just a side note: Islam has the orgional text so there is not question about it's status. Also the orgional writtings of Buddah are available as well as other Chineese like Confusius (spelling). It is also interesting to note that Christians save other orgional text of church fathers and others but as for the scriptures there are no New Testament orgionals. BTW Dr. T. If you would also like to start a textual analysis on singularity or plurality of G-d - we could start a separate thread on that as well. That thread should start with an analysis on the Hebrew term "Ehad". This I know quite well. The Traveler

Oh my forum friends - Roman is an old long time anti-LDS troll and loves attention. If there is any kindness in him he will not cast that pearl without a barbed hook before LDS. Sadly, I have contributed to his bitterness. The Traveler

If I understand you correctly, we will look at this issue and see if the dead sea scrolls show something different than this? Actually I was thinking about something more Biblical, direct and specific - like “Messiah”. I would think that the doctrines and teaching of the Messiah in the Old Testament would show how such an important core idea changes over time. We have Old Testament scriptures that date to the era and time of Jesus that have been untouched for over 2000 years. We can see how core idea like “Messiah” stand up to you insistence that the core doctrines have not changed in the Bible – as Jesus would say even a jot or tiddle. Since the New Testament was written during this same era but we do not have any copies until over a generation later we can use the Old Testament as our reference. Keep in mind that every reference in the New Testament scriptures (including that the scriptures are the word of G-d) was intended at that time the writers of the New Testament wrote - to mean the Old Testament. We do not have to agree on what we may think Messiah may mean today and thus we can take an honest look into the past and make note of how much the ancient texts vary (or not) on this most important core concept. Not to say one idea or concept is right over another but only to establish weather or not the ancient scriptures used today to create the modern Bible agree with each other, if the modern Bible is a honest representation of any ancient text and if not to what extent there is variance. If we establish that there is a wide variance – perhaps you can explain to me how we should decide which one is the real “word of G-d”. If there are not variances or changes then I will have to explain to you why I have insisted that there really are. That way if we come to another point of doctrine where we disagree – we know which of the ancient text is really the word of G-d and which of us has a better understanding of it. We could use what we learned to settle our difference rather that making emotional and unfounded claims. So can we agree that “Messiah” is a core doctrine that is not or should not be changed anywhere in “The Word of G-d” – can we agree that “Messiah” is both important (meaning core) and one that is indeed common to all Christians or not? The Traveler

This may sound strange - but as I have viewed history the anti really has never been the real problem. Jesus dealt with the anti of his day but always warned about the wolves in sheep clothing. At least the anti are not pretenders - they are outwardly honest about what they believe and do not try to hide it. As I understand scripture, it is the pretender on the inside saying they believe the same and are a part of Christ that seem to offer greater danger to spirit. G-d is the most loving and compassionate being, force or person in existence. It would stand to reason that those that believe in such a G-d would stand as an example to all of that love and compassion (and I do not mean a bad example). If we think that we can teach someone of G-d that is more compassionate and loving than us we lie the greater to our self about G-d. The problem are those that call themselves Christians or believers in G-d and for whatever reason refuse to participate with him (the oneness thing) when it comes to love and compassion. The Traveler

I have thought much about our discussions concerning scriptures, especially the Bible and I am thinking that we will not come to common ground with the direction we are currently headed. So allow me to propose a joining effort. How about you define 2 or 3 of your personally most core doctrines with important supportive scriptures from the Old Testament. I will take these core doctrines of yours with supportive scriptures and we will study together what is written in the various ancient text and explorer the variations and changes imposed on the "core" doctrine(s) of your choice. In fact I will rely - not on LDS scholars but scholars from the leading universities of traditional Christians and Jews. - such as Harvard, Yale, Cambridge and the University of Jerusalem - particularly as these scriptures relate to the discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls.My intent is not to try to change your mind about "core" doctrines but to perhaps open your mind to the appreciation the possibilities that come from seeking, asking and knocking. What I would like to change is the thought that the things of G-d should be divided into core things that matter and non core things that man can disregard because they do not matter. If there is anyone else interested I invite you to join with us. Let us reason together and learn of the methods and economy of G-d in making his will known to man. The first thing I would propose is that the methods and economy are the same today (G-d does not change) as in ancient time. (See Ecclesiastes 1:9-11) The Traveler

I am sorry that you feel that the parables and analogies Jesus used in his teachings eventually break down. Perhaps you should explain your understanding of using analogies to him. He is the one that taught me of such things.BTW - I think you are wrong in thinking that the Bible is a greater and more loved and cared for creation of G-d than is man. I believe that G-d's will is expressed the greater in his value of man and what happens to man over time than what happenes to the Bible over time. I do not say these things to appear smug - but because I know they are true and I really believe that if you search within you - you will find the truth - not as an excuse but as a declaration of what is true and freedom. BTW Paul said that scriptures must be written on the heart not stone or parchment before we will extract the "core" doctrines without inperfections. The Traveler

Sadly there are some people that believe things like this. I would first state that the description is more accurate of Satan and Satan’s vision of his G-dhood. It is not an accurate description of Christ and his sacrifice on the cross. Nor is it an accurate of description of Joseph Smith and what he endured to open up the restoration. Now I do not know of Jesus and Joseph as I do know some apostles, many stake presidents and bishops. All of these men have given up much more than they gained by their church positions. Brother Packer was a school chum of my mother and some of my uncles. I know of his giving heart and know for a fact that he is much more the less in financial and worldly things to serve in the church. I also know of the humanitarian efforts of the LDS are not understood by many – like this poster. I do not mind criticism of the church and it leaders when the critic offers a better example of a church (or organization) and its leaders as the better example. Where is that church with a longer lasting and more successful welfare program, a youth program that can produce better and more successful missionaries at the age of 19? Better helps in teaching and a better program for families than family home evening. Marriages more devoted to family values and members more devoted to their faith. Goodness – even Satan can criticize G-d but he will never demonstrate a better example – and that is why he will always fail. The Traveler

Smylie: You have hit on the single teaching of the restoration that I have personally struggled with more than all the other teaching combined. I am a 5th generation LDS Mormon and I just did not understand the “I know the church is true” declaration. I wondered how anyone could know such a thing. For most of my life I decided that a “testimony” should be more a statement of “Faith” than a statement of knowledge. I have been careful to declare my faith rather than knowledge – is not Faith a greater thing than Knowledge? Is not Faith – not knowledge a “first” principle of the Gospel? Many times I was dissuaded from speaking my testimony because I felt I lived by faith and not by knowledge. But still I sought to have a knowledge. What is a knowledge of anything? How can anyone know and declare kindness as good? How can anyone declare that bashing someone in the face with a baseball bat is evil or bad? At first it seemed to me that knowledge is most illusive and that to declare knowledge is just an overstatement of belief. Still I prayed for and sought a knowledge. The truth is that only spiritual conformation is knowledge. We do know acts of evil from acts of good by knowledge. In fact knowledge must precede faith because without some knowledge we cannot “know” what it is for which we exercise faith. It is our intellectualizing that blurs knowledge and creates doubt of things we know by spiritual understanding and experience by faith to be true. If you do not have a spiritual conformation of a truth you will not increase in your knowing of it and even your beliefs will be confused – as will your basic knowledge from where you began your quest and understanding of truth. Many of us lie about our confusion (as I use to do) and pretend to know what we do not comprehend. I would now say something about marriage in eternities, which is how G-d intended marriage. Like so many things marriage is not a pretending thing. We can pretend that we love someone with a “marriage” love – as though love is the only element. The love and promise of an eternal marriage is not what you start with it is what you create. Such a creation is not made by jumping into bed with someone and having the “night of your live”. Goodness – even homosexuals can do that. Eternal marriage is about sacrifice and creation of life and devotion to the sacred powers from which life springs – not about spilling your passions in quests for pleasures. Those that sacrifice themselves, their wants, needs and pleasures to the sacred powers of creation of life will find themselves and will become a manifestation of eternal marriage – but the temptation to do otherwise is the strongest of all temptations. We are what we spend ourselves in becoming and that is what is and will be eternal in all of us. The Traveler