Traveler
-
Posts
16385 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
69
Posts posted by Traveler
-
-
Let’s back up a little here - The scripture Matt 24:30: "And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven:...".
Is the sign in heaven of the Son of man the star of Bethlehem? I though that the sign given in the heaven of the "Son of man" at his birth was the star of Bethlehem. I thought that the story of the "wise men" recognizing the sign was a type and shadow that would be given again according to Matt 24:30.
Am I the only one that has read the scriptures and wondered as to their meaning? What is the sign in heaven of the "Son of man" if it is not the star? How will you boys and girls know when the "Son of Man" comes?
The Traveler
-
Perhaps you could give an example of an LDS creed to support your idea that it is specific creeds, and not creeds in general, that we reject.
There are no official or unofficial creeds sustained by the general assembly of the LDS. This does not purport that that creeds cannot be supported as revelation from G-d just that as of now, none of the creeds (and other things) issued since the loss of apostolic authority to Christian believers is considered to be done with authority. In other words - we do not recognize the authority of the council of Nice to write checks against the account or treasures of G-d. (See Matthew 7:22).
The third commandment is: "Thou shalt not take the name of the L-rd thy G-d in vain." Do you not understand that issuing (or accepting) something in the name of G-d that he has not authorized is in violation of this commandment?
The Traveler
-
<div class='quotemain'>
"I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight:"
I understand that to mean that the very nature of creeds are an abomination, because they are so limiting, not that all the beliefs behind the creeds are bad.
Part of the intent of the word abomination is directed toward accuracy or purity. Your notion does not really apply. Allow me to give an example: If I were to write a $5,000.00 check against your bank account and you asked your bank to reject the check. In turn I use your response - you cannot reject this check - I can prove that I plan to use 2 cents as Tsuzuki would and has agreed. Does not matter - the check is rejected even if you agree with it in part.
The point is that the Nicene Creed claims to be authorized by G-d. In fact if you read the manuscripts written by the creaters at the time concerning the purpose of the Creed you would realize that the creed was intended to replace or override scripture when necessary. In other words the Creed is greater than Scripture.
We are not talking about parts - that concept is not relevent. We are talking about the creed and the correct answer is that the LDS reject the notion that the creed is scripture or authorized by G-d. To say otherwise is misleading.
The Traveler
PS. I find it interesting that those the claim to believe the Nicene Creed contradict the notion that the creed is divine and exclude the text of the creed from the Bible.
-
Just wondering? What is the sign that will be given in the east that Jesus has returned as King for the 1,000 years of peace? Could it be that same sign or similar sign (in the east) that the wise men saw?
The Traveler
-
Hi everyone. Do Mormons reject the Nicene Creed? If so, what parts of the Nicene Creed do you reject?
According to the Scriptures of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints - Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith -- History; I quote the following from verse 19 in answer to Joseph's question of which church he should join: "I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight:"
I am quite sure that this assessment includes the Nicene Creed.
The Traveler
-
Your view of the Trinity makes me wonder if you don't believe in three gods as opposed to one. Help.
There are 3 G-ds in the G-dhead. G-d the Father, G-d the Son (or the Son of G-d) and G-d the Holy Ghost. Each G-d is separate and distinct and a separate individual. According to LDS doctrine, G-d The Father has an immortal body of flesh and bones. After the resurrection of Jesus the Christ, he also has an immortal body of flesh and bones. The glorified bodies of flesh and bones of the Father and the Son are their own and are separate and distinct from each other. The Holy Ghost does not yet have a body of flesh and bones but is a spirit.
The oneness of G-d (or the G-dhead) as spoken of in scripture mean united in the same manner that marriage means oneness or one flesh. The ancient Hebrew word for oneness is "ehad" and all scriptures that refer to oneness of G-d uses "ehad". The ancient Hebrew word for one individual or one soul is "Yhead". "Yhead" is never used to describe G-d in ancient scriptures.
Hope this helps.
The Traveler
-
Any one want to offer theories as to what the Star of Bethlehm was or what was the cause of the star?
The Traveler
-
Okay Ray, nearly everything is possible. Fine. Agreed.
My point is not what is possible, but what is probable.
Based on Jewish custom, priestly practices, sacrficial protocols and the legal/social status of women in Jewish society, it is more unlikely than likely that a woman--even Mary--lived in Herod's Temple.
Not according to the gospel of James. Agreed this is not Biblical scripture but is part of the landscape of the first 100 years of Christianity. There are some scholars that believe the terminology is misunderstood and that Mary may have been kept at Qumran as a temple in exile based on the copper scroll.
The Traveler
<div class='quotemain'>
Was Mary's father a priest? Did he serve in the temple?
No, Mary and her father were descended from the tribe of Judah, only Levites could be priests.
M.
According to the Jospel of James Zacharias was the high priest at the temple.
The Traveler
-
I am wondering what the LDS doctrine teaches about Jesus being Lord. In the evangelical christian church, we are taught that Jesus is savior and lord of someone's life. I am wondering what LDS doctrine teaches about Jesus being Lord over someone's life. I am wondering do you believe that Jesus is king and helps the person to become more like God. I know that the Holy Spirit also helps with it. I am looking for what you believe about Jesus, Heavenly Father and Holy Spirits roles. Anyway takers?
Sharyl
Prior to the fall of Adam and Eve (mankind - the spiritual children of G-d the Father) the scriptures reference the elite of heaven in the plural from of G-ds. After the fall all references of G-d become singular. This is a most important notion for if mankind still had the same access to the same singular G-d before and after the fall - then there really was no fall from grace and no need for a mediator, redeemer or savior; simply because man still had the same access to the same singular G-d before and after the fall.
LDS doctrine supports the notion of the fall and the doctrine that G-d the Father is a G-d, G-d the Son is also a G-d and the Holy Ghost is a G-d and the three G-ds comprise the G-dhead. After the fall of Adam and Eve G-d the son was appointed by G-d the Father as the one and only singular G-d that is the “Mediator” G-d and the one and only “Way” that mankind can come unto G-d the Father. Jesus is the only G-d that man has been able to have relationship since the fall. Jesus is therefore the G-d of the Old Testament and is the G-d of salvation and exaltation (which is the return to everlasting life in the Kingdom of G-d the Father. Because Jesus does “All Things” in the name of G-d the Father (Jesus will from time to time speak in the first person according to divine law which is in the name of G-d the Father). For this reason many Christians have become confused and constructed the very misleading doctrine of the Trinity.
Jesus is both L-rd and King and rightfully holds those titles in the Kingdom of G-d the Father. Many in modern society do not understand “Kingdoms” and Suzerain succession so they are easily mislead by doctrines invented by man and not given by G-d in scripture. For example though the Jews cried out before Pilot “We have no king but Cesar” – Herod was also a king over the Jews under Cesar – But they were not one and the same king.
The Traveler
-
First I would point out that there is very little in the Biblical scriptures concerning the birth of Jesus. There are 3 verses in Luke that describe the journey from Nazareth to Bethlehem and the birth of Jesus. Interestingly there are 8 verses in Luke that describe the angels appearing to the shepherds. It would seem that whenever the saga is told outside of the scriptures tradition has embellish the journey the Bethlehem the search for a place to stay and the setting of his birth among animals – none of which is in Biblical scripture. I may comment later about my theory as to why there are 8 verses describing the angles appearing to the shepherds. If there are any theories as to why the shepherd story carries such great weight compared to other things I would be most interested.
One reason I point out the addition to Biblical scripture is because of criticism directed towards the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints for “adding” to sacred Biblical scripture. I find this criticism most interesting in conjunction with what Christian tradition has done concerning the birth of Jesus; and yet I have never heard a word of criticism or thought concerning the embellishments of the infant birth.
On to other things. Among the ancient writings not included in Biblical scriptures is the Gospel of James (the lesser, cousin and brother of the L-rd Jesus, chief Apostle and first Bishop of the Christians in Jerusalem – according to most scholars.) or what is called the Protevangelion. This text tells of the miracle birth of Mary to the aged Anna and the one angel followed by two angels that came to Anna to explain the importance of her child. Mary is taken to the temple after her birth and is cared there and protected by angles until she is 12 years old. An angel comes to Zacharias (the high priest) and commands him to gather widowers among the people and a sign would be given for the husband of Mary. Now quoting from verses 12 &13 of chapter 8: “And the high-priest said, Joseph, Thou art the person chosen to take the Virgin of the L-rd, to keep her for him: But Joseph refused, saying, I am an old man, and have children, but she is young, and I fear least I should appear ridiculous in Israel.”
I will not say that this account is accurate or not – but it is believed to have been written no later than the second century of the Christian era and is referenced and kept by most of the Church Fathers of that era.
This account of James also tells of the donkey upon which Mary road to Bethlehem and that Jesus was born in a cave. It also tells us that the “wise men” visited Jesus at the cave. The account ends with Joseph and Mary fleeing to Egypt with Jesus and Elisabeth fleeing to the mountains with John. Verse 16 chapter 16: “However, Zacharias was murdered in the entrance of the temple and alter, and about the partition;” In previous verses Herod send his servants to kill Zacharias for hiding his son.
The Traveler
-
I have long been a proponent of radiating food for several reasons. The shelf life could be increased 10 fold. Expense of keeping food cold in most cases would be eliminated. The danger of contaminated food would be eliminated. Current wasted food could almost eliminate world hunger at no additional cost (except for shipping – which is much less for radiated food). Cost of food, especially shipping could be lowered by a great deal.
A little history: Following World War II the USA tested nuclear weapons under many scenarios. Several scenarios against small mock town produced an interesting discovery. Food that was radiated did not spoil. Milk left on tables in sealed cartons did not spoil, even after several months of not being refrigerated. The reason is that the radiation killed all the bacteria that cause food to spoil and since the food was in a sealed container no new bacteria could get at it, thus it did not spoil.
Since this discovery much research has been done to determine how much radiation is needed to kill bacteria and keep sealed food fresh. As it turns out – not all that much. Many countries have adopted this process to care for food. In over 50 years no ill effects have been found from people eating radiated food. Thus USA and other countries have refused to consider radiating food because of possible unknown health reasons; even though none have ever been demonstrated.
How many e coli contaminations have we had lately and how many lives have been lost because of food contamination? We could end this problem by allowing radiation of food. As I see it there is only one problem. The food industry is concerned that with longer shelf life of food that they would not get the profit from food they are currently getting. Already we pay farmers not to grow food because we produce too much.
I think that it is time to rethink a lot of things. Instead of sending money to starving countries where corrupt governments take a most of the money for themselves – let’s start sending radiated food as foreign aid. It would be a lot harder for corrupt government officials to get rich and much easier to make sure the food was distributed. Oh my heck (unique Utah lingo) we could really solve some problems, not just in the USA but in the world. Just think we could trade radiated food for oil.
What amazes me is that we hear nothing in the media??? Maybe it is time we write our congressmen.
The Traveler
-
How about the story of Joseph and Mary? How old was Mary? How old was Joseph? Was Joseph married previously with children? Concerning the journey to Bethlehem – When did it take place? Did Joseph and Mary arrive in Bethlehem late in the day before the night that Jesus was born and did they travel with Mary riding on a donkey and no other possessions or provisions other than the cloths on their backs? How long did the journey to Bethlehem take?
The Traveler
-
The story that we all seem to know about the birth of Jesus - how much is included in the scriptures and how much has been made up over the years? For example; was Jesus born in a stable? Did Joseph ever talk to any Inn keeper? How many Inns were there there? How old was Jesus before he was taken to Egypt? Most likely what time of year was Jesus born? Why do we have "Christmas in December?
The Traveler
-
I have yet to meet a Mexican who want's to see his country become a part of the United States. They're a proud people who would fight us tooth and nail should we even feign annexation.
Bad idea.
Bad idea? If they know that coming to live in the USA could cost them their country and they do not want Mexico to become part of the USA - That fact alone will not change a thing? I think not - I think that if you are really correct two things will happen. Mexicans that do not really want to be a part of the USA will not only stop coming but the second thing is they will make efforts to stop others from coming. Right now even the Mexican government encourages illegal entry into the USA - the government even sponsers and prints information for Mexicans to come illegally to the USA. If such actions would cost them their country - you really do not think they will consider forstering illegal entry into the USA? Think again!!!
The Traveler
<div class='quotemain'>
What are the suggestions? Send the illegal’s home? - In less than a year they will be back.
Send them home and spend some money to secure the border. Right now, it's super-easy to get across. Those who do it the legal way and who will live by our laws and pay taxes just like we Americans do are welcome.
They have been sent home and money has been spent to secure the borders. Borders are not the problem - the problem is that there are incentivies on both sides of the border for illegals to risk all they have including their lives. Unless we create pressure on both sides of the border - I do not think things will change. I really believe that making an attempt to annex Mexico will change how Mexicans view the problem.
The Traveler
-
Okay everybody: I think we can agree that there is a problem that needs a solution. I know we can avoid the problem, pretend the problem is not that bad, do nothing or we could make the problem worse. If 80 percent of Mexico wants to be part of the USA what can or should we do.
I really feel that complaining about the problem will not help. What are the suggestions? Send the illegal’s home? - In less than a year they will be back. Pass another law to limit how many can come - we know that does not work. I suggest nothing tried so far has worked. Why continue or escalate or increase something we know is flawed and does not work?
I believe that if we declare that we will annex Mexico that just the idea will have an impact on what people are thinking. Maybe the Mexican government will consider reforms to satisfy their citizens and think about making some internal changes. The point I am trying to make is.
1. Billy aching - does not work.
2. Not wanting them – does not work.
3. Passing laws against them coming - does not work.
4. Sending them home – does not work.
5. Ignoring their coming – does not work.
We know a whole bunch of things that do not work. Why not try something that has not been tried yet?
The Traveler
-
This is not really a joke because it really happened. I was working in Japan and went to attend church. Since I do not speak Japanese very well beyond asking directions, ordering food and saying thank you; I needed some help. I have tried the route of relying on the spirit for interpretation of tongues but it would appear that I am lacking in faith. Anyway I sought for translation help and come to find out; many wards in Japan provide a wireless head set and a translator for visiting American businessmen. I thought to try the headset and listen to the translation – I have enough faith for that.
The sacrament meeting was under the direction of the primary – I thought that it ought to be quite interesting, with the translation and all. About half way through the program a young girl (about 9 or 10) got up to the pulpit to give a short memorized rendition. When she got to the pulpit she grabbed the pulpit and just stood there looking at the congregation with very wide eyes and saying nothing – just locked in a silent blank stare.
After some time a lady (I assume the girl’s teacher) came to assist the young girl whispering in her ear. The girl stood not moving or saying a thing. After trying whispering thing several times the teacher attempted to remove the girl from the pulpit but the girl held on tight and would not move or say a thing – just continued to look at the congregation with big wide eyes (quite unusual for an Asian).
Finely another lady (I assume the girls mother), stood up in the congregation and walked quickly to the pulpit with short steeps softly saying something in Japanese. I guessed she was saying like – “So Sorry, So Sorry” and bowing politely to each side as she walked. When she arrived at the pulpit she tired the whisper thing but it was not working. The little girl remained motionless and staring wide eyed at the congregation.
Then a crystal clear voice, in perfect English, sounded in my ear phone from the translator saying, “I am terrified and afraid to speak.”
The Traveler
-
<div class='quotemain'>
<div class='quotemain'>
Some prophets talk about this too... the concept I am thinking of... as something Celestial inhabitants now and/or will actually have. Each one with their own "stone" and their name written on "it"... and with this "stone" they can learn everything that God knows.
I wonder how long it will be before everybody here can get one of these things for themselves?
The stone is called the Urim and Thummim - you haven't got your's yet?
They are priceless and cannot be purchased with either Master Card are Visa.
The Traveler
Heh.
I'm not saying I have.
I'm not saying I haven't.
If you want one, please just get (or use) your own, Traveler.
:)
And don't leave home without it...
... the device or the card you should carry.
:)
I regret to say that mine is still on lay-a-way. But I am hoping to get it soon with some help from my "older brother".
The Traveler
-
I wanted to respond a little bit about this idea. This idea first came to me as I thought about the problem. I thought that maybe we ought to take a different look and attitude. Instead of moaning all the time about what a problem it is; maybe we ought to think about a way to exploit the situation and gain an advantage in it. There is a tremendous workforce that can be used at great advantage.
Mexico is the most resource rich country in the Americas. Not only is Mexico rich in oil, minerals, precious mettles and other such resources (including farmable land) – Mexico is also home of a very large and capable (though currently under used) workforce. Unlike East Germany there is one of the world’s greatest stores of resources in Mexico.
I do not think we need to hide our intensions. We can openly admit that we intend to put every able body in Mexico to work, provide them with incomes vastly greater than they are currently receiving and make a profit at it.
I know that to some this sounds silly and not workable but – judging from efforts in our own country to end poverty over the last 50 years – we have only made poverty worse. We know giving handouts don’t work – maybe giving out work will work. We can do this as a great economical and social experiment (if you want to call it that) to end the poverty in Mexico by exploiting the poor for profit and giving them a decent salary. Since they worked for their salary there would not be the stigma or incentive that results from not working. Everybody wins - big business, little business, middle class, upper class and even the bottom poor class. Economies boom all over the world as workers in Mexico buy stuff and everybody is happy.
The only problem currently stopping the progress of such an idea is corruption and greed in both countries that not only want more for themselves but are so greedy they do not want the poor to have anything and they want political power over the poor thus they keep them under utilized and under worked.
One thing for sure – nothing that has happened in either country in the last 50 to 100 years has helped at all. Let’s start a movement to annex Mexico – who knows when an idea like this is started – what other ideas may emerge.
The Traveler
-
The stone is called the Urim and Thummim - you haven't got your's yet?Some prophets talk about this too... the concept I am thinking of... as something Celestial inhabitants now and/or will actually have. Each one with their own "stone" and their name written on "it"... and with this "stone" they can learn everything that God knows.
I wonder how long it will be before everybody here can get one of these things for themselves?
They are priceless and cannot be purchased with either Master Card are Visa.
The Traveler
-
I have been thinking about the illegal immigration problem. The biggest problem that we have is with Mexico. I have been thinking about this problem from some time. There are two things I have learned about Mexico that has me worried about this problem.
The first thing has to do with a Mexican company that ran a survey in Mexico and discovered that 80% of all Mexican citizens plan to come to live in the United States of America. I read this article at the Fox news web site. 80% is a very profound percentage. This 80% crosses all sectors of their society. This is not just about the poor this is all throughout Mexico and includes Doctors, businessmen, professionals, blue collar workers and whatever. I have wondered why so many want to come and live in the USA.
I think the answer to why is in two stories from my experiences in Mexico.
First story: I have a niece that was involved in a foreign exchange program with a young girl from Mexico. The Mexican girl came to live for a year with my brother’s family and go to school. In return my niece went to live for a summer in Mexico. The Mexican was well to do by Mexican standards – the father was a medical doctor. However, my niece discovered that as a high school girl doing baby sitting she made more babysitting in the USA than the Doctor made with his medical practice in Mexico.
Second story: I met a gentleman in Mexico that ran his own taxi business. He had 4 very old junky beat up taxi cars. I asked him why he did not expand his business and make more money. He could either get some more of the older cars or get some newer better looking cars and go after more of the lucrative tourist business. His answer was quite interesting. He said that if he got more cars or better cars the police would know he was successful and making pretty good money and that the police would steal his cars or extort money from him. He was better off making less and staying below the radar of success and avoiding the problems with the police.
Are you readers getting a picture here why Mexicans want to come to the USA?
Now my solution may sound stupid but I think it just might work. Since so many Mexicans want to come to the USA – Why not let them come? Why not open up the borders and let them all become citizens of the USA? Why not annex Mexico and add a few more states to the union? Even if it never happened – I am thinking that pursuing such a course could change the course of things. I am thinking the effort would be worth it even if it never really happened. And if it did – we could end our dependence on foreign oil.
The Traveler
-
Just a side thought PC: Is there any way or method, in a formal setting, that an EV has opportunity to make an accounting and be taught concerning their personal covenants (commitments) and standing with G-d?
The Traveler
-
What does it mean to be "temple worthy?"
Who determines whether a member is? Once you are declared worthy, what does it take to remain worthy--or do you have to regain the worthiness before each visit?
Can a member not be temple worthy, but still be in good standing?
Is there a correlation between being a "temple worthy Mormon" and being in a state of salvation-readiness?
Any thoughts on the expectations of members vis a vis the Temple and this whole discussion of faith and works?
Temple worthy is one of those topics that involves very simple concepts that are sometimes not understood very well within the LDS community let alone the non-LDS religious community. The foundation of the concept begins with divine law and associated covenant. In essence there are 4 Laws and associated covenants that prepare the Latter-day Saint for temple worship. The laws and associated covenants have to do with chastity, sacrifice, consecration and obedience.
Currently all Latter-Day Saints (including president Hinckley) are required to make an accounting of their stewardships in relationship to their covenants at least ever two years – more often is circumstances require it. This accounting is to their Bishop (or councilor) and Stake President (or councilor). During this accounting of their covenant stewardship the Latter-Day Saint is reminded of what is expected as a minimum requirement and given an opportunity to make an accounting. The determination of worthiness is the primary responsibility of the Latter-Day Saint with the Bishop and Stake Presidents having secondary or advisory roles.
Being active in G-d laws and associated covenants is essential to one’s eternal standing. For example our eternal relationship with G-d is associated with our desire and ability to live according to his laws. G-d will not force us to live according to laws we do not accept or cannot live. Therefore our life here on earth gives us an opportunity to “try” various laws and covenants in our quest for eternal rest; to help us understand living with G-d or what-ever it is we choose. In this, G-d encourages us to be invested in his plan for our eternal destiny – or some other plan. This is what we understand as “agency”.
The Traveler
-
I like to look for the roots and similarities between people throughout time.
What group or what people, today, remind you of those people back then?
They had heard the gospel, or at least some of it, but did they have any prophets of God?
If they did, did they claim God’s authority?
I wonder where they think they got it.
To answer your questions:
Hard to say - in some ways the Catholics and in some way the protistants. The had wondered off a little but there were within a couple hundred years of prophets and they may have had the correct authority.What group or what people, today, remind you of those people back then?
They had heard the gospel, or at least some of it, but did they have any prophets of God?
Their "Teacher of Righteousness" was considered like a prophet or you could say a prophet but there was a big split that happened about the time of Christ the divided their society and caused a mass excommunication. I have wondered if this split was caused by "Christians" that were kicked out shortly after the resurrection of Jesus.
They believed that authority was with the tribe of Levi. They believed that only a Levit could perform sacrifices and ordinances at the temple. It is very likely that Zacharias (father of John the Baptist) was connected and was performing the prescribed duties of a priest according to their documents. They claimed they had the true unbroken authority of the Levit's in Israel. Some believe that they broke of from the main body of Jews under Jonathan Macabee when the Levits of the temple were killed and non Levits were assigned (beginning of the Pharasses). They believed in the authority of the Levits and to be a priest amont them one had to be a Levit.If they did, did they claim God’s authority? I wonder where they think they got it.
The Traveler
-
From the document (The Son of G-d – 4Q246)
….Then Daniel arose and said, “O king, why are you angry; why do you grind your teeth? The Great G-d has revealed to you that which is to come. …..
…Oppression will be upon the earth. Peoples will make war, and battles shall multiply among the nations, until the King of the people of G-d arises. He will become the King of Syria and Egypt. All the peoples will serve him and he shall be come great upon the earth. ….All will make peace, and all will serve him. He will be called son of the Great G-d; by His Name he shall be designated. He will be called the son of G-d; they will call him son of the Most High. Like the shooting stars that you saw, thus will be their Kingdom. They will rule for a given period of years upon the earth …. His Kingdom will be an Eternal Kingdom, and he will be Righteous in all his Ways. He will judge the earth in Righteousness, and everyone will make peace. The sword shall cease from the earth, and every nation will bow down to him.
Some notes about this document. It is an older document (over 100 years before Jesus) Some scholars argue that this document is a copy of an older document – meaning the original document may have been dated as early as 500 + years before Jesus. This is the first and earliest Jewish document to specifically reference “the son of G-d” as opposed to “a son of G-d”. I find it interesting that many think there would be no connection in this document with the Apostolic Christians. That such an important Jewish document in the hands of the first Christians would have no relevance.
The Traveler
Do Mormons Reject The Nicene Creed?
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
The whole spirit of the restored gospel has been anti-creed from the beginning.
I think the "whole" spirit includes a little more than anti-creed - but thanks for your input.
The Traveler