Traveler

I assume any society that surrounds G-d in heaven is both enlightened and advanced. You disagree with this logic? - if so would you indicate why?I agree that the LDS concept of a pre-existence presents new questions that cannot be answered with old thinking. Perhaps you would share your opinion concerning Lucifer (Meaning one bringing Light) could turn to darkness and convince many to follow. I find no reference from scripture or anywhere else to imply that they did it because they were stupid. If they were not stupid - what intelligent objection could they have worth going to war with G-d? The Traveler

I do not think you are LDS so I am not sure you will understand the relationship between the "Great and Abomnimal Chruch" and "Babylon the Great" (Revelation 17:5) .In my post I intended to show the correlation - Sorry I was not clear enough on that point for you. The Traveler

"Sorry I am not around to answer more and I will be gone for a while - kind of a busy time. The G & A C was responsible for removing "plain and precious" truths from the scriptures." Name one? - I will gladly name a few. 1. The full Book of Enoch - a part of which is quoted in the Book of Jude verses 14-16 2. The Dead Sea Scroll (4Q246) titled “The Son of God” 3. 49 Hebrew words missing between the last verse of Chapter 10 and the first verse of chapter 11 of 1 Samuel. 4. Text Changes in Isaiah 38:11 5. The Gentile prophet of the Last Days as described in the Testaments of the Patriarchs. "Most of this was accomplished by 100 AD and there really was not a Catholic Church at that time." Yes there was a Catholic Church. It was founded by this dude from Nazareth.... Sorry I missed the scripture where Jesus ordained a “Pope”, or “Cardinals”. Apostles I can find but not the structure or organization of the Catholic Church as it appears today. "Recent finds in Caesarea indicate that by 75 AD scriptures were being systematically altered." Source please? - Tom Newman - retired archeological chair Harvard University "We know through the Dead Sea Scriptures that the pure parts of the scriptures were still in tact (Old Testament) up to about 73 - 74 AD." Don't you mean Dead Sea Scrolls? - No I mean the Dead Sea Scriptures. Among the Scrolls that were discovered are scriptures - All of the Old Testament except for one book. Do you not consider the Old Testament Scripture? These documents are the most accurate text found to date - I believe they should be recognized as sacred. "There should be some overlap as scriptures were hidden up to be preserved. As a matter of fact, I believe there are several relevant scriptures found among the DSS that give understanding. Those that have followed the attempts to keep certain DSS from the public realize that all 50 of them play at least a small part in scriptures being removed from the public." Care to share an example? - Again there are 50 to name just a few 1.The Messiah of Heaven and Earth (4Q521) 2.The Messianic Leader (4Q285) 3. Servants of Darkness (4Q471) 4. The Tree of Evil (4Q458) 5. The Angels of Mastemoth and the Rule of Belial (4Q390) "I am sure that the G & A C has been around a long time. 2000 years ago it united leaders from several religious organizations to alter scriptures and is still effective today in keeping many confused and from the truth when the scriptures are rediscovered or restored." Let me see: Illumaniti, Trilateral Commission, Freemasonry....name your conspiracy. The Hellenist - Debates concerning Grace vs works. Peter the keeper of Heavens gate vs Mot and the scales of Mot. G-d is unknowable. Just to name a few ideas coming from the Hellenistic conspiracy. "If one studies the methods and worship of Baal much more becomes clear. Perhaps the next chance I get I would post more about Baal and the interesting method of burning to clean away this particular effect before society can operate ““cleanly””." Oh, please do. - Later when I have some time. Perhaps you would not mind starting the thread by telling us what you know about Baal, who he was and his role in the scheme of things. The Traveler

Sorry I am not around to answer more and I will be gone for a while - kind of a busy time. The G & A C was responsible for removing "plain and precious" truths from the scriptures. Most of this was accomplished by 100 AD and there really was not a Catholic Church at that time. Recent finds in Caesarea indicate that by 75 AD scriptures were being systematically altered. We know through the Dead Sea Scriptures that the pure parts of the scriptures were still in tact (Old Testament) up to about 73 - 74 AD. There should be some overlap as scriptures were hidden up to be preserved. As a matter of fact, I believe there are several relevant scriptures found among the DSS that give understanding. Those that have followed the attempts to keep certain DSS from the public realize that all 50 of them play at least a small part in scriptures being removed from the public. I am sure that the G & A C has been around a long time. 2000 years ago it united leaders from several religious organizations to alter scriptures and is still effective today in keeping many confused and from the truth when the scriptures are rediscovered or restored. If one studies the methods and worship of Baal much more becomes clear. Perhaps the next chance I get I would post more about Baal and the interesting method of burning to clean away this particular effect before society can operate “cleanly”. The Traveler

A thought about the war in heaven. The big answer is why? How could Lucifer convince citizens of the most advanced and enlightened society to ever exist to engage in a war that could not be won? One might say he lied to them - How could they not know a lie with G-d there to help understand? I do not buy that. Those that rebelled had to have made a choice based on the true facts. Why would they take a stand against G-d - the most intelligent and powerful being that exist or could exist? The scriptures lead us to understand that the center of the controvosy of the war - the great rebellion was "Man". What about man would split heaven in a war? Some religious societies teach that Satan fought against G-d because G-d intended to save mankind from sin. How could Satan care if man was caught in sin or not and if man was caught in sin why would Satan car if man was somehow set free? Keep in mind that after Satan now concentrates all his efforts attempting to destroy man. Why? Why risk G-d's power to destroy man - man that the scriptures says is basically carnel and evil anyway? What in G-d's plan for man has Satan and ever one that follows him so envolved? What about man does Satan fear so much that he coutinues in his war? The Traveler

Jesus said the Sabbath was for man - not man for the Sabbath. In Hebrews chapter 4 there is an interesting correlation drawn between the Sabbath - the day of rest and the rest of the Lord or the resurrection. In essence we are to understand that the rest of the Sabbath is a shadow of our life in eternity. Therefore, if you want to spend your eternities with recreation like seeing movies - have at it on Sunday. On the other hand if there is something to be gained by spiritual sacrifices and spiritually serving others, consider serving in a calling both at church or at home on Sunday - I have not found better training than the devotions to G-d as a servant to children teaching a primary class (or other such things). Or spending time with my family visiting someone sick or grandparents or some other such thing. The Traveler

To help with understanding the War in Heaven - It is important to note that the conflict between good and evil on the earth is a continuation of the war in heaven. (See Ezekiel 28:11-19). One needs to understand that this conflict between good and evil as it is taking place on earth is a type and shadow of what took place in the heaven (not Eden) of G-d. (See Ecclesiastes 1:9-11) Though in Revelation we are to understand things that will take place in the final conflict between good and evil on earth by understanding what took place previously in heaven as good and evil came into conflict there. The Traveler

To begin the title itself offers interesting insight. Anciently the term “Great” meant large size or of majority numbers. The term great implies that such an institution is unrivaled or in other words the Great and Abominable Church is the church, religion, doctrine and ways of the world. The next part of the name is “Abominable”. Anciently this term had only one meaning - something that is used to replace the true and living G-d. This is no idle evil or simple misunderstanding of things but a deliberate replacement of G-d - his way of life including commandments and covenants with something else. Some indication of the Great and Abominable Church: 1. The G & A B makes war on anyone that commits to live as Jesus taught. (Rev 12:17) 2. Described as the great whore that sitteth upon many waters (Rev 17:1) - Besides the symbol of the women involved it also meant the people are the majority throughout the world and they cater to pleasures. 3. Has been around a long time - was the dominant power of intellectual thinking at the time of Jesus as well as in our day. Also had the power to alter sacred scripture and keep everyone for many generations from obtaining the scriptures in their pure form. (1Nephi 13:32). Note that the reason for this corruption of scripture was to cause contention among would be believers and cause them to stumble over doctrine. Has it worked? 4. Has power to infiltrate any and all religious institutions that do not align themselves with the standards of the church of G-d and his saints. (1Nephi 14:10). This is a rather critical notion - Those that wish to take a stand against good moral people based on doctrine, do so at a terrible price. 5. Encourages and fosters the rejection of G-d and a moral family lifestyle. (D&C 88:94) Paul describes the society of the G & A C or those involved in it practices in the “Last Days” in a most interesting manner in 2 Timothy 3:1-8. Lets review some of the concepts - from verse 2 of the King James version “For men shall be lovers of their own selves,”. The original Greek can also be read as: “For men shall be lovers of their own kind”. Interesting alternate translation - don’t you think? Then from verse 3: “Without natural affection”. The Greek is quite clear that this refers to sexual perversions with the additional description of “incontinent” which means without restraint of reproductive urges by exercising such desires in “unnatural ways”. The word translated to fierce is in reference to wild or untamed animal (not enlightened human) behavior. Can there be a better description of pornography and those caught in its addictions? Then in verse 4 “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of G-d”. Paul hits on this theme so much one would think Paul could be talking about addictions to behavior not likely fostered in loving families with Christian values. In verse 5 Paul says something very astonishing - “Having a form of g-dliness; but denying the power thereof.” In other words there will be an effort to make the life style to be considered as social viable as a marriage prescribed by G-d. This will be done by asserting that G-d does not have the right to prescribe what is “right” and “wrong”. The Traveler

I was introduced to a homosexual when I was boy scout. The person pretending to be a national Scout leader.I was again intorduced when I served in the army. Though I was 17 I looked 13. I weighted about 115 lbs. I know by experience why some homosexuals want access to the boy scounts and the military. And I know why they should not have that access. I also know that not all homosexuals need to force others to endorce their behavior as something that society must consider the same as fathers and mothers commited in marriage. I think those that intend to inforce homosexuality through the force of law as somewhat dangerious to children - regardless of their orentation. I also do not see the logic is forcing children to accept homosexual behavior as bio-logacal. The Traveler

Do you consider condescending a good thing or a bad thing?Would you prefer that I not express my opinions? If I was more friendly would you consider that more or less condescending? Are you disapointed with my posts because I communicate too poorly or because I communicate all to well? The Traveler

LOL well that explains why I can't stand TV these days. I always like the shows when they are new, but after a few weeks they become so repetitive...I guess the ending and next moves before they happen...very boring. As to the intelligent finding something interesting in anything...well...I can't agree. After hearing the same thing over and over again....having nothing insightful or mind worthy....to find....it becomes boring...just like TV. I believe we can have a happy situation when the talks are geared to meet everyone where they are....and when they are given and received through the Spirit....then there isn't anything boring.....but if they are not given by the Spirit, they can be tedious and boring to the Spiritually hungry... Starsky: Very good response. Not just because I agree with your conclusions (because I don't) but because your response displays above average intelligence. Which causes me to reflect on my conclusions. I suspect that you will soon find most post on this forum (including mine) somewhat booring (repetative) and move on. Good luck with your journey. The Traveler

Cal I am not talking about good or bright students. I am talking about true genius, say of the level of Nikola Tesla. Since you teach physics you should have an idea who Nikola Tesla was? In your classes, how would you identify a Nikola Tesla that may have some disagreements with many teachers conclusions (including yours) and be vocal about it? How would you identify true genius that disagrees with you from a bright student (above average but not exceptional) that agrees with you? Is it possible that a Nikola Tesla would learn to keep his mouth shut in your class? As for TV you missed the point. TV is intended to be intertaining - in contrast to talks by GA's. I thought you would pick up that idea and expand on it. Since you are a teacher maybe you would like another shot at it. The Traveler

Intelligence spoken of in Abraham is spirit and is eternal and cannot die. Only that which is physical can be corrupted in death. A thought - the word salvation comes from the same root as salvage. Could it be that - that which is spiritual is salvaged and that which is physical must be cleansed by various processes - such as burning? Thus the symbol of the mediator that comes with a sword and/of fire - that keeps the way to the tree of life with a flaiming sword. Once made clean that which was corruptable will be come incorreptable. The Traveler

Contrary to what may be the popular opinion of the world, I would like to introduce the notion of logic to the consideration of human biological processes. This should not be difficult to a person possessing normal intelligence – to begin with, note how the term logical fits in the word biological (not to be confused with biostupidity). Consider first the biological process of eating and digestion. This biological process begins by introducing food into the mouth where it is chewed and mixed with saliva and then swallowed down the esophagus to the stomach. In the stomach food is broken down as part of the digestive process then passed to the small intestine. The entire process is completed as the digesting food continues through the large intestine and the unused product is expelled. Most of the process occurs under the control of what is known as the sympathetic nervous system. To humans, this means that we are not completely cognizant of the process. The part with which we have the most conscious control is during the chewing and initial stages of swallowing and at the end during the relaxing of the mussel that allows the waste to be ejected. The biological process of eating is part of the survival of any individual human. A normal healthy person can go several days without eating but to survive, eating is eventually necessary. Just because a human can survive for a few days without eating is not a logical basis to conclude that eating is not really necessary and can be eliminated or deemed unnecessary. Even if someone is overweight – eating is still necessary for long-term health and survival. Any logical understanding that concludes that eating is not a bio necessity is biostupidity. Eating and digestion is part of the logic in the biological process of survival. Consider the importance of salivating as part of eating in the overall biological process of digestion. The logic of saliva is directly related to eating and digestion. If this one little processes is altered significantly the bio-logic of eating can be interrupted and eventually become a threat to survival. That any individual has discovered other fun things to do with saliva has little to do with the logic of saliva in the biological process of eating. Pavlov demonstrated that by introducing outside stimulation in correlation to eating, that a dog could learn to anticipate eating and salivate even when no food is present or eating taking place. Sometimes this is referred to as drooling. This process of learning and altering of behavior is known as the lowest cognitive level of learning. Humans with their enterprising intelligence have learned to do all sorts of creative things with extra saliva produced from non-eating learning, such as spitting. Some humans males have learned to drool when introduced to a particularly good looking lady. Others have learned to drool for a variety of other reasons. But the logic or biological logic of saliva remains directly connected to eating. All other logical uses of saliva for non-eating processes are in reality non-natural, not bio-logical and are learned. Consider another biological processes necessary for survival of a species. Instead of eating and digestion lets look at the biological process of reproduction. Like eating some of the biological activities of reproduction are cognitive and can be controlled and altered through the same lowest level of learning involved with salvia and some activities are controlled by the sympatric nervous system and are not cognitively controlled. For example, in human males during their climax of pleasure in reproductive biological activity, sperm is released in great quantities. The logic of this biological process of releasing male sperm during reproduction activity is directly dependent to the logic of reproduction and survival of the human species. This is the logical reason for its occurrence. It is the logic of the reproductive biological process. So pronounced is the necessity of this logic in the biological process of releasing sperm that the human species cannot continue to exist without it and we all (humans) owe our existence to this biological process. However, just like the experiment of Pavlov where he demonstrated that the logic of saliva while eating could be cognitively altered to occur without the eating so can the male learn to release sperm without being involved in actual reproductive activity. But the logic of altering biological reproductive activities for non-logical or non-reproductive activity is not bio-logical. Therefore it must be learned. For some reason the first step in this reproductive biostupidity is to change the definition of terms in an attempt to disguise that fact that the bio-logical process is in reality and at it core a reproductive activity. This is done by denying that the biological activity is in essence a reproductive – this is done by ignoring the logic of the function as reproductive and calling it just a sexual activity. No sane person is going to fall for the biostupid term “homo-reproduction”. This alternate process is not bio-logical but a learned logical process and has nothing to do with logic of survival in any species. For whatever reason it seams that the only way homosexual activity can be justified among human society – even by those that have learned to logically enjoy that activity - is to convince themselves and everyone else that homo-reproductive behavior is as bio-logical as actual reproductive behavior. And that my friends – despite all the hand waving and trying to say otherwise – is why I find the arguments for homo-reproduction amusing and completely stupid. In fact, the harder the sell and the more determined the attempt to convince the public that such biostupid activity is necessary, the more I am convinced that the salesman is incapable of comprehending bio”logical” activity – or for that matter any other real or intelligent logic. There is no logic or intelligence in any homo-reproduction activities. I do not doubt that some find the activities fun and entertaining – but please, homo-reproduction is not “biological” or “natural”. The Traveler

Thank you Snow this has been a rather interesting thread. It is interesting the color according to the poster. When I say color I refer to the spectrum of what a person thinks is important, what has value, what is the basis of believable, what is desired, what is boring ect. Just a side note. Many years ago I attempted to become a teacher (never could pass the spelling test). I specilized in exceptional learners. In other words the very bright and how to teach them. One of the great problems is that most teachers do not know how to identify exceptional learners. One thing, contrary to popular opinion the very bright are seldom bored and find stuff of great intrest to them out of almost nothing or things that would bore normal people. The shorter the attention span the less sharp the brain. It can be funny when a very birght person attempts to explain something they find of great importance. The less inteligent become so lost in the boring details that there is almost no communications. The opposit happens when a less intellilgent person explains something to a bright person. The bright person will start filling in all the gaps until the slower person gives up becomes bored and wants to change the subbject. In short - what someone finds intertaining is a major indication of their intelligence. BTW 90% of TV programming is directed toward lower that average inteligence. Asking a person about their favorit music, TV program and other intertainment is a major indicator of their intelligence. Is this not fun? The Traveler

No. see Ecs 1:9-11 There is nothing new under the sun. That is why the LDS church is "RESTORED". The Traveler

It is interesting to me to consider the various types and shadows of the anti Christ provided in ancient scripture. Judas as a type of Anti Christ that was once a close and trusted friend of the Christ that joined with other Anti to Christ inorder to take Jesus at night under the cover of darkness. It has always been of great interest to me that many that claim to be close to Christ then in another breath deny the necessity of being obedient to all of his commandments. Jesus also said that not every one that says "Lord, Lord" unto Jesus and claims to do great things in his name were ever authorized by Jesus. Jesus says of such that he will provess he never knew them. This phrase can also be translated as he never authorized them. I believe Judas is a type and shadow of Anti Christ among us in our current day. The Traveler

Critics of the Book of Mormon love to say that there is no proof to demonstrate that the Book of Mormon is historically accurate for the time and place from which it came. In 1Nephi I have personally counted over 100 facts mentioned in the Book of Mormon that indicate historical, geographical, political, social and religious accuracy for both time and place of the Book of Mormon in the Middle East. None of the 100 plus facts were known in America when the Book of Mormon was translated by Joseph Smith. That is astonishing proof for anyone on a quest for truth. In a quick review of a few facts I have previously mentioned on this forum, there is the accurate naming of ancient trails, several places where water is to be found in Arabia, the identification of “borders” near the Red Sea, a river the flows year round into the Red Sea, the “Tree of Life”, and a extremely accurate description of a place known as the valley of Lemuel and also the “land Bountiful”. I can tell that many are exerting great effort in order to not be impressed with this astonishing display of accuracy. If Joseph had a one in two chance of guessing right (which in predicting water in Arabia is hardly one in two) that the probability of the Book of Mormon being correct on so many facts is actually less that two separate individuals walking on to a beach in southern California and randomly picking up a single grain of sand and discovering they had chosen the exact same grain of sand. Not likely to anyone intelligent enough to calculate such probabilities. Snow thinks anyone can think of white fruit of a tree of life as a religious symbol without any connected experience but he has not given a single example of such a symbol without any known reference. My point is that the tree of life symbol was created by example that was demonstrated by the time and place of Lehi and the Book of Mormon uses the symbol in a manner that is 100% consistent with the time and place of Lehi. Why is this such a difficult concept? And why do those that oppose this concept not give any historical counter examples to demonstrate how it could all be based on luck? I submit the reason is because there are no such examples. In addition there are numerous collateral facts that are not directly involved with the Book of Mormon that still indicate it’s accuracy. Once again I will give an example. When a Christian pilgrim explores the many places to see throughout the Holy Land they will get a feel for a time and a place quite foreign to our American society. One place of interest in our discussion is a cave on the outskirts of Jerusalem. It is called the cave of Lehi. It is not called the cave of Lehi because of the Book of Mormon. In fact there is almost no reason to even associate the cave directly with the Book of Mormon or anything to do with the LDS. Then why is it called the cave of Lehi and how does it help the Book of Mormon? The naming of the cave comes from an ancient picture graph of a jawbone of a horse, mule or donkey in the cave. Such a jawbone is an Egyptian hieroglyphic of the Hebrew name Lehi. The one thing this cave demonstrates is that the name Lehi was anciently known and used with an Egyptian base by the Hebrews that occupied Jerusalem. How did Joseph Smith know of such proper Hebrew names in 1830 in America? And how did he know that there is an Egyptian hieroglyphic connection (reformed Egyptian) among the Hebrews that had their own written language? But the jawbone mystery only begins with the symbolic representation in a cave near Jerusalem. This same jawbone symbol is everywhere among the ancient ruins in the Americas. Remember that the B of M critics insist that there is no evidence of horses in Americas prior to the arrival of the Spanish. Will these same critics produce any authorized published opinion that these jawbone symbols are not related to horses? They will not because there is no such published opinion. There is in addition other deceptions of animals the B of M critics claim was unknown in the Americas that illiterates their view of ancient America is seriously skewed in a false manner. In connection with this jawbone symbol I draw particular attention to a stone carving called the “Stela #5", known among LDS as the Lehi Tree of Life. There are two things I would point out of the many collateral facts of this carving that support the Book of Mormon. First in the presents of the jawbone labeling the patriarch as a Lehi on the Stone. No one knows that this is a Lehi designation but with the same token no one knows for sure that it is not. But there is also something else of interest and that is the “Tree of Life” carved into the rock. The tree is a palm tree with fruit. In the Americas palm trees produce only two kinds of fruit. Coconuts and bananas. The fruit on the Palm tree on the Stela #5 is obviously not coconuts or bananas. The configuration of fruit of that palm tree is only consistent with the date palm tree that does not exist in the Americas. How is this possible with isolated indigenous people know about date palms in order to have created the Stela #5? How can any one say there is no indication of any historical migration to the Americas from the middle east having influence on rapid changes to the ancient culture in the Americas? You have all seen the responses of the anit’s on this forum. Have they disputed any facts relating to the physical evidence of Book of Mormon? Have they disputed the accuracies of the Book of Mormon concerning Arabia? Are the facts concerning Lehi’s cave false as I have presented them? Anti’s have not given a single exception to the historical accuracy of the Book of Mormon as it relates to exact known places in Arabia. Only excuses. And in light of the facts will they admit that the Book of Mormon revealed true historical fact about Arabia that was not known in America in 1830? With the truth in front of them they will refuse it. Where is the evidence that Joseph made up the story of Lehi leaving Jerusalem? Where are the obvious historical flaws that are out of time and place of Arabia? There are none. And there is a mountain of facts - of which I have just scratched the surface - Yet I have not even mentioned the most significant and important facts concerning the historical relevance of the Book of Mormon. The Traveler

Before we can dicuss homosexuality one important question must be answered. 1. Are humans intelligent. Though this question appears simple the answer touches the entire spectrum of complex human behavior. The question should be - can humans learn and modify their behavior based on an intelligent learning process. If humans are locked into behavior based on some preset parameters then there is no debate. We all act as we have been programmed. Murder, rape, justice, honor, lies, love and everything else are nothing but manifestations of an individual's presets. Likewise sexual behavior would be nothing more than another preset. There is nothing to debate not even the justification of our individual opinions because even that would be a preset. This theory would make any discussion meaningless. Which from most arguments that favor homosexuality seen to favior the theory of preset behaviors. If on the otherhand if humans are intelligent and capable of modifying their behavior by a learning process then the justification of what a person does, is in the merrit of their ability to learn and modify their behavior to conform to the greatest good. If a person is capable of learning then decission would be part of a learning process and therefore reasonable. Two thing I am convinced of having considered homosexual behavior: 1. Humans are intelligent and capable of modifying their behavior, including sexual behavior by various learning methods and processes. Therefore society is justified in holding individuals accountable for their sexual behavior. 2. Homosexuality is not the expression of the greatest good (sexual behavior) for society. As with all behaviors any society would be well advised to support (teach by various methods) behaviors that best support and maintain that society. I am convinced that our society can exist on a long term basis without any homosexuality. Teaching that homosexuality is not a benifical behavior does not appear to me to be something that will destroy society. I am not convinced that our society will last beyond one more generation should all of society modify their sexual behavior and become homosexuals. I am not convinced that encouraging homosexual behavior benifits society. I am convinced that not holding individuals accountable for their sexual behavior will destroy civilized society. The Traveler

I have begun two threads to demonstrate that the Book of Mormon is both a historical and accurate document indicating cultural and historical facts correctly. I have presented data that has been shown to be true despite so called experts writing otherwise in scientific publications. I have given proof the Book of Mormon is an accurate source and critics are wrong - especially those that say there is no proof the Book of Mormon is historical accurate.. What is the reaction on this forum by the LDS critics? Have they shown that I was the one mistaken? Have they demonstrated that I have misrepresented any fact? NO! And what has been their counter arguments. Well, in the words of Sargent Shultz of the famed TV series “Hogan’s Heroes. They have countered with their claim of “I see nothing!” This is an argument? Does any one find their excuses for the accuracy of the Book of Mormon entertaining? These experts in logic that criticize the LDS for lack of it? I for one find their kindergarten logic shameful and ignorant. If anyone thinks they have demonstrated any depth of reason or intelligence - I truly fill sorry for the lot of you. The only reason I can see that they deny facts in the light of truth is their bigotry and prejudice. How can we possibility move forward and discuss any possible theory of how Joseph Smith produced a historical and culturally accurate description when they cannot even identify any accurate description of anything to start with. The Traveler

The Point I wish to make is that we know exactly where Lehi started and we have the Book of Mormon to compare to true facts concerning Arabia. I am not talking about speculation I am talking about facts! The facts are right and exact. Then lets admit them. If anyone can get facks right by chance perhaps someone could show me of such an example. Without an example - I don't believe the logic. If there is such an example of such chance where there is accuracy and no error - I would like to see it. As of yet I see no facts that the Book of Mormon got anything wrong about Arabia. The Traveler

The eagle is symbolic of many things. But even though it is a symbol it also exist and its existance adds to the symbolic meaning. I am sorry if something real being used as a symbol upset you.The Traveler

You should learn before you think. If Joseph had done as you suggested there would have been no "Tree of Life" in the Book of Mormon. You are very wrong on two points. First: Plants growing in the 1500 have nothing to do with time of the Book of Mormon Second: There are no historical references to a "Tree of Life" in any publication in our western culture prior to around 1940. Outside of LDS references and the Garden of Eden I doubt you can find a reference of historical fact of a tree that produces "white" fruit. Though you may not realize it, your objection also proves that the Book of Mormon is based on true historical fact rather that someone like yourslef that thinks only to manufacture non-truth. If you were a little smarter you might consider a study of the time and palce you wish to lie about. But if there was no information (and the Tree of Life was not available to Joseph) a smart lier would at least pick a topic they know something about. What the Tree of Life means is that the Book of Mormon is more based on historical fact than critics like yourself who do not seem to care at all about historical facts. The Traveler As an expert please tell us a historical fact about Arabia that the Book of Mormon has wrong. Do you have one or not? I contend the Book of Mormon is accurate - I presented evidence and proof. And you have presended .... What .... NOTHING? Please tell me what is this glaring problem in the Book of Mormon about Arabia. Why do you hide it? I believe you do not know anything about Arabia and that you cannot handel the truth. Am I wrong about the Tree of Life? Am I wrong about Bountiful. Am I wrong about "borders" and the Hebrew and Arabic words for Borders? Am I wrong about the wadi Tayyib al-Ism? NO my friend that can't stand truth. I am right any you can't handel it. Sorry but that is your problem. The Traveler

Whether or not that was the exact route taken is not the point. The point was that the presence of places like that lend credence to that part of the story. Not proof, but credence. One thing for certain. The more one speaks on a subject they do not know anything about the more it is evident they do not know what they are talking about.Cal: Though you have an opinion - for the life of me I do not know why. This subject does not appear to be something you know much about. The Traveler

I though to add another fact at this point. If one were to leave Jerusalem to the east there are two ancient trails. One was known anciently as "The Kings Highway" the other way was known as the "Wilderness way". Guess which one Lehi took. This ancient history is not so well know in our part of the world but to someone that is knowledgable of that area the Book of Mormon is very descriptive. I could describe a trail from Arches to the Henery Mts. Someone ignorant of the area would think it sketchy but someone that had been there would know exactly if I was accurate or not. The Traveler