Traveler

One of the early historians of antiquities was an individual called Josephus.  He is interesting to me because his entire motivation was that he claimed that there were in his day – extended and powerful efforts to “change” the history of the Jews (kind of like fake news) from within the Roman empire.  He wrote in an effort to keep the records correct (straight).  Josephus explained that following the flood most people remained in mountains on high ground because they were afraid of another flood.
He then explains that Nimrod was the grandson of Ham and had contempt for G-d.  The lower lands were much more fruitful and productive.  To entice people to come down from the mountains and live in low lands to create wealth and power in a centralized government, Nimrod built a great tower where the people could go to be safe from another flood.  According to Josephus the sin of Nimrod and the people was to trust in the “arm of flesh” (Nimrod) and not to call upon G-d (have faith in G-d).  The other problem is that G-d commanded the people to spread out across the earth and not create just one very powerful government.  This can be read in Chapter 4 of Josephus’ first book.
I find this account interesting for many reasons.  One is that it makes a lot more sense than what many think is being told in the Bible.  But there is something else I find much more important.  That is that for 3,000 years things had been taught and during the time of Josephus subtle changes were being made to “disrupt” the truths of the ancients.  In other words, we have another witness (other than the Book of Mormon) that precious truths were being deliberately being taken out and altered (great apostasy) from sacred scriptures.
 
The Traveler

The funeral and accompanying media bios of Pres. Monson have inspired me to do more service to others--i.e., to use his words,  "paint a bright spot on my soul."  
When I fall asleep at night, it will be nice to consider : "I think we have done some good today." Wonderful Monson-esque words to live by.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I didn't watch the whole video, but it seemed to have the timeline wrong (at least as far as the Biblical account of the tower of Babel).
The Genesis account of the tower is too vague to take much of anything from.  But the account in the Book of Jasher is interesting (and perhaps other historic books may have interesting stuff in them, not sure).  The text is free online.  Chapter 9, starting in verse 21.  They intended to reach heaven and go to war against God and take heaven from Him, place their own gods there.  If a brick fell and broke, they would mourn it; but if one of the workers fell, they wouldn't care.  In short, the people were exceedingly wicked.  Rather than destroy them, God confounded their language.  It makes sense in a way - they separate, and the overwhelming influence of the most wicked over the whole is reduced, giving individual groups a chance to choose better - if they will.
Honestly, I don't think we really know what happened or what the story is meant to tell us.  It's a bit of knowledge we can look forward to learning later.

One of the early historians of antiquities was an individual called Josephus.  He is interesting to me because his entire motivation was that he claimed that there were in his day – extended and powerful efforts to “change” the history of the Jews (kind of like fake news) from within the Roman empire.  He wrote in an effort to keep the records correct (straight).  Josephus explained that following the flood most people remained in mountains on high ground because they were afraid of another flood.
He then explains that Nimrod was the grandson of Ham and had contempt for G-d.  The lower lands were much more fruitful and productive.  To entice people to come down from the mountains and live in low lands to create wealth and power in a centralized government, Nimrod built a great tower where the people could go to be safe from another flood.  According to Josephus the sin of Nimrod and the people was to trust in the “arm of flesh” (Nimrod) and not to call upon G-d (have faith in G-d).  The other problem is that G-d commanded the people to spread out across the earth and not create just one very powerful government.  This can be read in Chapter 4 of Josephus’ first book.
I find this account interesting for many reasons.  One is that it makes a lot more sense than what many think is being told in the Bible.  But there is something else I find much more important.  That is that for 3,000 years things had been taught and during the time of Josephus subtle changes were being made to “disrupt” the truths of the ancients.  In other words, we have another witness (other than the Book of Mormon) that precious truths were being deliberately being taken out and altered (great apostasy) from sacred scriptures.
 
The Traveler

Anddenex can answer for himself, but to me the connection is obvious. Moses 1:1 specifies: "The words of God, which he spake unto Moses at a time when Moses was caught up into an exceedingly high mountain..." This is a clear reference to Exodus 19:3, which reads: "And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel". The phrase "the LORD" here is יְהֹוָה (Yĕhovah), or Jehovah, as a quick look at Blue Letter Bible demonstrates. And Jehovah is Jesus Christ, QED.

To me, the "tight coupling" between truth and virtue is a function of mutual meaningfulness. By this I mean that each, in part, derive their meaningfulness from the other.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I consider myself as a Traveler lost but seeking truth that I may someday return to my home.  Often, I ponder and study intently revelations we are given as a guide.  Recently I was listing not just to what I was hearing but to the spirit as well.  I was impressed to understand that virtue and truth are what we call in science as “tightly coupled”.  This means that the two are so closely aligned that depth of one cannot be understood without the other.  For me this is a significant paradigm shift.   Often, I have argued that truth is tightly coupled with empirical evidence.
What do others think or is your experience?  Is virtue a precursor to you that goes hand in hand in understanding and identifying truth?
 
The Traveler

Wow – you really surprised me with that answer – I thought sure you would quote a scripture?
 
The Traveler

Yes, I think so. The tree of life and the tree of knowledge represent this. In Mosiah 4:11-12 we find a phrase that expresses this connection or tight coupling: "ye shall always rejoice, and be filled with the love of God, and always retain a remission of your sins; and ye shall grow in the knowledge of the glory of him that created you, or in the knowledge of that which is just and true." The tree of life, or immortality, is the an expression of the loving condescension of God, while the tree of knowledge is the expression of the quality of life, eternal life, that He lives. I see virtue (the red bolded text) ans the coupling link between love or charity and knowledge.

I agree. I think to understand a virtue such as tithing, you need to perform the action of paying tithing. I think trying to understand virtues such as tithing, service, compassion, you need to live the virtue. Action is vital. People can discuss philosophy and virtue without gaining much from mere contemplation.

A little Utah history.  About 30 years ago a fine-looking lady named Karen Shephard (Democrat) ran for congress (house) against an obvious twit named Eda Green (Republican).  Karen ran on the principal that she would represent the “wonderful” people of Utah – she bragged that Utahans were good people with high standards that she supported and loved.  Karen won in a landslide – even I voted for her.   But here is the problem – the democratic party has a lot of ideas and standards that are way (really way) different than the majority of Utah residents. 
There came before the house a bill that just about every Utahan found repulsive.  It has been so long I do not recall the exact issue but polls in Utah showed that 90% were against the bill.  But the bill was a democrat bill and we have learned how democrats act in congress.   Karen announced her support for the bill and her phone lines locked up with all the please do not vote for the bill requests.  Karen had a press conference and announced that she could not vote against her conscience.   Really???? – why didn’t she tell the voters her conscience during the election?
Here is the lesson – there are not good or bad politicians representing their constituents.   Let me rephrase that – politicians do not represent constituents!  They represent their party first – second they represent the money that got them elected.  What determines the quality of a politician (with most voters) is how well they can deceive their constituents into believing that they give a D—m about them.
I do not believe Romney knows (or cares) any more about Utah other than it is great place for an outdoor vacation (including winter Olympics) and a LDS university (where good LDS members – like him, myself and others – can find really wonderful {the world’s best} spouses – also known as the happy hunting ground). 
If you are a fine corporate executive and wish to buy a congressman to support your corporate agenda, you will likely find some competition in the state your particular corporation has its headquarters.  So many corporate types look for a bargain congressman in some off the beaten path – Podunk state – like Wyoming, Nevada or – could you believe it --- Utah!!! 
Romney has already been bought and sold to Eastern Interests.  He is their grand bargain and easy shoe in.  The republicans will not run anyone else and the Democrats will only try another Karen Shephard – thinking that since Romney got in that Utahans are as dumb as the rocks that make up our mountains. 
My prediction? – Romney will win and Utah will continue to have no representation in the Senate. 
 
The Traveler  

I consider myself as a Traveler lost but seeking truth that I may someday return to my home.  Often, I ponder and study intently revelations we are given as a guide.  Recently I was listing not just to what I was hearing but to the spirit as well.  I was impressed to understand that virtue and truth are what we call in science as “tightly coupled”.  This means that the two are so closely aligned that depth of one cannot be understood without the other.  For me this is a significant paradigm shift.   Often, I have argued that truth is tightly coupled with empirical evidence.
What do others think or is your experience?  Is virtue a precursor to you that goes hand in hand in understanding and identifying truth?
 
The Traveler

I consider myself as a Traveler lost but seeking truth that I may someday return to my home.  Often, I ponder and study intently revelations we are given as a guide.  Recently I was listing not just to what I was hearing but to the spirit as well.  I was impressed to understand that virtue and truth are what we call in science as “tightly coupled”.  This means that the two are so closely aligned that depth of one cannot be understood without the other.  For me this is a significant paradigm shift.   Often, I have argued that truth is tightly coupled with empirical evidence.
What do others think or is your experience?  Is virtue a precursor to you that goes hand in hand in understanding and identifying truth?
 
The Traveler

Yes, I did consider his response, and it moved me deeply.
I may not understand all the mechanics of salvation, and I am somewhat ignorant like the man whom Jesus healed, in that I can't answer all the questions about salvation posed to me and whomever, though I can say, "He is a prophet [Savior and Redeemer]....One thing I do know, I was blind and now I see [I was damned, but now the way of salvation is open to me], 
However, the more I learn of the Lord's redemptive sacrifice, the more in awe of him I become, and the more gratitude I feel towards him, and the more inclined I am to not sin.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It seems to me that virtue is truth in action.  It seems reasonable to believe that truth cannot fully be understood without acting on it.  Acting on it is virtuous, thus increasing your understanding and virtue.  This would be an upward spiral, increasing your understanding of truth and virtue together.

I am very impressed @wenglund - Just wondering if you also considered Jesus' response?
 
The Traveler

Wow.  Never knew this.  Good thing I don't live in Hawaii.  Wait, maybe this means I should move to Hawaii.  I'm going to have to ponder.

Getting back to the meaning of the atonement, at least as wonderfully explained by @brlenox, I have a question about figure two.  Since we all are represented by Adam and Eve, then the same question posed to Christ regarding the blind man has relevance: "Rabbi, who sinned, this man [(i.e. all mankind)] or his parents, that he was born blind [(or fallen)]?
Thanks, -Wade Englund-
 

You almost have the right idea - but I think you don't quite get it because of the terms you use.  Instead of "Humans"; try  the term "the Natural Man".  Other than that - I think we are seeing the mostly the same problem.
 
The Traveler

All the problems of not understanding Divine Investiture (especially the trinity) come from ignorance and misunderstanding of the ancient order and laws of Kingdoms which were modeled after what was given to man in revelation of the Kingdom of Heaven over which the Father is the supreme Suzerain.   Our postmodern culture lacks the tools, experience, logic or any incentive to decipher scriptures correctly in this matter.  But then it is worse than difficult – it is impossible to explain, even something trivially simple, to someone that does not want to and is determined not to understand it.
 
The Traveler

I am quite cynical when it comes to politics.  I believe Satan has greater hold on governments and that funds are allocated for military purposes and illicit purposes.  I am convinced that any attempt to alter corruption in government will result in bloodshed.    The only thing that impresses me is the opposition that Trump is getting from political and other power brokers.  It means he is causing problems to “the establishment”. 
In general, I do not think Trump or anyone else is addressing our greatest political problems.  Taxes is a red hearing.  The problem is not what money the government brings in – the corruption is in how the money is used.   I have posted before – taking Social Security as an example.  If the money taken in by Social Security was just given back to survivors starting at age 65 (my generation).  The average benefit would be $70,000 per year.  If there was any interest added (which there is not) the amount would be more than double.   However, the average benefit is about 1/3.  This is because Social Security is a lie – the money has not been held in reserve but spent and not replaced – so Social Security is going bankrupt.   There is not one politician in any party that cares and if there is ever any change to Social Security – it will be to increase the SS tax.
The same is true concerning health care.  The costs of health care have consistently gone up much more than the economy or cost of living.  Never once has the government in all its noise about health care ever once addressed any of the 4 major reasons for the increase costs of health care (this includes all members of congress of both parties – and the current Trump administration.
I cannot think of anything the US government has done since I started paying attention (1960’s) that has not been a colossal over reach and a massive waist of far more funds that was actually needed.
One last point.  The magic date is 1973.  This is the date that the middle class in the USA was overburdened by government and has remained financially stagnant or flat – while the economy has continued to grow.  The wealthy class has benefited – the poor have benefited but the middle class has remained stagnant.  If the trend continues the middle class will be no better off than the poor on welfare long before global warming changes the economy – if it ever does.
 
The Traveler

I would refer you to the book "Lehi in the Wilderness" by George Potter (and your fellow Brit) Richard Wellington.  These two (with interest in archaeology) while living and working on the Arabian Peninsula decided to attempt to retrace the steps of Lehi with the Book of Mormon in hand.   Specifically, they identify and document 81 historical and archaeologically verified and still existing evidences that are expressly mentioned in the Book of Mormon – that were not and could not have been known when Joseph Smith published the Book of Mormon.
I like their work because they were themselves on location rather than projecting ideas and thinking from afar.
 
The Traveler

For anyone considering ways to learn to be friendly – I suggest practicing with your in laws.  This would be a two birds with one stone kind of thing.
 
The Traveler

Absolutely not. The money covers damages. Once you get the money, you are repaid. However you want to spend the money is irrelevant.
EDIT: A more careful rereading than my first glance discloses that this is not an insurance issue per se, but a gracious act by the company. While I still think it would not be immoral, I agree with Gator. As the (irritating) current saying goes, the optics are bad.

Does the fact that Nephi specified "south-southeast" influence your opinion? To me, that statement mandates a sojourn through the Arabian peninsula.
I do appreciate your cordial tone.