Traveler

Members
  • Content Count

    13830
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from JohnsonJones in The Law of Consecration and Stewardship   
    Thank you - I should rephrase that - no donated funds were used.  I would also point out that donated funds are not used to subsidize GA's for being GA's.  Some may claim that it is all "church" monies - but that is a strawman argument.
     
    The Traveler
  2. Haha
    Traveler reacted to Carborendum in My Dog Is Trans   
    Well...
     
    That's gotta be some kind of joke.  Tell me the guys who run Antifa.com really didn't believe it would be a good idea to have it re-direct to Joebiden.com.
     
  3. Like
    Traveler reacted to CV75 in The Law of Consecration and Stewardship   
    I think it is fair to conclude from the discussion that General Authorities do not sign over their property and are then given an assignment to be stewards over that property. These articles are also instructive and help prevent confusion, innuendo, etc.:
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/history/topics/united-firm-united-order?lang=eng
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/revelations-in-context/newel-k-whitney-and-the-united-firm?lang=eng
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/gs/united-order?lang=eng
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1986/06/i-have-a-question/why-is-the-united-order-not-practiced-today?lang=eng
    https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/inspiration/latter-day-saints-channel/listen/series/past-impressions-audio/the-united-order-episode-21?lang=eng
  4. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from Scott in Who Was that Rich Man?   
    Often I tend to be blunt and show little emotion.  This is not by accident.  It has been my personal experience that ignoring logic and being emotional is a recipe for disaster.    My dear wife, who is much better in social settings often suggests that my bluntness in conversations are rude.  Enough about me.
    My father was both successful and wise which took him very quickly from relative poverty to great wealth.  He grew up during the depression in a small 3 bedroom home with 13 siblings.   He raised his children to work as he had learned to work.  He believed that when children reached the age of accountably (8) that they should earn their own money and pay for their cloths and any other non essentials - like family vacations.  We were also required to do service - we were expected to be the first to arrive and the last to leave.  If any of us complained his response was always that we would never be expected to do as much or more than him.  He had enough cash to pay for the most expensive home in our stake - but he never did.  He did not drive a new car - it was always a beater - often requiring "special" knowledge to open doors, starting, rolling up and down the windows or other things.  If I could compare my father to some historical person - I would compare him to King Benjamin. 
    It is my believe that wealth is the most likely result of living righteously (living according to covenant with G-d).  But the great temptation of wealth and riches is pride.  The kind of pride that convinces people that they "deserve" better than others.  Usually (always) this is demonstrated by "things" that can be purchased for money.  Sometimes even poor people will demonstrate such pride by thinking they deserve what belongs to others - This is also called coveting.   And so they wish that they had more money so that they could "have" what they deserve. 
    I believe it is very clear that there is no place in "Heaven" for the prideful.  Those that adorn themselves or wish to adorn or present themselves with things will have similar  difficulty getting into heaven as a full grown camel will have in passing through the eye of a needle.  Jesus even made it clear that in using wealth as an offering to the poor to be seen or respected of others - is of the same prideful cloth as those with opulent attire or things to be seen and adored by others.
    This pride of adornment has corrupted much of our entertainment and is the engine of hate that is the outgrowth of covetousness that destroyed the Nephits and is destroying the United States of America.   I find myself struggling and often reproved by others for my pride - Perhaps the greatest temptation of pride is to think we as an individual are rid of it.  Or thinking we are better than others at avoiding it.
     
    The Traveler
  5. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from JohnsonJones in The Law of Consecration and Stewardship   
    As a youth I knew Hugh B Brown - Hugh B Brown's daughter married the Bishop in my best friend's ward - My best friend did yard work for the Bishop and whenever Elder Brown would visit (which was often to relax by a private pool) I would help my friend with his work so we could spend time talking with Elder Brown.  On my mission I met Legrand Richards and drove him through Oregon for mission meetings.  Stephan L Richards was the father of a close friend - I never met Elder Richards other than through stories from his son. Boyd K Packer and my mother were school friends and my uncle (Father's brother) was his best friend and served with him during WWII and I use to car pool with his son to work.  Two Emeritus 70's - one is Larry Corbridge who was once my Stake President (still living) and also someone I knew in my youth - actually I knew his sister and the other is Robert L. Backman (still living and the oldest GA) that was my mission president - he performed my wife's and my temple marriage - myself and a few other missionaries were planning a birthday party for him earlier this year when we had to cancel because of COVID.
     
    The Traveler
  6. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from JohnsonJones in The Law of Consecration and Stewardship   
    The only source I have is through personal contact.  As far as I know there is no public information.  As I stated previously the primary focus for anyone ought to be their own covenants.  If you hold a current temple recommend - it is my personal opinion that you ought to be living the law and covenant of Concentration and Stewardship.  
    This kind of reminds me of a person that asked Mozart how to write music.  Mozart replied that the person was too young and the person replied that Mozart was only 6 when he wrote his first master peace.   Mozart replied that he did not have to ask anyone how.  It is my personal opinion that if someone does not want to live the law and covenant - obviously they are not ready.  If they desire such a thing - it is most likely they are not worried about what others are doing.
     
    The Traveler
  7. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from JohnsonJones in The Law of Consecration and Stewardship   
    Two thoughts.  First - the general authorities that I have know personally - keep their personal lives personal.  This is not the type of item General Authorities want to brag about or make a big deal of in public.  The things from their personal lives are carefully guarded but may be referenced from time to time when it is thought to be beneficial for the Saints.  I am also aware that it is possible to be obedient and live according to the covenant of the Law of Concentration and Stewardship - I am also aware of many (with emphasis on many) of the Latter-day Saints that are not general authorities that are living the according to that covenant.
    Second - The absents of evidence is not evidence of absents.  That a source is not sited does not mean that there is no one living the Law of Concentration and Stewardship.  
     
    This should not be a question in our hearts concerning what others are doing.  The question before us all - is what is the desire of our hearts.
     
    The Traveler 
  8. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from Vort in The Law of Consecration and Stewardship   
    As I understand - the United Order was designed to provide a platform for a community to live under the Law of Consecration and Stewardship.  Individual families are individually responsible regardless of what is happening in their community - with the exception of socialistic states.  It is my personal belief that without freedom and liberty it is impossible to live the Law of Consecration and Stewardship.  Thus I believe a people must have desire and then G-d will provide a proctor with authority.
     
    The Traveler
  9. Like
    Traveler reacted to Scott in Stopping COVID   
    As mentioned on a thread a while ago, I had COVID19 in July and early August.  So did my wife and kids.

    The Red Cross was and is looking for people to donate plasma who have recovered from COVID19.  We were told that they are looking for people who have recovered in the past 2 1/2 months because COVID antibodies drop off significantly after that.  I would assume that would mean that they don't drop off completely, but according to them at least (and I can't think of any reason why they woundn't be telling the truth or wouldn't be knowlegable on the subject) they drop off significantly after 2 1/2 months.
     
  10. Thanks
    Traveler reacted to Scott in Stopping COVID   
  11. Thanks
    Traveler reacted to Just_A_Guy in The Law of Consecration and Stewardship   
    1) What is the source for the claim that the GAs live the Law of Consecration?  (I’m not disputing it, necessarily; but this seems to be one of those things that everybody knows but no one can source.)
    2)  FWIW, property records in Davis and Salt Lake Counties are online, and searchable by owner name; and several members of the Q15 are on there as owning homes in their own names or under family trusts.
  12. Like
    Traveler reacted to Carborendum in The Law of Consecration and Stewardship   
    I'm going to bring up this topic again because I've just had a change of perspective on just what the differences and similarities are here.  It was because I actually got a copy of the Priesthood manual on Church Welfare and read it.
    The primary thought that has enlightened my mind is the "full title" of the law.  It isn't just "The Law of Consecration".  It was "The Law of Consecration and Stewardship."
    Primarily what this meant was that, yes, we signed over the deed to our land and property to the Church.  BUT!!! then we were given an assignment to be stewards over that property.  The vast majority of the time, such stewardship simply meant that the signing the deed over was effectively nominal.  Yes, a legal procedure.  But the way it was practiced, it was "in name only."  The steward ran the farm, received profits from it and gave what he could to the Church for welfare purposes.
    As a side note, there were many of the particularly wealthy who would not sign over their property.  None of them were excommunicated for that refusal (that I'm aware of).  And when the practice was discontinued, the property was all given back to the stewards.
    Today, the general authorities practice the same thing.  And I wonder when George P. Lee was excommunicated, did he ask for his property back?  Was it given to him?  I don't know. But I'd suspect that if he did ask and it were not given back to him then we would have heard about it all over the news.
    So, again, even though it was a legal procedure, it was apparently in name only.  So, why do they practice it?  I think that it is because when you sign on as a general authority, you have to have a physical reminder of the level of sacrifice you have to make to serve in that capacity.  Signing over the rights to all your property is a pretty big commitment.
    Each of us makes a commitment to live the Law of Consecration.  But we are not asked to sign over our homes.  I think that on a practical level, it would be untenable.  A general authority will live in the same place for pretty much the rest of his life.  But I've moved into 11 different homes since I've been married.  What process would I have to do for each time I had to move?  I'm going through the process in my head and it could potentially be REALLY complicated.  Would I even be able to move? How would I have had the jobs I've had in my life? 
    The reality is that I would end up unemployed most of my life if I had to stay where I was.  Instead, I make that covenant in my heart, but not on paper.  I view all my property (both real and personal) as the property of the Lord.  I am only the steward of that property.  If the Lord were to ask me for it, I'd have to oblige.  It's His.  How could I keep it from Him?
    So, while some people say that we don't live the Law of Consecration today -- only the GAs do -- they are technically correct.  But on a spiritual level, I disagree.  The difference really is "just a piece of paper."  The GAs who practice it are still given stewardship over all that property.  They basically run it as if it were their own, just as I run my property as if it were my own.  But in the back of their minds, and in the back of my mind, I'm always reminded of the covenants I've made.  It isn't mine.  It is the Lord's.  And as long as I carry that thought in my mind and the principle in my heart, then I believe I am living the Law of Consecration and Stewardship -- with or without that piece of paper.
  13. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from Scott in Who Was that Rich Man?   
    Often I tend to be blunt and show little emotion.  This is not by accident.  It has been my personal experience that ignoring logic and being emotional is a recipe for disaster.    My dear wife, who is much better in social settings often suggests that my bluntness in conversations are rude.  Enough about me.
    My father was both successful and wise which took him very quickly from relative poverty to great wealth.  He grew up during the depression in a small 3 bedroom home with 13 siblings.   He raised his children to work as he had learned to work.  He believed that when children reached the age of accountably (8) that they should earn their own money and pay for their cloths and any other non essentials - like family vacations.  We were also required to do service - we were expected to be the first to arrive and the last to leave.  If any of us complained his response was always that we would never be expected to do as much or more than him.  He had enough cash to pay for the most expensive home in our stake - but he never did.  He did not drive a new car - it was always a beater - often requiring "special" knowledge to open doors, starting, rolling up and down the windows or other things.  If I could compare my father to some historical person - I would compare him to King Benjamin. 
    It is my believe that wealth is the most likely result of living righteously (living according to covenant with G-d).  But the great temptation of wealth and riches is pride.  The kind of pride that convinces people that they "deserve" better than others.  Usually (always) this is demonstrated by "things" that can be purchased for money.  Sometimes even poor people will demonstrate such pride by thinking they deserve what belongs to others - This is also called coveting.   And so they wish that they had more money so that they could "have" what they deserve. 
    I believe it is very clear that there is no place in "Heaven" for the prideful.  Those that adorn themselves or wish to adorn or present themselves with things will have similar  difficulty getting into heaven as a full grown camel will have in passing through the eye of a needle.  Jesus even made it clear that in using wealth as an offering to the poor to be seen or respected of others - is of the same prideful cloth as those with opulent attire or things to be seen and adored by others.
    This pride of adornment has corrupted much of our entertainment and is the engine of hate that is the outgrowth of covetousness that destroyed the Nephits and is destroying the United States of America.   I find myself struggling and often reproved by others for my pride - Perhaps the greatest temptation of pride is to think we as an individual are rid of it.  Or thinking we are better than others at avoiding it.
     
    The Traveler
  14. Like
    Traveler reacted to Carborendum in Who Was that Rich Man?   
    Cool.
    I appreciate the apology.  And I hope you appreciate mine.  But in an effort to abide by your own advice for engaging with you...
    1) I was NOT criticizing you for missing some part of my post.  Everyone does that.  When you apparently missed something, I was trying to be as polite as possible in trying to steer you in that direction, so you might be informed of what you missed.
    2) When you persisted in reiterating your point, I offered a rebuttal. And at the same time I asked you to take a moment and consider.

    3) Then you said that you had asked for more information when you hadn't.  This seemed like you were making a snarky remark.  You said you had asked.  But you didn't.
    This was what seemed to lack civility.
    For now, we'll both apologize and accept one another's apologies and move on.
  15. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from dprh in Who Was that Rich Man?   
    Part of the reason I post is to bring to the attention of the forum or a specific poster "things" to various thoughts and ideas that may be missing or left out of various threads or posts.  If this is understood to be an attack or disagreement or even an act of arrogance - I apologize.  It would, perhaps, be more excusable if I were expert and without flaws in my own thoughts and responses.  Never-the-less  I do understand frustration when something that has already been resolved is presented again as if it were not.  Whenever I make such a mistake - please remind me.  I am dyslexic and often miss thoughts or the point being made or the logic involved.  I do not offer this as an excuse.  When I post something that is incorrect - it ought to be corrected.   If I have missed something - it is most helpful to state it clearly or to restate it again in a slightly different manner.  Otherwise, I most often will not know or connect to a specific frustration.  Sorry for my flaws
    Thanks
     
    The Traveler
  16. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from Jane_Doe in Freedom, Family, and The Gospel   
    Perhaps you could explain clearly the difference between being one with G-d and living life as a G-d.  I would point out that in the Gospel of John this exact point was made by Jesus and the Jews intended to kill him over this point of his teachings.
     
    The Traveler
  17. Thanks
    Traveler reacted to estradling75 in Who Was that Rich Man?   
    Your frustrations with Traveler are rather common.
    It is the nature of conversations that people fill in or add their own context to what others say.  This can cause confusion and misunderstanding the greater the disconnect is between the desired context and the added context.  For whatever reason it appears the Traveler's context additions appear to be permanently dialed up to an 11.  This makes it any conversation with  him to be frustrating, because there is the conversation you are trying to have, and the conversation Traveler is trying to have are severely disconnected.  It like you were missing 3/4 of the conversation that would otherwise make those connections.
    As for your point... is seems to me that the Dems tactics for awhile now is "Every Republican Candidate is Worse then Hitler" Disproving this pretty easy.  Showing that Trump has some good qualities and is therefore not "Worse then Hitler" is straight forward.  Mostly because they set the bar to clear so very very low.
     
  18. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from JohnsonJones in JohnsonJones Gospel Topics thread   
    I thought I would add another ancient Egyptian connection in the Book of Mormon (that was not know at the time of Joseph Smith).  Often we see the phrase "And it came to pass" in the Book of Mormon.  In ancient Egypt there was a deity and divine concept represented by the scarab or dung Beatle.  Scarabs are often used in ancient Egyptian funerial rites.  The scarab was symbolic of divine change or a change brought about (both blessings and curses) by G-d.
    In our Latter-day Saint culture we understand repentance as divine change - change is a very important principle.  And it came to pass is a phrase that symbolizes this divine relationship to a change.  I, personally now find joy when encountering this phrase and look to discover what it is drawing attention to in scripture and then to see how it applies to me and my life.  This is a testament to me of the divinity of the Book of Mormon and to its particular purpose to our day and time.
     
    The Traveler
  19. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from JohnsonJones in Who Was that Rich Man?   
    I would add that the one thing added in the Book of Mormon to identify "prideful rich" is the purchase of costly apparel and I would add expensive adornments.  Dare I add show cars as a spiritual wealth crisis for our day?  My father, who was very rich, rejected costly apparel and avoided owning a auto (or house) that indicated opulence or wealthy status.    Perhaps my upbringing has cause me to be prejudice toward the wealthy the flaunt their riches or define themselves in terms of things.  Often I must bite my tongue when visiting someone wealthy that adorn themselves with expensive things.  
    But then I must remind myself that (as you have pointed out) most of the world thinks all Americans adorn themselves with expensive things.  My son, while serving a mission in Mexico ask that we not send pictures our our Christmas to him.  That we avoid showing things that appear so much above the good people he taught in Mexico.
     
    The Traveler
  20. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from JohnsonJones in Getting Out of a Business Partnership   
    I would suggest that a lawyer oversee the contract (what is written down) On this I agree with @JohnsonJones.  I would also suggest that all parties involved sign a NDA (None Disclosure Agreement).  You do not need a lawyer for that - you can find copies of NDA's on the internet.  Be careful regarding a patent.  They can cost more than they are worth and not provide the protection you expect.  It is my opinion that most such adventures fail because of marketing failures.  From your posts - this appears to be lacking and it does not appear that there is anyone involved with the needed skills.
    It is also my opinion that if the concept is sound there are plenty of venture capitalist that can bring more than money to the table  - such as with manufacturing and distribution connections.   There is more to financing a new product than starting it on a shoe string and building a proto type.  If a venture capitalist is not willing to invest - your product is likely not as great as you may think.  Venture capitalist exist for the sole purpose of finding investments possibilities.
    Lastly - I suggest that a business plan be put together.  If you leave this up the the venture capitalist or someone else it is likely that you both will lose control (minimum of 51%) of your company.  There was a movie a while back about this very thing and how an employee took control of McDonalds and left the original owner with nothing - not even the name.  Sorry I do not remember the title of the movie.  
     
    The Traveler
  21. Like
    Traveler reacted to Just_A_Guy in Getting Out of a Business Partnership   
    I completely agree with you.  It’s one thing to fully find a business and then dole out one’s share of profits as one sees fit. It’s another thing to bring outsiders into the inner circle of a business where you’ll be forced to deal with their possible ineptitude/malice/graft/bad advice/inability to play nice/theft of trade secrets, etc. I’d get out now, before things get really ugly (as you seem to sense that they will).
    I don’t know that you need to go so far as to withdraw your moral support (or use of your shed) just because you don’t like how he plans to (ethically) develop/market a product that you know to be good.  I’d be more concerned about when (or if!) I’m going to get my shed back, whether they’re going to be responsible tenants, and/or whether their use of my property may somehow create an impression that I’m involved in the venture and/or expose me to liability for any resulting debts accidents or other misadventures.  So, I’d probably talk to a lawyer and to my homeowner’s insurance carrier; and if you chose to keep letting them use your shed I’d get them to sign a commercial real estate lease even if the rent is only something token like $1/month.
  22. Like
    Traveler reacted to JohnsonJones in Getting Out of a Business Partnership   
    Many friendships (and marriages even) even over money.  Money seems to be a great divider between people at times.  Those who were previously friends cease to be, and those who were friendly turn antagonistic...all over money.
    In your instance, I would say get out post haste unless you have a contract signed and relationships officially recognized.  Without the paperwork organizing a business, there should be NO business ideas implemented.  Without official paperwork organizing and specifying various relationships and agreements things can quickly go south.  I know it can cost money to do so, but the value of it means that the situation that you describe is less likely to occur.  When things are spelled out, it is a LOT harder to change the conditions already notated.
    If you do not wish to get out, GO TO A LAWYER AND GET THE PAPERWORK WRITTEN.  It should have been done before any equipment was even stored on your property.  In a business venture, do NOTHING without paperwork to back it up.  If they are unwilling to have such paperwork it is a sign of either corruption or bad faith (in my opinion).
    It could be that by withdrawing, your friend is no longer your friend.  This may happen sooner than later anyways, because without legal protections, there is no legal understanding that can bridge the gap between people when they want to go their different directions.  Unless they want to sign paperwork explicitly discussing the what, who's, where's, hows, and why's...they aren't your friend (in the business anyways) in the first place or have a vast misunderstanding of the reasons why such paperwork is normally needed in the first place.
  23. Thanks
    Traveler got a reaction from prisonchaplain in Baptism of the Holy Ghost?   
    If I did not know better I would think this is from a fellow Latter-day Saint.  In science there are two kinds of particles - fermions and bosons.  Fermions are what most of us think of as matter.  Bosons are quite different - for example two bosons can occupy the same space-time.  Photons (particles of light) are bosons.  One speculation is that spirit matter is similar to or are bosons.  This would explain how a spirit can occupy a physical body and otherwise be undetected.   This would also explain how the Holy Ghost can enter into our body and communicate directly with our spirit.
    It is LDS doctrine that our pre-existence spirit is the same "stuff" as the Holy Ghost and the pre-born entity of Mary - Jesus Christ.  It is also the same stuff of which Lucifer was and Satan remains to be.   It is also my speculation that Dark Matter and Dark Energy may be Boson type spirit matter.  This would mean that our universe is dominated by spirit stuff and give credence to a literal concept that spirit stuff gives life to the universe.  Of course this is all my speculation - but there has been little divine revelation on such things since science has advanced our physical understanding of the universe.  I do wish and speculate that if our eyes were "opened" that we would understand both science and religious doctrine much better.
    Perhaps our spirits are far more powerful than we realize - even in our physical universe.  One thing - I believe the scripture (including our Latter-day prophets) tries to inform us is that only by faith in Christ and through the Holy Ghost can we know truth - of anything. 
     
    Thanks for your input
     
    The Traveler
  24. Thanks
    Traveler reacted to prisonchaplain in Baptism of the Holy Ghost?   
    In Joseph Smith's era the above was true--very much so. However, your church's first prophet brought something to light--praying to receive a Holy Spirit witness--a burning in the bosom. LDS speak of being impressed by the Spirit. Indeed, the Bible says the Holy Spirit will convict us. We think of conviction as relating to sin, but He also gives us conviction--a strong sense of what is true. Of course, for Pentecostals/Charismatics the Holy Spirit brings spiritual power. On an intuitive level, many view the Heavenly Father as that traditional, strong, somewhat distant authority figure, who always seemed right. The Son, Jesus, is our brother, our example, even, on some level, our friend. The Holy Spirit though is an internal, intimate sense of God's presence. He is a Comforter, a guide, and most certainly, an assurance.
  25. Like
    Traveler got a reaction from askandanswer in Baptism of the Holy Ghost?   
    The Holy Ghost is the least known of the G-d Head.  Although there are many revelations about receiving the Holy Ghost and His importance in the Plan of Salvation - there is disappointingly (for me) very little known about the person.  Even in traditional Trinitarian Christians (like @prisonchaplain) I find no logic that such a being has any actual critical or necessary religious importance or contribution beyond various speculations.
    I have my own speculations - mostly based in logic, science and mathematics (dealing with our dimensional space-time with the possible speculations concerning an additional dimension.)   In short at least 95% of what we think we understand of our universe is unexplainable and beyond our current science (including quantum physics - that no one really understands well enough to make me confident).
    Some of my speculations:
    1. I mostly believe that the Holy Ghost is a single unique personage but I can accept the possibility that this divine role may be accomplished by several different persons at different times or eras of the divine plan of salvation.  But I do not believe Jesus has ever been a Holy Ghost individual.
    2. When Christ returns to rule in power and glory - that the Holy Ghost will no longer be necessary and that he or they will complete the divine purpose of creation - meaning that they will receive a body, be baptized and eventually be resurrected to Glory.  
    3. In conflict with #2 - I speculate that the Holy Ghost will be necessary as we are brought to stand before G-d at what is called the final judgment.  But I cannot find any scriptural references.  I am also conflicted that the Holy Ghost could receive a mortal body and yet be another individual capable of mortality without sin or that being a G-d he would sin.
    4. There is an order of resurrection - not only is the first resurrection the greatest in glory - the first resurrection will be completed before resurrections of lessor glories begin.  I believe this is necessary and part of the order of the Priesthood.
    5. There seems to be a strong connection between the Holy Ghost and fire.  I am not sure if this is symbolic or actual.  I tend to speculate that baptism by fire is not so much symbolic but literal and necessary to be clean before anyone can be in G-d's presents.  I personally believe my speculations are better than most in this regard - but I am quite sure my speculations are far far from reality.  It seems this is a matter of faith based in hardly any knowledge or understanding.
    I am not willing to die on any hill of my speculations and will be glad to someday move beyond speculations to truth.  I am very willing to entertain other speculations but with the caveat that we are dealing with speculations - at least for now.
     
    The Traveler