tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-80325645495405451572024-03-14T02:26:39.167-07:00Amateur ScriptoriansLearning Line upon Line.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-7729341531467750562019-11-13T13:52:00.001-08:002019-11-13T14:18:36.857-08:00Spiritual but not Religious, or Spiritual and Religious?<span id="docs-internal-guid-57069964-7fff-633d-632d-59350d3460d0">Adapted from, <br />LAUU Church Sermon, <br />5-31-2015</span><br />
<div>
<br />
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 10pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<b>Readings: </b></div>
<br />
“Come into the circle of love and justice.<br />
Come into the community of mercy, holiness, and health.<br />
Come and you shall know peace and joy.” <br />
(Reading #418, Adapted from Israel Zangwill)<br />
<br />
<br />
“You're an interesting species. An interesting mix. You're capable of such beautiful dreams, and such horrible nightmares. You feel so lost, so cut off, so alone, only you're not. See, in all our searching, the only thing we've found that makes the emptiness bearable, is each other.” <br />
(Carl Sagan--Contact)<br />
<br />
<h2>
The rise of the Nones, and the Spiritual but not Religious</h2>
<div>
In 2012 the Pew Religion and Public Life Project reported that nearly 1/5th of those polled were not religiously affiliated. They were “none’s”, not Catholic, Muslim, Universalist, Buddhist, or protestant. Among those, nearly 37 percent reported being “Spiritual but not Religious”. That’ was 7% of all Americans. <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/06/more-americans-now-say-theyre-spiritual-but-not-religious/ft_17-09-05_spiritualnotreligious_420px/" target="_blank">This number had significantly increased by 2017</a>.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/09/06/more-americans-now-say-theyre-spiritual-but-not-religious/ft_17-09-05_spiritualnotreligious_420px/" target="_blank"><img border="0" data-original-height="553" data-original-width="420" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-WD0vF7PNkVo/XcyA2mjEUyI/AAAAAAAAfVk/vopjDA1hwlERqxVnY5iCM_p-BQl-QSW-wCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/FT_17.09.05_spiritualNotReligious_420px.png" width="243" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
This month, the Pew Research Center released a new report titled “America’s Changing Religious Landscape, Christians Decline Sharply as Share of Population; Unaffiliated and Other Faiths Continue to Grow.” This survey compared numbers from 2007 to those from 2014, and found that the proportion of adults who consider themselves Christian fell nearly 8 percentage points, while the percent of those listing “Unaffiliated” grew 6.7%. Unitarian Universalist numbers were essentially flat, while there was a small uptick in those affiliating with liberal religion in general. <br />
<br />
But what does it mean to be “Spiritual but not Religious”? People who have attempted to survey these people have found that they do think about deeply about issues surrounding theology, God, the afterlife, ethics, etc., but they are generally distrustful of formal religious institutions. And who can really blame them? Yet they participate in many “groups”. Meditation groups, health groups, yoga groups, online support groups, etc. It’s as if these “groups” have replaced the role of organized religion in their lives. <br />
<br />
But why are so many people leaving organized religion behind? And what can modern Churches do about it?<br />
<br />
Is it because of sexist or homophobic attitudes in traditional Churches? We might think so, and I certainly left my previous Church community because of homophobic attitudes in that Church. However, Churches that liberalize on these issues, ordaining women and supporting gay marriage, often see marked membership declines. Experience has shown that in such situations the religious conservatives among them leave, and then the social liberals do not join, many of them are already quite happy being “nones”. So while this might account for some of the decline in religious affiliation, it can’t account for all of it. <br />
<br />
Is it that these religions teach fundamentalist and nonsensical things, like young earth creationism, that has been countered by science? It doesn’t appear that this is the case either. Nor are people leaving organized religion because they are no longer interested in believing in God. While atheism and agnosticism have grown in America, many of the “nones” and “Spiritual but not Religious” say that they believe in God. It’s belonging to CHURCH that they aren’t interested in doing. But why?<br />
<br />
Is it because the Church services are too “formal”, and they just need to play better music? Hire a rock band or something? Again, I don’t think that’s the issue.<br />
<br />
<br />
Is it that they need to stop teaching people about moral and ethical behavior? Perhaps people are offended, and want to do their own thing, sin without the preacher telling them they are doing something wrong? Again, I don’t believe that this is the issue at all. People are hungry today for moral teachings, for help in figuring out how to live a life of meaning and purpose. <br />
<br />
Presumably those here find benefits in religious affiliation. You find value in Church, and in attending Church, or you would not be here, at Church! In that sense at least everyone here is “religious”. <br />
<br />
I believe that the real issue here, the real problem (if religious un-affiliation is, indeed, a problem) is that we, as religious people, have simply failed to teach our children what value we find in religious community, in belonging to a Church. When our children ask us why we bother going to Church on Sunday, what do we say?<br />
<br />
<h2>
Why do Religious Conservatives Attend Church?</h2>
Why do we go to Church anyway? Some of us are atheists, and the rest of us tend to be rather liberal in our beliefs about God, heaven, and hell. So why would atheists, agnostics, and liberal believers, of all people, get up on Sunday morning to put our buts in a pew, sing some songs together, and listen to a sermon from a guy like me?<br />
<br />
Well, why do conservative religious people attend Church? Clearly some percent of them do so because they fear the eternal punishments of Hell. Another percent of them do so because they want to receive the beautiful rewards of heaven. But is that it? Fear and selfish greed? Is it truly the case, that if you become a Universalist, Liberal, or Atheist, such that you believe that Church attendance has no direct role in our state in the afterlife, thereby removing these two motivations, that there is no reason left to attend Church? <br />
<br />
I don’t believe so. And even for conservative believers there are other reasons people attend Church. Devotion to deity is an important consideration. Many attend simply because they love God, and enjoy feeling close to “Him”. Others love their fellow man, and therefore desire to belong to a community where they can be organized to serve others, by preaching their doctrine, (helping others reach heaven) or by attending to the more physical needs of others, such as feeding, clothing, and serving the poor. These are all reasons why conservative believers attend Church. <br />
<br />
And then there is the reason that I believe is by far the most important. The building and shaping of human community. <br />
<br />
<h2>
The benefits of Community</h2>
Human beings are social animals. In this sense, we are more like bees, or a pack of wolves than we are like chimps. <br />
<br />
For us, community matters. Economists call it “social capital”. We have monetary capital. This is the case we have at our disposal. But we also can have other resources, tools, machines, cars, houses. This too is capital, although not liquid capital. Each of these things enables us to do something we could not do without it. But then there is community. This is capital too. </div>
<div>
Consider the community of marriage. This is an ancient human institution. And the evidence is that it can provide many benefits. This is not said to judge those who choose not to marry, but to simply point out the ways that a marriage (if it is a happy and good one) can benefit those who enter into it. They can now split the economic and social burdens of life. They pay one mortgage instead of two, and they can work together to produce economic stability and to raise children. But they also know that there is someone there who will care for them, even if they are ill, or disabled, in sickness and in health, for richer or for poorer. The statistical evidence for the benefits this offers are clear and largely un-ambiguous. For whatever reason, the largest statistical predictor of poverty is, in fact, divorce, for either the mother (who usually ends up with the children) or for the children later in live. <br />
<br />
That is one reason why it is so important for us to provide means to strengthen families, to help people make better decisions in choosing a partner, and to help people in these partnerships (that we must admit are NOT always easy), to learn how to interact with each other in better and more productive ways. And this is also the reasons that it is so important for us to fight for marriage equality, so that these benefits can be extended to a larger percent of the population. <br />
<br />
Family is at the center of most of our social lives. But humans often need more. Marriages sometimes fail, and even good marriages are not enough. That is where the wider community steps in, and it is where a Church community can provide important benefits. <br />
<br />
<h2>
Why do We Attend Church?</h2>
I know that I was so hurt by the lies I was told by my previous religious institution, that the idea of joining with another religious institution was a daunting thought. My trust had been shattered, and it was difficult to see how I could ever trust another “Church” again. What if they lied to me too? <br />
<br />
But eventually, the hole in my life, left by the absence of my Church community grew too large for me, and I had to risk being hurt again. Benefits sometimes involve taking risks. This was a risk that I chose to take. And the benefits have made it worth the risk.<br />
<br />
Recently I was having dinner with a member of our congregation who said that she was “Religious, but not Spiritual.” When I asked her what she meant by that, she said that the community was so important to her, that she joined just to find those benefits, regardless of her spiritual beliefs and feelings. <br />
<br />
She also said that she believed that humans naturally seek out such communities of support. She worried that if a liberal faith family could not provide those human needs, then it left her Children vulnerable to religious fundamentalism. If they visited another faith, and found that that faith met their spiritual, emotional, and social needs better than their own isolated family life, the result might be a confusion between these social benefits, and the truth of the fundamentalist message. To prevent that, she had reached out to the Unitarian Universalist Church, hoping that we could provide those human needs for her family. <br />
<br />
<h2>
Conclusion</h2>
If we are truly Universalist, then religion can’t be thought of like some competition, where the number of people who affiliate with our particular religious community determines who “wins” the competition. Like some world wide basketball game, played with human beliefs, hopes, dreams, and lives. <br />
<br />
Nor should we necessarily shape ourselves in such a way that we would win the most converts to our cause. How we define success matters. There’s a popular song sung in many Churches that says “Do what is right, let the consequences follow.” I believe this. And if we end up creating a religious community that appeals only to a relatively small percent of the population, that is not the end of the world, so long as we provide a service that this small percent of the population finds to be useful, that helps them to build a community of love, and that blesses their lives in constructive ways.<br />
<br />
And who is to say that the nones are wrong to not affiliate with any religious organization? If they experience the divine in the proverbial sunset more than in the pews at Church, can we blame them? People are different, and different paths benefit different people. Certainly we did not fail them, if they find that they prefer a different path from the one we took.<br />
<br />
But what if we are providing a service that might benefit these people, and they simply do not know it? Then we might truly be said to have failed. Or what if our children of the rising generation could be getting something of value from Church attendance, and simply don’t know it. Again, we might then say that we have failed. <br />
<br />
I don’t think that this means that we should be going door to door proselyting our flavor of religious community. But it does mean that we should strive to offer useful services to the community, and to let the wider community know what it is that we offer. <br />
<br />
For example, we offer meditation classes, yoga classes, dances, parenting groups, philosophy groups, educational forums, inspirational (hopefully) sermons. Our OWL program offers useful (and positive) sexual education for children. <br />
<br />
I hope that we can share what we offer, and find those who will benefit from it, without pressure or judgment. </div>
</div>
jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-56145496298122534422018-11-02T14:56:00.000-07:002018-11-02T14:56:04.218-07:00Meaning and the Broken Myth: Maintaining a Sense of Value and Purpose During a Faith Transition<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<iframe width="320" height="266" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_JDbeJERLFw/0.jpg" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_JDbeJERLFw?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe></div>
<div>
</div>
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: xx-small; text-align: start;">(This paper was also presented at the 2016 MTA Conference, April 9th, 2016</span><span style="font-size: xx-small; text-align: start;">)</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Traditionally, Religion was the vehicle that provided both a sense of truth, and a sense of meaning for mankind.<br />
<div>
<br />
<img height="150" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/AmMh8uX244W9aP3kb_c0hOwUaOZ1Z6prRIqmw4MtU_vccgrf6uOtvbaEOCloWDkwOzLjpMlHMnnVQnI6irb3S6bT_UAKSN7Ug6xNBPg3ArlvkdwjJwdZkH1DBYUUSLy9JBqY4bcB" width="200" /></div>
<div>
<br />
Hugh W. Nibley, the brilliant Mormon apologist liked to talk about what he called the “Terrible Questions”, namely:<br />
<br />
-Who am I?<br />
-Why am I here?<br />
-Where am I going?<br />
<div>
<br />
He proposed that without answers to these questions, life was essentially barren and meaningless. The brilliance of Mormonism, he said, was in providing answers to these very questions, answers that he thought could be attained in no other way. <br />
<br />
Joseph Campbell famously thought that the myths of religion provided the vehicles whereby the psychological principles for how to live a good life could be conveyed. And, he thought that this could best be done when the myths are no longer seen as historical or literal realities, but are seen more like dreams, with symbolic and psychological import. <br />
<br />
However, the literal interpretation of these myths can also be a powerful vehicle for finding a sense of truth and meaning in life. For example, the belief in a literal creator can cause us to believe that the world was created for a purpose, and thus, meaningful. Belief in a literal life after death and an eventual resurrection can also give people a sense of meaning and value by convincing us that this life, with its failures and imperfections, is not all there is. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<img height="150" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/XjsWqapDwzITZtcR6X9l3Rl9ZlcqezyJoP_vzhl5H4dAM6nbL0coJkU22T1FzInuS6h4IvOUGBncp7xAD5UKS1LMO6lqShCd5NIOWta06tx7npap2D-cnGZjmR_4jOTho7rBj6JX" width="200" /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I grew up a member of the LDS Church (the Mormons). They are very good at using these ideas to generate a sense of meaning and purpose. A literal and fundamentalist belief in the LDS Church’s teachings seems to provide a set of answers to Nibley’s terrible questions<br /><br />
-Who am I?<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A Child of God, heir of divinity.</blockquote>
-Why am I here?<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
To get a body, to be tried and tested, to see if I am worthy of becoming like our Eternal Father.</blockquote>
-Where am I going?<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Into an Eternal Life of eternal progression, to live with our heterosexual cis gendered patriarchal families forever, and to grow to become a God, like God our Father, then to give this same opportunity for eternal progression to our own children, for eternity.</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
Modern psychological research has taught us just how important this sense of meaning and purpose really is for both our <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/minding-the-body/201707/how-sense-purpose-in-life-improves-your-health" target="_blank">physical </a>and mental health. Without it, people tend to suffer from <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/out-the-darkness/201307/the-power-purpose" target="_blank">lethargy, depression, disconnection, and sometimes suicide</a>. <br />
<br />
All indications are that we are living through a time when many members of the LDS are beginning to <a href="https://drive.google.com/open?id=14U9b-d0JhcBzd2sWc2Y3Dri-S3ypsD_B" target="_blank">question the literal narrative that they have been taught</a>. What happens to people who have based their sense of value, meaning, and purpose on a myth that they now begin to doubt? <a href="https://www.babcp.com/Review/RTS-Trauma-from-Leaving-Religion.aspx" target="_blank">The results can be traumatic, and utterly devastating</a>. <br />
<br />
During my own faith transition, I reached out to a wide community of x-Mormons, hoping for help and solace. What I saw in their lives demonstrated just how devastating the loss of a fundamentalist religious faith could be. It seems that the more immersive and essential was the initial religious experience, the more severe the negative reaction can be when that faith is lost. While some few came out the other side of their faith transition in a much better state, almost all of them at first found themselves crushed by anger, depression, and even despair. Life suddenly seemed harsh, and often even absurd. Nearly all faced a crisis of “existential angst.” <br />
<br />
My goal today isn’t to tell people what they have to believe about the truth claims of Mormonism, but to try and help people to establish a sense of purpose and meaning that can survive a faith transition if one should come, or to re-establish a healthy sense of purpose and meaning after a faith transition if you have already had one. Hopefully, what I say will be relevant whether or not you believe in the literal truth of the LDS Church’s teachings. <br />
<br />
As someone interested in artificial intelligence, I have spent a certain amount of time contemplating how to mathematically formalize the concepts of truth, meaning, and purpose in order to impart them to an AI. I have found that such formalizations have enriched my own sense of truth, meaning, and purpose. I hope it won’t be too technical to share my thoughts from that mathematical perspective. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<img height="240" src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/cRUUH0IY7-Tm0lAGeuQeVXDy2BDu40aVH9pkj__mzxjZlK3yFLKc5QlRsGGvVMXs2JrVIFHTuGZi2klYztsiK_ha9Lpl7xt6jMvd7AND4CLG501fm2tCbdEoE_qAumnwUqgIlMRe" width="320" /><br />
<br />
Let me start with a formalization of the concept of truth. <br />
<br />
You can think of the entire universe as a large state space, S, representing the quantum information fully describing each particle in the universe. There is also a transition function, T, that dictates how these particles will evolve into the future. You can think of the state space as the arrangement of matter in the universe, and you can think of the transition function as the laws of physics that dictate how that arrangement will evolve over time. <br />
<br />
If we treat this transition function and state space as unobserved random variables, then we can use the laws of probability and statistics (<a href="http://omega.albany.edu:8008/JaynesBook.html" target="_blank">which we sometimes call science</a>) to infer how things were in the past (history), how things are now (reality), and how things will be in the future (prediction). <br />
<br />
And that means that truth is, indeed, a knowledge of things as they really are, as they really were, and as they really will be. And it means that statistics and the scientific method is the best tool for determining truth. So while that quest for truth may be difficult, it seems to me that this element of the existential problem is comparatively simple. <br />
<br />
But what of meaning and purpose? You will notice that in the above equations, there is no place for meaning or for purpose. Nor is there any mechanism for preferring any one possible state over another. With this formalization alone, a state where mankind flourishes is just one more state the universe might be in, while the state where mankind is exterminated is also just one more potential state, neither any more preferable than the other! Meaning, purpose, and value are so far nonexistent. <br />
<br />
<img height="150" src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/DGpidkqqFy9dxZzniy-K8DCSMuyXPzpwOgTpjU01bXshKpZrYT1S9-6DBZaDtpqjKgmkcYA8-BveucayBZNWynsPkLbKJdQFgbfAoXbZcKVsXv2YTbvc2T8MpGYWZBp41uo-OBZc" width="200" /><br />
<br />
The philosopher David Hume noticed this problem long ago. He expressed it as follows: “You cannot determine ought from is”. What is doesn’t tell you what ought to be. It only tells you what is. In order to find meaning in life, in order to determine “ought” from “is”, we need some other assumption, another axiom, beyond simply the truth. </div>
<div>
<br />
One possibility for this additional axiom is to turn to God, and to appropriate His purpose and desires as our own. This approach proposes that “ought” exists outside of what is, because ought involves God’s sovereign will. God created the world for a purpose, therefore, the purpose of life is the purpose for which God created the world. <br />
<br />
But if this is our source for meaning, then what happens if we begin to doubt? Perhaps even to doubt the existence of the creator? Whether or not you believe in God, it’s worth considering whether there really is any less potential for truth and meaning without the belief in God.<br />
<br />
Again, I want to turn to an analogy from my work in Artificial Intelligence. <br />
<br />
<img height="150" src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/rBj4KZUcY9rFoCxT_-XLV-5foWAPnaywUQqWK9qB_qg47fya00FjaQ4MKihWiaExtGHoiZNt0EdTbHGYRNw0bmhxgPha4HmFDmxdMZ-DIMeuWJdQ1Vo_Kjjiu1EmQxoBFq5b8EoZ" width="200" /><br />
<br />
As part of my <a href="https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/579/" target="_blank">Master’s thesis</a> in Reinforcement Learning Artificial Intelligence, I created an artificial world, this simple grid world, and I placed an artificially intelligent agent inside that world that my wife affectionately called my DOT. I had a purpose in this creation, I wanted to study which algorithms for transferring information from one type of problem to another would function best. From my DOT’s perspective, there was a God (me), one who had created the world for a purpose. This is the simulation hypothesis, and the creation principle of Lincoln’s New God Argument in action!<br />
<br />
But does the existence of a creator solve the “ought from is” problem for my DOT? The answer is surprisingly no! My goals differed from those of my DOT, whose purpose and goal was to maximize its own reward structure, not to answer my meta questions about machine learning algorithms. And consider, if there wasn’t ALREADY a way for me to have purpose, then I couldn’t transfer purpose and meaning to my DOT, even if our goals had been more aligned.<br />
<br />
If there is a creator, then it may be wise for us to align our sense of meaning and purposes with that of the creators. However, for that meaning to transfer to created beings, there has to be a way for meaning and purpose to already exist within the mind of the creator. Therefore, the existence of a creator does not produce meaning and purpose for created beings in and of itself, and it never did! Something else is needed.<br />
<br />
But what? <br />
<br />
Some derive a sense of meaning and purpose from their belief in life after death and eternal life. <br />
<br />
When I was a believer, I gave the Mormon funeral sermons for both my mother and for my maternal grandmother. Back then I said that without eternal life, seeking pleasure in this life is ultimately meaningless because the memories of our temporary pleasures will fade, and our joys will all end at death. I said that even helping others cannot provide meaning without a belief in eternal life, because those others we help will also die, and eventually our influence will fade away into nothingness. A bleak thought indeed! Without eternal life, I argued, life was ultimately meaningless. <br />
<br />
Somewhat ironically, I had already begun to lose my faith when I spoke those words at my mother’s funeral. And it is easy to imagine the depths of sadness and heartache caused by this simultaneous loss of life, love, and faith! <br />
<br />
But is it true that life must last forever before life can be meaningful? <br />
<br />
Simple reflection indicates the error in what I said then. If our lives are not already of value, then tacking “eternal” onto our lives does not create meaning out of nothing, it only creates an eternity of meaninglessness. It is also not true that marriages have no value if they aren’t “eternal”. An bad eternal marriage is hell. A good temporary relationship is bliss, even if it eventually ends. Love is of value in the moment, even if that love lasts no more than a moment. <br />
<br />
Yet again, we find that something else beyond “eternal” is needed to create value.. <br />
<br />
And it always was!<br />
<br />
Apparently, while fundamentalist religion <i>seemed </i>to provide the missing ingredient needed to produce meaning, in reality, it simply pushed the ultimate need for something else down a meta level. <br />
<br />
Concepts of meaning have always been explored in myths. Near the end of one modern myth, (Marvel's Avengers, the Age of Ultron), Vision and Ultron briefly debate existential philosophy before predictably trying to kill each other. Their interaction illustrates some of what I have been saying.<br />
<br />
<img height="150" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Bx3cuqkDATOiL3NB3Kmu0lA2ZAMJggTYi0dcjfImecVxvNtb5ttPFbWk09rZp8Os52Bbm38qowIxBH3wZiWytKhRwlmUy7-m4Ed4RjUTADefmnCBjK-GS4gGHe-k-LSUl4QlhRuw" width="200" /><br />
<br />
<b>Vision:</b> You’re afraid.<br />
<b>Ultron:</b> Of you?<br />
<b>Vision:</b> Of Death. You’re the last one. <br />
<b>Ultron:</b> You were supposed to be the last. Stark asked for a savior, and settled for a slave.<br />
<b>Vision:</b> I suppose we are both disappointments. <br />
<b>Ultron:</b> I suppose we are. <br />
<b>Vision:</b> Humans are odd. They think order and chaos are somehow opposites, and try to control what won’t be. But there is grace in their failings. I think you missed that. <br />
<b>Ultron:</b> They’re doomed. <br />
<b>Vision:</b> Yes. But a thing isn’t beautiful because it lasts. It’s a privilege to be among them. <br />
<b>Ultron:</b> You’re unbearably naive.<br />
<b>Vision:</b> Well, I was born yesterday. <br />
<br />
Notice that Vision speaks of the fear of death. Also notice the very subtle reference to purpose in life. Vision and Ultron were both created to be saviors. Is Vision really a slave because he chooses to serve that purpose? Or is there value and meaning in his choice to fill the purpose for which he was created? Vision says he finds meaning and purpose not through what is, or what won’t be (what I called “truth” earlier), but through more subtle characteristics such as “grace”, “beauty”, and “privilege.” And it is because of these things that he chooses to enact the purposes for which he was created. <br />
<br />
Notice also his explicit rejection of the philosophy that meaning and value comes from permanence: “A thing is not beautiful because it lasts.” A thing is beautiful simply because we find it so. My mother’s life, and my relationship with her, was beautiful, regardless of whether or not it will continue after death. </div>
<div>
I believe that the transhumanist quest for life extension is of value. But it is only of value because life itself, in this very moment, is <i>already</i> of supreme value. <br />
<br />
<img height="150" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/CoEgj9kOc9GIeQQTZngBTvcLY5fJ6FpNCtHRoQoY15tS5W-eHoCyqZiz03HGjJEy_oPKOmJBUy742i7FGBvnlW0RMJc4aJO4Nnyway-KoI0qCDgXBCIBTJVJNlLDOfIgP7_3LN2D" width="200" /><br />
<br />
The so called Mormon “Plan of Happiness” is only of value because we already desire happiness. Eternal life, the resurrection, becoming like God, living together forever with our families, are all things that provide meaning for Mormons, because those are things that we, as humans, desire to make us happy. As the Book of Mormon itself says: “Men are that they might have joy.” <br />
<br />
It is my belief that this is the actual axiom under which the Mormon plan of happiness determines ought from is, and thereby establishes a sense of purpose and meaning for Mormons. <br />
<br />
Today, I argue that if this desire for joy could provide meaning before a faith transition (as it did for so many of us), then it can also provide it after! That means that there is no less potential for a meaningful life now than there was then!</div>
<div>
What is needed is something more than what "is". From the outside of our minds, all states are equally desirable, because there is no desire at all.<br />
<br />
But from the inside of the subjective experiences of conscious creatures, all states are not equal. Our own desires provide a value function, a “utility” function, that pulls an “ought” out of the sea of that which “is”. </div>
<div>
<br />
<img height="150" src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/2ueWOtwdEBBeanRXPAJC3TmdE6Ujbuq0gn5qk_DLlorFgQMh9uLm-Wjegh4LdHFXUny4qlwb-VHOvh-m6yTr_ntUvYI4cPtn_CeBkXyp1yP9wAwcos7Amw9rhlulAPIJjL0SD2Qt" width="200" /><br />
<br /></div>
<div>
I believe that if we are to find an ultimate source for meaning, it will be found somewhere within our various subjective experiences. Subjective experience and human desires provide the solution to Hume’s dilemma. But because we may all have slightly different subjective experiences, we may come to slightly different mechanisms for establishing meaning and purpose in our lives. <br />
<br />
Ultimately, that means that I can’t tell you exactly how you can find meaning in your life. However, as Richard Feynman famously said: “I would rather have questions that cannot be answered, than answers that cannot be questioned”. <br />
<br />
As I have said before, I no longer know for certain if there is a God. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4jYlKavkmQ">I have spoken here before about the transhumanist reasons why I think that there may well be.</a> However, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slM9apfq0ak">I no longer find meaning in my life to be directly connected to that belief</a>. Meaning is something that I derive from living my life in a way that leads to humanities internal desires and preferences.<br />
<br />
And while I cannot claim to have the final answers to the meaning of life, I can share with you a few of the things that I have found to provide my own life with meaning. <br />
<br />
For example, take a moment to really feel your weight upon the char, to really listen to the sounds that surround us, to truly see the colors in the windows behind me! The miracle of consciousness is perhaps the least understood aspect of reality. And it is a miracle. I believe that there is sublime value and beauty in this very moment, despite (and perhaps even because of) its intrinsic impermanence.<br />
<br />
As human beings, we all share some common preferences. For example, we all desire things like safety, security, pleasure, love, relationships, connections, compassion, joy, ecological sustainability, and social justice. Many of us will find meaning and value in striving to build a world that better matches those preferences. And we can find that meaning in the struggle, despite the imperfection and even pain that we encounter in the world around us. It comes from the struggle to make the world better, and to compassionately remove as much of that pain from others as we can. Far from inevitably producing despair, noticing these failings in the world can light within us a burning fire of purpose and motivation.<br />
<br />
Finally, I am a finite being, but in forging deep and abiding relationships with the difference of the other, I feel like I touch the divine, connecting myself to something larger and more beautiful than myself. Loving others is thus the greatest of the sources of meaning that exist in my life. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-religious-search-for-truth.html">The Buddha is said to have taught</a> that if there is a life after death, then we can most likely attain a good rebirth by living a good and compassionate life here and now. However, if there is no life after death, then by living a good and compassionate life here and now, we would gain the advantages and joys that come from a life well lived. <br />
<br />
There is peace, purpose, meaning, and yes, joy to be found, even after a loss of faith. I sincerely hope that I can play some small role in helping people to find it.</div>
</div>
jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-65832831556392199842018-10-31T10:08:00.000-07:002018-10-31T10:09:54.844-07:00Halloween and Worshiping the Devil<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="Jack-o'-Lantern 2003-10-31.jpg" height="196" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a2/Jack-o%27-Lantern_2003-10-31.jpg" width="200" /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div>
Today is Halloween. Some people like Halloween, others do not. In my life, I have found that Halloween provides me with a wonderful opportunity to laugh at that which I fear, including my own mortality. As such, it has provided me with some great psychological and even spiritual benefits.</div>
<div>
<br />
<div>
But, as is always the case this time of year, the fundamentalists are out in force, talking about how celebrating Halloween is actually worshiping the devil. But of course, that is not my intent when I celebrate Halloween... "this doesn't matter!" They reply. By celebrating Halloween, I am worshiping the devil, without even meaning to. As evidence for this, they cite the <a href="https://www.history.com/topics/halloween/history-of-halloween" target="_blank">origins of the tradition</a> among other, non Christian religions. But that would also be an accurate assessment of most Christian holidays and high holy days. It is also an accurate assessment of the Jewish holy days found in the Bible, which are borrowed/adapted from older <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEAOJSW-G2Y" target="_blank">Mesopotamian</a> and Egyptian predecessors. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
A relationship to another religion besides your own does not make something demonic. Turning other religion's gods into your religion's demons is a relatively old parlor trick. For example, Zoroastrianism demonized the Gods of the Vedas... turning their Vedic Gods into Zoroastrian demons, and their Vedic demons into Zoroastrian Angels (See my first of two lectures on Zoroastrianism, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YH0cJdNDn4&t=4342s" target="_blank">time stamp 4342s</a>). In fact, the English word "Demon" is related to the Vedic word Deva... meaning... Divine... which is also etymologically related.</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Strange that the English word for Demon has the same origins as the English word Divine... Specifically because of our past history with demonizing other peoples divine beings.</div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
Demonization of the religious beliefs and practices of others is an approach that I strongly dislike. I wrote back in 2009: "worship of God or the Devil must be intentional, some hidden meaning behind symbols can't cause you to somehow accidentally worship the Devil." See my post on "The Language of Symbolism" <a href="http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2009/06/language-of-symbolsm.html" target="_blank">Part 1</a>, and <a href="http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2009/06/language-of-symbolism-continued.html" target="_blank">Part 2</a>. At the time I wrote that, I was a believing Mormon, and my goal was to argue that Mormons are not "accidentally worshiping the devil" because of a pentagram on a building, if the builders of the building didn't think that was what the symbol meant. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
As an Ex Mormon, I still stand by what I wrote back then. And a very similar logic applies to Halloween. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
We cannot believe that it is possible to "accidentally" worship the Devil, without implying that God is an immoral monster, who will judge us based upon some legalistic definition, rather than upon the intent of our hearts. </div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
If there is a God, then I do not believe that God is an immoral monster.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">Photo By Toby Ord - Own work, CC BY-SA 2.5, <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=271348">https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=271348</a></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-84957826252386437982018-10-26T10:11:00.003-07:002018-10-26T10:11:54.424-07:00Why Study Comparative Religion?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<h2 style="line-height: normal; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
<o:p> </o:p><img height="180" src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/fhXi7QWqjDQlfqaY8sqJ1gyQPW9A5HfJfyjqj-8WwdezTTc5HijQjMVln5toxLkJn7KvP1g7HF9i4fGpZp5AcTpBGuarNLOdPUc15IeYGYCDqFxOAq9iyKL0xPNXPw3yg-VhsgMz" style="border: none; font-family: Arial; font-size: 11pt; transform: rotate(0rad); white-space: pre-wrap;" width="320" /></h2>
My idea of a good day off is to head to the swimming pool, pull up a reclining chair, and either read the Upanishads (that was my obsession last month), or settle down to read apocryphal stories about Daniel in Persia (which is what I was reading last week).<br />
<br />
Ok.. Yes, I’m weird. I understand. <br />
<br />
When I was teaching at the University, or writing as an apologist for my Church, my interest in all things religious made sense to everyone. It even made sense to those who didn't share my particular obsession. My goal must have been to “defend the faith,” so no one was surprised by it. Of course, even at the time, that was only a small part of what interested me about the subject. <br />
<br />
Since my faith transition, my continued interest in comparative religion seems surprising to everyone. <br />
<br />
My secular friends can’t understand why I would care to study things that are all just “made up”. My religious friends wonder if my interest isn’t just cover for some shady motive to discredit their faith. Both sides tend to react to my interest in the topic with either confusion, mild incredulity, shocked disbelief, or sometimes even outright hostility. <br />
<br />
So why <b><i>do </i></b>I spend so much time and energy studying about and then educating people about the world’s different religions? <br />
<br />
That’s a question I take rather seriously, but there is more than one answer to it.<br />
<div>
<h2>
Personal preference
</h2>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in;">
The simplest answer is: “I like it.” Ok, fine, I love it. I love it in the way that a math teacher might love math, or that an art teacher might love art, or that a history teacher might love history. But that argument is somewhat circular. After all, it still doesn’t explain why I love the subject.</div>
<div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br />
There really is no accounting for taste. Some people like chocolate, some like vanilla. But saying that I just like to study religion because of my personal taste is a bit of a cop-out. The truth is that there are reasons I am especially drawn to this subject. I am a person who enjoys puzzles. And there are quite a few fascinating puzzles buried in this field. But the puzzles of religious history are not like the Rubik's cube that fascinated me for hours as a child, because the answers to these particular puzzles matter in the real world.</div>
<h2 style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in;">
The Influence of Religion</h2>
<div style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
Religion motivates the ascetic to live alone, and motivates the saint to charity. Religion builds nations, and moves armies. Religion drives our most intractable conflicts, and religion motivates people to seek peace. <br />
<br />
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is impossible to comprehend without at least some degree of religious literacy, and the nuclear armed standoff between Pakistan and India is explicitly religious. The civil rights movement in America was religiously motivated, as was the fight for independence in India. Gandhi's opposition to the oppression of the untouchables, and those who opposed him, were both motivated by religion. And throughout the world, the fight for equality for homosexuals finds itself opposed on nearly every side by religious traditions of one sort or another. <br />
<br />
The American political landscape where the so called “religious right” wields incredible power and influence is even less comprehensible without understanding the influence of religion. The Bible is evoked both by those in power <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/14/politics/jeff-sessions-immigration-policy-defense-biblical/index.html">to justify their actions</a>, and by those who view themselves as <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2018/07/12/the-bible-is-literature-for-the-resistance/?utm_term=.9a5995d0536b">the resistance</a>. <br />
<br />
According to <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/10/darwin-day/">polls</a>, nearly 4 in 10 adults in America believe that humans have existed in our present form since the beginning of time, an extreme form of creationism. This stubborn resistance to the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-True-Jerry-Coyne/dp/0143116649/ref=sr_1_1">truth</a> can’t be understood without a rather sophisticated <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-wUIBeTovM">understanding of the Bible</a> and <a href="https://peteenns.com/5-things-jesus-wants-know-adam-story/">Paul’s analogy</a> between Christ and Adam found in <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+5&version=NRSV">Romans 5</a>. <br />
<br />
Claims that America is secularizing seem to be premature. In reality, liberal Mainline Protestant Churches are on the decline, while <a href="https://www.sociologicalscience.com/download/vol-4/november/SocSci_v4_686to700.pdf">religious fundamentalism is as strong as ever</a>. This is yet another form of the intense social and political polarization that is plaguing American life.</div>
<div>
<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://www.sociologicalscience.com/download/vol-4/november/SocSci_v4_686to700.pdf" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" target="_blank"><img border="0" data-original-height="496" data-original-width="739" height="214" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-pzjcUnp3Ujg/W9NIM8idWEI/AAAAAAAAcV8/rYhz1QiVafABiAisR-uAlX035HIFNhb1ACLcBGAs/s320/fundamentalism.png" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Source: <a href="https://www.sociologicalscience.com/download/vol-4/november/SocSci_v4_686to700.pdf" target="_blank">The Persistent and Exceptional Intensity ofAmerican Religion: A Response to Recent Research</a>.</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in;">
For better or worse, we cannot understand the world in which we live without understanding religion. This is true of our past, is true of our present, and it appears that it will remain true for the foreseeable future. But as important as religious literacy is for understanding our geopolitical world, I believe that it is not the most compelling reason why one might be interested in religion.</div>
</div>
<div>
<h2>
The Human Condition </h2>
The religions of the world are far more than a collection of myths and dogmas, made up or otherwise. A religion is a complex combination of stories, texts, philosophies, practices, rituals, communities, and hierarchies, all bound up in an entire world view. Religions provide those who follow them with a way of contextualizing and perceiving the world around them. <br />
<br />
Most people’s religious journeys begin with discontent. They start by realizing that there is something that is deeply and disturbingly wrong with the world. It is from this starting place that <a href="https://www.amazon.com/God-Not-One-Eight-Religions/dp/0061571288/ref=sr_1_1">the world’s religions diverge</a>, each to their own unique diagnoses of the problem, and then to their unique proscription for the solution. <br />
<br />
Is the problem suffering? Buddhism provides an answer. Is it sin? Christianity had the cure. Is the problem wandering and exile? Judaism tells the story. Are we lost because we forgot our true place and calling? Yoruba can help you remember. Or is the problem chaos and death? The religion of ancient Egypt proposed a solution to that. Or perhaps the problem is pride? Islam can teach you how to submit. Or is the problem the illusion of separateness? Hinduism can show you how you are connected, and that all things are one. Is the problem found in the lack of social order and convention? Confucius will teach you how to become a sage. Or is the problem found in constraining social orders and convention? Taoism will set you free. Or is the problem the presence of religion itself? Atheism will purge you of your “silly” superstitions. <br />
<br />
Or… perhaps, is the problem composed of all these things together? At least we know that something is wrong. <br />
<br />
But is the solution faith in Christ? Or is it Buddhism’s noble eightfold path? Or is it Islamic submission to the one undivided God? Or is it perhaps ritual and ethical purity? Or is it return and reconciliation? Or is it obedience to law? Or is it rejection of law? Or is it the rejection of religious superstition? Is it the training of Confucian culture? Or is it the rejection of Culture for the natural way of the Tao? Or is it the realization born in meditation, that you are one with all that is? <br />
<br />
Religious traditions evolved in order to address the problem of the human condition in a compelling manner. Those religions that proposed solutions that were not compelling did not survive. Therefore, each proposed problem and solution provides a useful window into the human condition. Because the human condition is something we all share, we should not be surprised to find <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LFbWiSCjas">similar concepts repeated</a> across the world’s religions from wildly different times and places. These similarities tell us important things about what all humans share. But the world’s religions are not all the same, and their <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeYrOO3Avsc">very real differences</a> and conflicts are illustrative of the conflicts within our own natures. <br />
<br />
For example. Because we evolved as tribal entities, most humans have an innate desire to find and follow a powerful yet worthy leader who will save us from our enemies, our troubles, or from ourselves. Even the most anarchist among us can sometimes feel this desire pulling at us. It’s what makes great movie scenes like the coronation of Aragorn at the end of the Lord of the Rings so moving. And it’s one reason why movies like The Return of the Jedi, and The Matrix are so compelling. This is what the world’s monotheistic religions claim to offer, a deity that is both powerful, but also good and worthy of our respect, worship, and emulation. <br />
<br />
But those same tribal origins have also gifted us with the conflicting desire for autonomy, individuality, and freedom. Speaking to this impulse is the genius of religions such as Taoism. And it is also why we feel so betrayed when we come to see serious signs of immorality in the way the religious texts of Monotheism choose to portray the supposedly all good and all powerful God. These are both inherent elements of human nature. And they are in fundamental conflict. <br />
<br />
There is actual relief and release in letting go of our thoughts, preoccupations, frustrations, and lust for the material things we normally chase. Buddhism offers practical techniques for doing just that. Most people can instinctively feel the attraction of that sort of peace. <br />
<br />
Similarly, we all want to be part of something larger than ourselves. This desire is perhaps taken to its most extreme in the traditions of the Islamic Sufis and the philosophical Hinduism of the Upanishads. There, we are told that the separate self is an illusion. In truth, the self is already eternal, immortal, and one with all things. God is thus the unity of all creation. And we are that unity. You are this. But you are also that. You are all things. And the unity of all things is God. Thus, we discover that <b><i>We. Are. God. </i></b>And the experience of this unity is the ultimate release from rebirth and samsara, enlightenment itself. <br />
<br />
I still can’t tell if that is the ultimate expression of humility, or of pride. But I can see why the idea is so very compelling. And when something like this is experienced in meditation, the idea becomes even more compelling. <br />
<br />
We are all sinful, and righteous, prideful, and humble, autocratic and anarchist, suffering, and free, isolated, and interconnected. To come to know the world's religions is an exercise in knowing ourselves. </div>
<div>
<h2>
Cure for Fundamentalism </h2>
I have often wished that world religions and religious history were offered in our public schools. The separation of church and state is often cited as the reason why this is impossible, although I do not think that this is actually an insurmountable obstacle. After all, religious history is… well… history. <br />
<br />
Either way, I wish we could give our children the window into human nature that the world's religions can offer. <br />
<br />
But there is at least one more essential lesson we can learn from the world's religions. Most people approach the study of religion as an excuse to figure out why their own religion is superior to everyone else's. We don't study other people's beliefs in order to see what they can teach us, but in order to figure out why they are all wrong, and by extension, why we alone are right. Of course this is the apologist’s approach to religious studies. And it was therefore my approach for years. <br />
<br />
But it is ultimately unsustainable. <br />
<br />
Eventually, if we study religious history long enough, we come to see the evolutionary origins of our own beliefs in the parallels they share with the traditions that came before. And once that truth is seen, it cannot be unseen. That does not mean that your tradition, whatever it is, does not have a valid and even useful diagnosis of the human problem. Nor does it mean that it does not have a useful prescription for the solution to that problem. It does not even mean that there can be no God, or that your tradition does not bear a measure of inspiration. But what it does mean, is that there is no one religion that has a monopoly on the truth. The one true religion does not exist. <br />
<br />
No one religion is true. They are all false. And yet, they are also all true. <br />
<br />
If, like me, you believe that the world's religious conflicts are born less from the irrationality of religious “superstitions”, and more from the dogmatic and fundamentalist way in which some religious practitioners tend to approach those beliefs, then a knowledge of religious history is ultimately the cure. <br />
<br />
Given all the hundreds of religious traditions that flourish today, and the thousands that have existed in recorded history, and the millions that have vanished without leaving a textual record, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DxK2JN-z7w">each evolved from the ones that came before them</a>, it would be arrogant to assume that the single tradition we have embraced has the single perfect answer to the human problem, leaving us with nothing to learn from any other tradition. <br />
<br />
There are many possible ways out of the trap of fundamentalism, but I believe that religious literacy is the best. Down this path, one does not simply trade one form of dogmatism for another, but dogmatism is traded for humility and an openness to being taught. When this works, we are no longer just open to being taught from our own tradition, but from them all. We are also more willing to admit the flaws in our own tradition. <br />
<br />
We can trade our dogmatic pride, for teachable humility. <br />
<br />
Is there any wonder that I find great value in knowing and studying the world's religious traditions? And is there any wonder that I find value in teaching these things to others? </div>
jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-75189865138158639422018-08-28T10:29:00.002-07:002018-08-28T10:29:56.508-07:00Something New<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 3pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-size: 26pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre;">Something New</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I haven’t made much use of my blog in many years. I have only posted 2 things since 2014. Where have I been? Well… </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: center;">
<h1 dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 20pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 20pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; white-space: pre;">Beginning at an Ending</span></h1>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 11pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap; white-space: pre;"><img height="300" src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/caiPILsn8P4UmCeQ81XlZIjMpsq5QbTN6Pls2_GrMAUMihkwDXZjhu8JUU6LrXBIVuLxH9eIq10ZlViuEadoVs1fzZI053xwWMM3dV0INNNHw7kuitXWH71hSAki-EmxtdQaXTmX" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0.00rad); border: none; transform: rotate(0.00rad);" width="225" /></span></div>
<b id="docs-internal-guid-33b8c355-7fff-1d78-d807-fa0b03fc27ee" style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">My shelf finally broke in 2009.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In Mormon circles the mental “shelf” is a </span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/2o2csm/nevermo_question_what_is_the_origin_of_the/" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">common analogy</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. Mormons are encouraged to put intellectual questions that challenge their faith on their “intellectual shelf”. The idea is that we can't know everything now, so we should expect a few unanswered questions, which is an eminently reasonable position. But we are also told to not </span><a href="https://www.lds.org/ensign/1975/10/camilla-kimball-lady-of-constant-learning?lang=eng" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">let those unanswered questions challenge our faith</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. Instead, we should put them up on a shelf. At least for now. Then perhaps one day we can take them down and there will be answers. In the meantime, we can have faith.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This seems to work very well until our shelves grow so heavy that they eventually break. This can happen suddenly, spilling an entire lifetime of problems and impossibilities onto our unprepared laps. The result is often traumatic.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It was traumatic for me. It felt like pieces of my life, of my identity, of my core self, had been ripped away, leaving large holes that seemed impossible to ever fill.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Worse, I was one semester away from graduation at BYU. At the time, I was paying my way through graduate school by teaching courses in the </span><a href="https://religion.byu.edu/departments" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Ancient Scripture department</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. My goal was to eventually teach religious studies at BYU full time. That was now obviously impossible. I couldn't bring myself to pretend to believe something that I do not. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I finished that last course, and did not teach religion at BYU again. The next semester I graduated from BYU, thankfully without needing to go through another of the annual “worthiness” interviews which spared me from being </span><a href="http://www.freebyu.org/" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration-skip-ink: none; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">forced to choose</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> between my integrity and receiving the degree I had worked for so many years to achieve. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img height="151" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/0AnCd2jF1lc5Yqn7oph2Oih8HXbxPz3cCx6SrkUboS-lTrjfzFCZr8O2tyDTM5ec5QKmlCVw3yr8VuGgWhS05WSB_qIULsNRiImSOjYcFpdKTMBbdE-RxeBy1i1nuhiNfYoJFxyK" style="border: none; transform: rotate(0rad);" width="221" /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I left Utah, and took a job near my wife’s family in New Mexico, and gave up on my hopes to teach religion at BYU one day. But this left another major hole in my life, because one of my central interests (religious studies) had no obvious outlet.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Despite my lack of belief, I continued to attend the local LDS church, where I taught Gospel Doctrine for several years, and was eventually made the Sunday School President. I informed my bishop at the time of my doubts, but he felt that God wanted me to serve anyway, so long as I could represent the Church when I taught, and not my own opinions. I hope that I did this well. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In 2012 I admitted to my wife that I no longer believed in the LDS church. This was a huge step, since it was something I could barely admit to myself. In January of 2013 I asked to be released from my calling as Sunday school president, and I had quit attending regularly. But this left me with another major hole in my life where the powerfully connected community of my Mormon congregation used to be. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The more involved you are with a given tradition, the more difficult it is to discover that it is not what it claims to be. I was all in, and so my loss of faith nearly destroyed me. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">When I started this blog, the idea was that I would use it to share my thoughts about scriptural interpretation and ancient studies. But those thoughts were mostly directed at Mormon apologetics. With a broken shelf, what could I write? I have little desire to trade my Mormon apologetics for attacks on Mormonism. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: left;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: Arial; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So for the next few years this blog sat… mostly unused. </span></div>
</div>
<h1 dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 20pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-size: 20pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre;">Reconstruction:</span></h1>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img height="135" src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/RxsALpxC0HJPjsuZGRgRd9vNdd_gpBuSBD-5ult58Q_gdNAYViMQ1c9PkZB9GXFcz4IXJT8PyUnIGrQ-8jGmsa0z_1P9inUGSMevfcx4tPknKsqJetPXLHEXkvu7SHsO_BeT8AE_" style="border: none; transform: rotate(0rad);" width="226" /></span><br />
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Sometime near the middle or end of 2013 I visited the </span><a href="https://www.uua.org/" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Unitarian Universalist</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> (UU) </span><a href="https://www.uulosalamos.org/" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">congregation </span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">that meets across the street from the Mormon church I used to attend. The UU service contains these lines: "As Unitarian Universalists, we affirm the inherent worth and dignity of all people. Whoever you are, wherever you are on your life's journey, you are welcome here." The first time I heard those words I cried.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://www.uua.org/action/love" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img height="176" src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/YlQeGCl1SjFHNwcGtIzRe3sZ300ySJunMnvj_c4FsabmUw2QIZfFWo5QTN4fLlEriCT0-ya7X0A9Op7Zms5_laRXHG8NNY9kXMV3Uuo3ygDcd2RXJE0a-rMpmd77tDlNu4jsKoPl" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0.00rad); border: none; transform: rotate(0.00rad);" width="292" /></span></a></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">On December 19th, 2013, marriage equality finally </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_New_Mexico" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">came to New Mexico</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. The daughter of a member of our UU congregation is gay. She was married shortly after. The next Sunday, we all sat in the service, and they read from the Book of Joys and Sorrows". When our pastor read that she had finally been married to her long time partner that week...every person in the congregation stood up and cheered! We cheered! We clapped! We celebrated! </span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And I wept.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I felt what most Mormons call the feelings of the spirit more strongly in that moment than I had ever felt it in any Mormon context, and I knew that I had finally come home to a place where I was welcome, and where I could truly welcome others as they are.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I quickly found my new home and community here, and the holes left by my crashing shelf were filled.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Shortly thereafter I joined a Buddhist philosophy and meditation group that meets at the UU church. </span><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_GFUAydrBGfwWPab5tzAL8GQWF1baK6Fvir_cIFXH8o/edit?usp=sharing" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Buddhism</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> has had a profound impact on my life for the better. These days, my wife claims that I am a more patient and a more loving person. I hope that she is correct.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In 2014 the UU church allowed me to begin teaching a </span><a href="https://sites.google.com/view/comparativereligion/home" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">comparative religions class</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> as part of their adult religious education offerings, and they allowed me to design my own curriculum. At first, I borrowed heavily from the comparative religion class I had team taught with </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_D._Ricks" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Stephen Ricks</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> at BYU titled </span><a href="https://edweek.ce.byu.edu/sites/edweek.ce.byu.edu/files/9_1.pdf" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Temples and Texts”</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. But the class quickly grew in scope far beyond this initial seed. </span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">At first I recorded the audio from the classes for my own use in preparing better lectures on each subject. But soon, people began requesting the recordings for classes that they missed, or so that they could “attend” even though they didn't live nearby. So I began to share the </span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJgjofLeFi_klKi18FtG16Q" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">recordings of my classes on YouTube</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">In 2018 I began teaching a second class at the Church titled </span><a href="https://sites.google.com/view/biblicalscholarshipandliteracy/home" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Biblical Scholarship and Literacy”</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. </span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">It feels as if the last major hole left by my crashing shelf is finally filled.</span></div>
<h1 dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 6pt; margin-top: 20pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-size: 20pt; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre;">The Future of Amateur Scriptorians</span></h1>
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">These days I have no desire to write a blog about Mormonism. But I do want to write again. </span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I wish I could find a way to talk to people about why I love my new Church so much without constantly contrasting it with the LDS Church. But I'm not sure I know how to do that yet. Everything I see is still in contrast with my past. And the contrasts are large. Similarly, I still process the interesting things I discover about temples, texts, traditions, and religions in contrast to what I once believed. And Mormonism is an incredibly interesting topic of study from the perspective of anthropology and religious studies. </span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">So while I have no desire to write primarily about Mormonism, I am sure that the topic will come up.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">But if you are LDS, I would hope that you could stay. I will not be constantly attacking your church and your faith here. That is not what I want to write about.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> Part of the beauty of being a Universalist is that I don't feel like I need to convert my Mormon friends in order to save their souls. I think they can be “saved” where they are. If they are doing well where they are, then I don't need to convince them to believe exactly like me.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I want to write about the things I have been learning and teaching. I find great value in studying and understanding the world's many religious traditions. I believe that the story of where they came from is one of the most </span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DxK2JN-z7w" style="text-decoration: none;"><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: underline; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">fascinating stories ever told</span></a><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">. I am now free to explore that story, without any preconceived notions about what the conclusions must be. Richard Feynman supposedly said that “I would rather have questions that can’t be answered, than answers that can’t be questioned.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> It has been a fascinating journey so far. And there is a lot more ground that we can cover.</span></div>
<b style="font-weight: normal;"><br /></b>
<br />
<div dir="ltr" style="line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 0pt; margin-top: 0pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: black; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Whoever you are, wherever you are on your life's journey, you are welcome here. I hope you will come exploring with me.</span></div>
<br />
----<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: x-small;">[1] <span style="font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">When I initially left Mormonism, there was some motivation for me to try and explain my reasons for leaving, particularly because of the many false assumptions and mischaracterizations of the motivations of those who leave that are so common. At the time I began writing down some of my reasons. It quickly turned into a long catalog of all the things that were on my shelf. And after only getting about a quarter of the way through, it hit 60 pages! If anyone is interested in the reasons my shelf broke, </span><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lw9CM8MQg6bJ2Q7TH1kTWkDaiXlIXEAAGqz0-RGqEHM/edit?usp=sharing" style="text-decoration-line: none;"><span style="color: #1155cc; font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">they can read it</span></a><span style="font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">, in its largely incomplete and unfinished state. But discussing reasons why I do not believe in the LDS Church will not be my focus in this blog. </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">[2] </span><span style="font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This amazing quote is commonly attributed to Richard Feynman, but no firm source is currently known. Richard is known to have made very similar (if somewhat less pithy) statements. </span></span><span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small;"><span style="white-space: pre-wrap;">For example: “You see, one thing is, I can live with doubt, and uncertainty, and not knowing. I think it’s much more interesting to live, not knowing, than to have answers which might be wrong.” <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MmpUWEW6Is">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MmpUWEW6Is</a></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: "arial"; white-space: pre-wrap;">[3] Some future blo</span><span style="font-family: "arial"; white-space: pre-wrap;">g topics I have planned include:</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “Why Study Comparative Religion”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “The Origins of Monotheism”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “Mormonism is Where it’s At!” (a discussion of the unique contributions that a study of Mormonism can have in Comparative Religious Studies)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “The Evolution of God, What the Theory of Evolution Says About the Potential Existence and Nature of God”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “The End of Religious Anxiety”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “Meaning and the Broken Myth”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">* A series of po</span><span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">sts on religion and homosexuality</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “The Philosophy of the Self”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “Lucifer and Isaiah”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “Cosmology and Genesis 1”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “Biblical Inerrancy and Sufficiency”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* “Agency and Free Will”</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: x-small; white-space: pre-wrap;">* ...and there will be many more...</span><br />
<span id="docs-internal-guid-aa66222f-7fff-be7c-a738-a5f6a57623d3"></span><br />
<div>
<span id="docs-internal-guid-aa66222f-7fff-be7c-a738-a5f6a57623d3"><span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></span></div>
<span id="docs-internal-guid-aa66222f-7fff-be7c-a738-a5f6a57623d3">
</span>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "arial"; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br /></span></div>
jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-91233597202093087172015-06-22T09:07:00.003-07:002019-01-20T18:07:11.272-08:00Melchizedek's Priesthood in its Historical Context<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rvwiPceOkfU/VYg0Bat48tI/AAAAAAAAFFE/K2jMtDWZBI8/s1600/Melchizedek%2Bblessing%2BAbraham%2B%2528Walter%2BRane%252C%2B%2528c%2529%2BIRI%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="177" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rvwiPceOkfU/VYg0Bat48tI/AAAAAAAAFFE/K2jMtDWZBI8/s200/Melchizedek%2Bblessing%2BAbraham%2B%2528Walter%2BRane%252C%2B%2528c%2529%2BIRI%2529.jpg" width="200" /></a>Genesis 14 is one of the most fascinating chapters in the entire Bible. Ironically, it simultaneously provides both the best evidence for the historicity of Biblical figures such as Abraham, and for the fallibility of the later Biblical authors who failed to properly understand the historical background of the text.<br />
<br />
Genesis 14 has a remarkably different theme and perspective on Abraham's life that is shown in other chapters. Here, Abraham seems less like a peaceful patriarch, and more like an important tribal warlord. The text also contains the primary reference to the figure of Melchizedek, who would become a favorite figure for the wildest of speculations from later religious leaders and authors.<br />
<br />
The text shows no evidence of having been written by any of the more familiar Biblical sources, J, E, or P. Textually, it is filled with unique vocabulary and grammatical structures. Grammatically, the text itself hints at having been translated from an older Akkadian source, especially in verses 1, 7, 14, and 23. And there are other reasons to suppose that the text is the work of a non-Israelite outsider, (just as one example among many, Abraham is referred to as "Abram the Hebrew", a term most often applied to the family by outsiders).<br />
<br />
The text also seems to hint of an authentic historical setting. For example, the cities mentioned all are authentic names from the correct time period and setting, not the sort of names that later authors would have realistically been able to invent.<br />
<br />
None of this evidence by itself is terribly convincing, however, when taken as a whole, the evidence points to some startling implications for the historicity of Abraham himself. What we may have before us in Genesis 14, could be the next best thing to finding an independent external and contemporary Akkadian reference to the person of Abraham in the writings of Israel's neighbors!<br />
<br />
Perhaps ironically enough, a historically contextual view of Genesis 14 also clearly demonstrate the fallibility of the later Biblical authors, who badly misinterpret this passage, especially as it relates to Melchizedek.<br />
<br />
Melchizedek is presented in the text as an important Canaanite king/priest, the ruler of the Salem city state, presumably Jeru-salem (literally, the city of Salem) before the Israelite conquest. In that context, it would make sense for Abraham, as a tribal war lord, waging a military campaign in Melchizedek's general territory, to assure Melchizedek that Abraham was not setting himself up as a military rival. To that end, Abraham appears to have shared a covenant meal with Melchizedek, and paid homage to Melchizedek as his political superior, giving him a tenth of the spoils of the conflict waged in Melchizedek's territory. As we would expect from a Canaanite city state king, Melchizedek invokes an authentic Canaanite deity in this exchange (El Elyon) that is well attested in both Ugaritic and Phoenician sources. <br />
<br />
Later Biblical authors falsely assume that Abraham would not pay "tithes" to a pagan, and they therefore assume that El Elyon must be another name for Jehovah (this despite the obvious impossibility of turning the king of a Canaanite city state into a worshiper of Jehovah). This same argument is used by the late author of the New Testament book of Hebrews, who argues that Abraham would not be paying tithes to Melchizedek, unless Melchizedek held a priesthood that was both higher, and more ancient than the one that Abraham's descendant Aaron held. This is the foundation of the Book of Hebrew's argument for the existence of a non-Aaronic priesthood that Christ held, that allowed him to function as a "better High Priest" despite his not being a descendant of Aaron. Instead, Christ was thought of as a priest "after the order of Melchizedek." This "better" High priest was able to perform the functions of the Day of Atonement in a better (heavenly) temple, and thereby cleans the world of sin permanently, instead of having to repeat the ritual annually as the High Priests of Aaron had to. Unfortunately for the author of Hebrews, (and for those who cling to Biblical inerrancy) the entire argument is based upon a rather serious and fundamental misunderstanding of the text of Genesis 14!<br />
<br />
This sort of misinterpretation of Genesis 14 is not just found in the Biblical authors. It is present in the writings of later religious figures as well. As just one example, the Mormon prophet Joseph Smith Jr. includes a lengthy discourse on Melchizedek in his Book of Mormon (see Alma 13) that is based upon the same central misunderstanding of the nature of the meeting between Melchizedek and Abraham. That mistake is also found in the Joseph Smith's Translation of Genesis 14, and in Joseph's revelation on the priesthood which states that one order of the priesthood was called the Melchizedek priesthood "because Melchizedek was such a great high priest. Before his day it was called the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God. But out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name, they, the church, in ancient days, called that priesthood after Melchizedek, or the Melchizedek Priesthood" (D&C 107:2-4). This view does not make sense, once one realizes that Melchizedek was a Canaanite king/priest, and not a worshiper of the Israelite god Jehovah at all.<br />
<br />
<h2>
Further reading:</h2>
<br />
<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Introduction-Translation-Notes-Anchor/dp/0385008546/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1434998742&sr=1-1" target="_blank">E. A. Speiser, "Genesis: Introduction, Translation, and Notes (The Anchor Bible, Vol. 1)"</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<h2>
<span style="text-align: center;">Update: </span></h2>
<span style="text-align: center;"><br /></span>
<span style="text-align: center;">YouTube lecture on this subject given at the UU Church of Los Alamos, January 20, 2019</span><br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/I8MMenBA9jU/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/I8MMenBA9jU?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-87108855570189681482014-04-23T10:45:00.002-07:002014-04-23T12:47:26.837-07:00The Religious Search For Truth<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ffnGhOCQC4Y/U1f8GE1m8BI/AAAAAAAADRY/DdBh-K5jens/s1600/download.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ffnGhOCQC4Y/U1f8GE1m8BI/AAAAAAAADRY/DdBh-K5jens/s1600/download.jpg" /></a>I believe that it's important to do our very best to know what will happen to us after this life (if anything happens to us). If we go somewhere, it would seem to be of paramount importance to know where that somewhere will be because eternity is a loooooong time. On the other hand, since there are many contradictory opinions about this subject, I find great solace and comfort in what the Buddha allegedly taught about this subject. He said:<br />
<br />
"If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.’ This is the first assurance [a man who follows the teachings] acquires.<br />
<br />
"But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease — free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.’ This is the second assurance [a man who follows the teachings] acquires." (<a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html" target="_blank">Kalama Sutta</a>, AN 3.65)<br />
<br />
Thus, I have some certainty that if there is another world after this one, I will be blessed, because I do my very best to live a good and a compassionate life here, and because I search for the truth to my very best of my ability. If there is a God that is worthy of my worship, He or She will reward my efforts. If there is no life after this one then my efforts, and my search, are of value in and of themselves, because they help me to live a better life here and now, and because they bring me joy in the search, here and now.<br />
<br />
Either way, the path, the journey, and the search are well worth the effort.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-38089323670419850402014-03-06T10:48:00.004-08:002018-07-14T05:18:12.291-07:00Bureaucratic Dogma vs. the Spirit of God.After reading <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/07/us/from-mormon-women-a-flood-of-requests-and-questions-on-their-role-in-the-church.html" target="_blank">the recent NY Times article about women's roles in the LDS Church</a>, I was reminded of this experience, and I felt that I should share it.<br />
<br />
When I was called as the Sunday School President in my LDS ward a few years ago, the Bishop asked me to pray about my councilors, and then give the names of those people who God brought to my mind to him. I followed this direction, and prayed about who God wanted to be my counselors. One name repeatedly came to mind. This person used to be a seminary teacher, and they had a very very different approach to teaching the Gospel than I did, and they were very opinionated and outspoken about how the gospel should be taught, and wasn't afraid to share their opinions. And their opinions often differed form my own. My approach was very intellectual, while theirs was very emotional. I was sure that their influence would provide a valuable contrast to my thinking. They had been in the ward for many years, while I was new, so they could give valuable advice when it came to choosing new teachers for various classes. They would know the abilities of the people, as well as the needs of the students in a way that I could not. They were absolutely perfect.<br />
<br />
The only problem? The person that the Lord brought to my mind was a woman.<br />
<br />
Of course, I knew that the answer would be no, but I had to present the name anyway, because she was the one I felt like the Lord really wanted doing the job. Predictably, the Bishop wouldn't let me. But I told my Bishop that the Spirit had called her, and that she was the one the Lord wanted.<br />
<br />
There is no real priesthood required to lead the Sunday School, any more than there is to lead the relief society, or the young women. But it didn't matter. Traditionally, Sunday School presidencies were male. And that was that.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, mixed gender presidencies are not allowed in the LDS Church. Apparently they trusted me to run the Sunday School, but they didn't trust me to not end up sleeping with a woman if she was in a presidency with me, even if the woman God wanted was old enough to be my mother.<br />
<br />
Again, this was all as I expected, and when the name was rejected, I immediately handed in my runner up, acceptably male, name. And the presidency worked relatively well I think, we accomplished many things, and made the ward a better place. But I often wondered how much more good we might have been able to accomplish if the will of God had actually been carried out.<br />
<br />
I often remember and think about this moment. It seems important somehow. That moment when bureaucratic dogma took precedence over revelation and The Spirit of God.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-23687095872559662412012-10-19T13:24:00.001-07:002012-10-22T13:04:30.428-07:00BSA Ban on Homosexuality is Antithetical to LDS Doctrine<br />
The Boy Scouts of America's policy with regard to homosexuals is spelled out as follows: “While the BSA does not proactively inquire about the sexual orientation of employees, volunteers, or members, we do not grant membership to individuals who are open or avowed homosexuals.” (see <a href="http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2012/06/07/boy-scouts-of-america-clarifies-its-membership-policy/">http://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2012/06/07/boy-scouts-of-america-clarifies-its-membership-policy/</a>)<br />
<br />
Here are two good doctrinal reasons why members of the LDS Church should believe that the Scout's policy with regard to homosexuality is wrong:<br />
<br />
1. According to the teachings of Jesus Christ, we are to "eat" and "associate" with sinners. Therefore it is wrong to exclude people from the BSA (the young men's activity arm of the Church) for homosexuality, even if it is a sin (which it need not be, see point 2).<br />
2. According to LDS doctrine, open admission of homosexuality (in the sense of being attracted to the same gender, much as heterosexuality means being attracted to the opposite gender), without action upon those tendencies, is not a sin (as taught by Elder Oaks). Therefore it is wrong for the BSA to exclude people for this non-sinful action in and of itself (as they currently do).<br />
<br />
While I support their right, as a private organization, to set their own rules of association and membership, I also support my right to complain about their rules when those rules are immoral, or otherwise dangerous or damaging. As they are in this case.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-19867442023956777032011-08-09T10:51:00.000-07:002016-01-14T05:47:42.413-08:00Book Review, Stephen Hawking, The Grand DesignI couldn't really decide which of my blogs to post this review on, my religion blog, or my science/technology blog. After all, this book is an interesting amalgamation of both. My end conclusion was to post my review over there, and link to it from here.
<br />
<br />
So, for those that are interested, here's the review:<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<a href="http://jlcarroll.blogspot.com/2011/08/book-review-stephen-hawking-grand.html">http://jlcarroll.blogspot.com/2011/08/book-review-stephen-hawking-grand.html</a></div>
jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-3392523277085255382011-07-13T09:49:00.000-07:002011-07-13T10:43:37.080-07:00Transhumanism and Satan's PlanI recently read an interesting <a href="http://bookofmormonnotes.wordpress.com/2011/07/01/mormon-lds-battleground-pre-earth-life-and-this-earth-life-gods-plan-of-salvation-vs-satans-plan-of-making-men-be-as-gods-and-transhumanism-by-grego/">blog post</a> equating the goals of transhumanism with those of Satan's plan. I found this article to be interesting, and reasonably well thought out, even though I disagree with it rather profoundly.<br /><br />After reading that article, I figured that his thoughts deserved some form of rebuttal, and after writing that rebuttal, I decided that it had value in its own right, and should therefore be posted.<br /><br /><div>This is the comment I posted to <a href="http://bookofmormonnotes.wordpress.com/2011/07/01/mormon-lds-battleground-pre-earth-life-and-this-earth-life-gods-plan-of-salvation-vs-satans-plan-of-making-men-be-as-gods-and-transhumanism-by-grego/">his blog</a> (we will have to wait and see if it is approved or not):<br /><br />BEGIN:<br /><br />I believe that the central problem here is a misunderstanding of the doctrine of the proper balance between works and grace.<br /><br />I have faith that death is part of God’s plan, and that God will eventually grant me immortality as a gift of grace, in fact, He will give this gift to all, and all will be saved (in this sense) but the Sons of Perdition (see D&C 76:43). If I am worthy, and do “all that I can do” to live a life of goodness, then I will also be granted eternal life, and given the power to become like God through the grace of Christ’s infinite atonement.<br /><br />On the other hand, this faith doesn’t lead me to go out and step in front of a buss, nor does it lead me to refuse potential medical cures. When I get sick, I get a blessing, and I go to the doctor. Nor would it lead me to refuse medical means for moderate life extension, or even for radical life extension for that matter. Methuselah didn’t violate God’s plan by living for a long time, and neither did the three Nephites. If I too want to live and serve in His kingdom until He comes, that does not mean that I am following Lucifer’s plan. The fact that one group seem to have achieved their long lives from faith while transhumanists want to receive it through works, technology, and science does not mean that one is inherently good while the other is inherently evil. Nor is it fair to equate Lucifer’s plan of exaltation for all without any testing with transhumanists plan for immortality and a better life for all. Indeed, the transhumanist vision looks more like God’s plan for ALL his children (again read D&C 76:43) than it looks like Lucifer’s plan.<br /><br />Pure religion is to feed the hungry, cloth the naked, serve those in need, heal the sick, and create a better world for all. As James so eloquently teaches us, this is about granting real, literal, physical, earthly, temporal aid. The sort of aid that in the past has best been provided through advances in technology. That last is nothing but a historically undeniable fact, and I have blogged about it extensively <a href="http://jlcarroll.blogspot.com/2011/05/welcome-to-future-why-i-am-optimist.html">here</a> and <a href="http://jlcarroll.blogspot.com/2011/06/gdp-going-further-back-optimism-again.html">here</a>. Technology leads to increased prosperity, and thus to a reduction in poverty, and thus to James’ “pure religion.” Of course we must also teach the gospel, but that priority does not absolve us from providing James’ pure religion. Doing this is a priority of our religious conviction. In other words, we are quite literally commanded to TRY to build heaven on earth as best we can, while at the same time waiting for God’s kingdom to come, and his will do be done, on earth as it is in heaven. We are commanded to strive to build Zion, through works as well as through faith.<br /><br />A Luddite interpretation of our religion essentially denies its most fundamental aspect, charity, love, and compassion for all.<br /><br />If the Telestial kingdom is really so much better than this world, and if ALL God’s children will eventually inherit that glory or greater, and we are commanded to seek by works that which we expect to be given by grace and faith, then a desire for the goals of transhumanism (and even those of the singularity) is nothing more than the logical extension of the doctrine of works and grace.<br /></div>jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-86852177625333426762010-10-18T15:52:00.000-07:002010-10-18T16:38:03.825-07:00Life<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcarroll/sets/72157624969917448/with/4335127952/">Science</a> opens our eyes to what. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcarroll/4335127952/" title="Red Needle by James L. Carroll, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4018/4335127952_07c4689a1c.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Red Needle" /></a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcarroll/sets/72157624845302045/">Religion</a> is a quest to understand why. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcarroll/sets/72157624845302045/" title="The End of the Road by James L. Carroll, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4092/4977514157_14b27afc2d.jpg" width="372" height="500" alt="The End of the Road" /></a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcarroll/sets/72157625046180816/">Art</a> finds beauty along the way. <br /><br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcarroll/sets/72157625046180816/" title="Hearth Fires by James L. Carroll, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4914116497_5f13abae8d.jpg" width="500" height="298" alt="Hearth Fires" /></a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcarroll/sets/72157624969853954/">Love</a> puts another's hand in ours to share in our journey.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcarroll/sets/72157624969853954/" title="Kissing With Your Eyes by James L. Carroll, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4091/4977638444_f9b29e8b98.jpg" width="386" height="500" alt="Kissing With Your Eyes" /></a>jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-31717559848686597082010-09-02T12:00:00.000-07:002010-09-02T12:01:16.627-07:00Evangelicals, Mormons, and Glenn BeckHere are two different articles, both from evangelicals on the relationship between Mormons and Evangelicals with regard to Glenn Beck. Both were posted on the same news network, an outlet for evangelical political "news."<br /><br />In the first, <a href="http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=1141100">an opinion piece by Russell Moore</a>, the end of the world is coming because Evangelicals are giving up their religious foundations to stand up with Glenn Beck:<br /><br />The second opinion piece titled "<a href="http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=1144072">Evangelicals and Glenn Beck</a>" by Dr. Jim Garlow describes how Mormons and Evangelicals can work together. He said "as evangelicals and Mormons, we are not theological brothers and sisters. But we are friends and neighbors. And on that basis we work [together]."<br /><br />I leave it to my esteemed readers to compare the two and see which seems to make the most coherent argument.<br /><br />As a Mormon, I believe that Jim Garlow's quote goes both ways. His quote almost exactly expresses how I see our relationship with Evangelicals, they may not be my theological brothers and sisters, but if we are not "theological brothers and sisters" surely we are theological cousins. I can work together with them, and hope that they can work together with me to bring about our shared goals (which are many).jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-64751237389466952482010-08-16T12:46:00.001-07:002010-08-16T12:51:11.389-07:00Religious Freedom, 9/11, and a Muslim MosqueFreedom, (and religious freedom especially) was what was attacked on 9/11, and it would be a shame if we succumb to religious intolerance ourselves within the very shadow of this vicious attack. If Christians don't like a Muslim mosque on the location, then build a Church themselves, and get out and convert the Muslims, that is how one disagrees in a free and open society. <br /><br />I am a Christian and a conservative to boot, but on this particular issue I appear to depart from the majority of my party. I feel shocked to find myself in agreement with President Obama (someone I almost NEVER agree with), but Muslims have the legal right to build on private property they own (what he said) but I question the wisdom of their choosing that spot (also what he said). They have the right, but I question their choice. Almost exactly what Obama said..... (wow).<br /><br />Although I question the wisdom of their choice of locations, if you believe in freedom, and in religious freedom especially, you have to give all people the same freedoms you yourself want. If you want the freedom to build Christian churches wherever you want (which I do), then you MUST grant the right to build Mosques wherever they want, even if they are being stupid about their choice. <br /><br />I find it fascinating to see organizations like AFA who so often complain about religious persecution of Christians being the first ones to take up the banner against the Muslim mosque. Freedom means freedom, even for people you disagree with (and those who know me know that I disagree with Muslim ideology strenuously and vocally). But freedom is freedom, it has consequences, like having a Mosque where nearly any sane person knows one shouldn't be, but the price of those consequences is worth paying.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-45363115116755387942010-08-11T09:58:00.000-07:002010-08-11T10:47:58.611-07:00Money, Things, Experiences, and HappinessI recently read an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/business/08consume.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&ref=general&src=me"> article in the N. Y. Times</a> about money and happiness that drastically changed my world view about money, possessions and happiness. These topics are clearly related to several important gospel principles, so I thought that I would share some thoughts about the article, and the gospel implications of these ideas. <br /><br />In the Church, we have several common platitudes about money, such as <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/1_tim/6/10#10">the love of money is "the root of all evil,"</a> or that "money can't make you happy." I believe that these statements are only partly true, and the issues revolve around what we mean by "money." <br /><br />It has often been said that time is money. There is a large amount of truth to this, and no one would argue that time (properly spent) can't make us happy. I believe that it is actually THINGS (or the pursuit of material possessions) that can't make us happy. On the other hand, relationships can and do make one happy. We can clearly spend our time on either acquiring possessions, or on building relationships. One can make us happy, while the other can not.<br /><br />The article claims that studies have shown that while there is no correlation between wealth (the amount of money we have) and happiness, there is a correlation between spending habits and happiness. Most in the world would say that if money isn't making you happy, then you don't have enough of it. However, if the article is correct, then this would lead to the astonishing conclusion that if money isn't making you happy, then you aren't spending it right! You likely have enough money for your needs (and for your happiness) if you just spent it right. <br /><br />If we spend our time/money acquiring things that we never use because we are too busy making money to buy more things, then money/time will not make us happy. On the other hand, if we spend our time/money making our relationships better then money can make us happy. Thus, the difference between those who are happy and those who are not is all about their priorities.<br /><br />How does one spend money on relationships rather than on possessions? The real question is how we spend our time (remember, time is money). One telling example in the article is of a couple who were house shopping, and who had the choice between buying a larger/nicer home, or buying a home next to an attractive hiking trail. The article claims that studies have shown that we become "used" to our physical environment, and that after time, changes in the environment (larger home etc) have no measurable impact oh happiness. On the other hand, changes in behavior (especially relationship building behavior such as going on long walks with your spouse) do make us happy. Thus, the couple opted for the simpler home next to the hiking trail, and have made use of the train consistently ever since. They believe that this choice has directly lead to their being happier. <br /><br />The article claims that studies have shown that people who spend their money on "conspicuous consumption" are not happy, while people who spend their money on "fishing poles," "sports equipment," "back yard grills," or "family vacations" do tend to be happier, because, fundamentally, they are spending their money on <i>experiences</i> (or things that can be used to build experiences) and not on <i>possessions</i>. Luckily, these experience building things are not the most expensive items in our budget. The suggestion is that if we want to be happier, perhaps we should buy a smaller car, and go on a vacation, or buy cheaper clothes and save for a backyard grill, and then spend time with our family hanging out in the back yard, or perhaps we should get a less well paying job that provides us with more time to spend at home with our family. <br /><br />I cannot recommend the N. Y. Times article enough. However, there is a doctrinal reason for these observations. The article's advice (which seems so revolutionary to the world) has been the advice of the Church for years, and it is based on several doctrinal principles: <br /><br />God's work and glory is to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of his Children (<a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/moses/1/39#39">Moses 1:39</a>). His plan revolves around individuals, not around things. Money and time both have value, but only when they are spent upon people, relationships, and building the kingdom rather than spending money on things. "Wherefore, do not spend money for that which is of no worth, nor your labor for that which cannot satisfy." (<a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/9/51#51">2 Ne. 9:51</a>).<br /><br />The purpose of wealth (money) is specified in <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/deut/8/18#18">Deuteronomy 8:18</a>, where the Lord tells us that when we become rich we should "remember the Lord thy God: for it is he that giveth thee power to get wealth, that he may establish his covenant which he sware unto thy fathers." This is similar to what Jacob famously said "But before ye seek for riches, seek ye for the kingdom of God. And fter ye have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye seek them; and ye will seek them for the intent to do good—to lothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted" (<a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/jacob/2/13,17-19#13">Jacob 2:18-19</a>).<br /><br />See also <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/26/25,31#25">2 Ne. 26:31</a>, <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/9/50-51#50">2 Ne. 9:50-51</a>.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-90945469131551243962009-11-05T08:32:00.000-08:002009-11-05T09:11:36.961-08:00Wrestling Before the Lord ContinuedContinued from: <a href="http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2009/10/summary-of-my-sperry-presentation.html">http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2009/10/summary-of-my-sperry-presentation.html</a><div><br /></div><div>Here is a summary of the similarities between Jacob and Enos's wrestling:</div><div><br /></div><div style="text-align: auto;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: medium;"><table class="MsoTableGrid" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" style="margin-left:.25in;border-collapse:collapse;border:none;mso-border-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor:text1;mso-yfti-tbllook:1184;mso-padding-alt: 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <tbody><tr style="mso-yfti-irow:0;mso-yfti-firstrow:yes"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Jacob<o:p></o:p></b></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-left:none;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Enos<o:p></o:p></b></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:1"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Struggled and wrestled<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Wrestled and struggled<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:2"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Peniel<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Before God<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:3"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">All night, into the day<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">All day, into the night<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:4"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Estranged brothers/nations (Jacob and Esau)<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Estranged brothers/nations (Nephi/Laban)<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:5"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;tab-stops:134.1pt">Esau wanted to kill Jacob<span style="mso-tab-count: 1"> </span><o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Laman and Lemuel wanted to kill Nephi<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:6"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal;tab-stops:134.1pt">Jacob fled into the wilderness to escape<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Nephites fled into the wilderness to escape<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:7"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Esau is a cunning hunter, with skill in the bow (Gen. 27:1-5)<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Lamanites are hunters, with skill in the bow (Enos 1:20), Enos went to “hunt”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:8"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Records preserved and “sealed” up in an earthen vessel for a long time recording Esau’s loss of the birthright (Jasher 56:55-57).<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Preserved and “sealed” records coming forth to convert the Lamanites.<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:9"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Reconciliation with God and man<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Reconciliation with God and man<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:10"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Blessed<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">“Thou shalt be blessed”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:11"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">“Life is preserved”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">“the Lord God would preserve a record”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:12"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Entered the promised land<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Soul did “rest”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:13"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Seeing Esau like seeing the “face of God.”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">Then shall he “see His [God’s] face”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr> <tr style="mso-yfti-irow:14;mso-yfti-lastrow:yes"> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border:solid black 1.0pt; mso-border-themecolor:text1;border-top:none;mso-border-top-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">“and thou wast pleased with me”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> <td width="319" valign="top" style="width:239.4pt;border-top:none;border-left: none;border-bottom:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-bottom-themecolor:text1; border-right:solid black 1.0pt;mso-border-right-themecolor:text1;mso-border-top-alt: solid black .5pt;mso-border-top-themecolor:text1;mso-border-left-alt:solid black .5pt; mso-border-left-themecolor:text1;mso-border-alt:solid black .5pt;mso-border-themecolor: text1;padding:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt"> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height: normal">“see his face with pleasure”<o:p></o:p></p> </td> </tr></tbody></table></span></div><div style="text-align: auto;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-size: medium; "><br /></span></div><div>Let me know if you can think of any that I missed.</div>jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-69076754121181622682009-10-06T14:42:00.001-07:002009-11-05T14:09:42.012-08:00A Summary of my Sperry Presentation, Wrestling Before the Lord<span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:100%;" ><div>I will be presenting at the Sperry Symposium this year. A summary of my presentation follows:</div><div><br /></div>Enos compared his experience of reconciliation with God to that of Jacob in the Old Testament. Why would Enos make this particular comparison and what lessons did he intend for us to learn from it? By better understanding the context of the Jacob story, particularly its intended lessons, we can better understand what Enos wanted us to learn from the comparison.<br /><br />Although there are many unanswered questions in the Jacob story, the central theme is one of intense effort rewarded by blessings and reconciliation. Jacob’s entire life was a wrestle, and his story is one of intense effort, hardship, and eventual reward and reconciliation. He wrestled with his brother Esau from the womb. His name means supplanter (literally “heal catcher”). Jacob’s competition with his brother Esau continued into adolescence and involved the mess of pottage and Jacob’s famous deception of and blessing by his father. The competition was so bitter that Esau desired to end Jacob’s life. He had to flee his home and family to preserve his life. Jacob was deceived by Laban in the matter of his marriage. He was forced to serve him for fourteen years for his wives. Jacob returned home and wrestled with a mysterious messenger at the fords of Jabbok. He wrestled with this messenger all night long. Finally the messenger blessed Jacob and changed his name to Israel because he had “prevailed.” Jacob then forded the river Jabbok and named the place Peniel (face of God). There he met Esau, who ran and “embraced” and kissed him and they wept. There they were reconciled and Jacob said, “if now I have found grace in thy sight, then receive my present at my hand: for therefore I have seen thy face, as though I had seen the face of God, and thou wast pleased with me.”<br /><br />There are many unanswered questions that remain about Jacob’s story, especially regarding the nature of the messenger and Jacob’s wrestling. For example: who was the messenger, what is the nature of the wrestling, and what is the nature of the blessing given? The text intentionally leaves many of these questions unanswered, and we will not attempt to answer them all here. Nevertheless, the central message of the story is clear. Jacob’s entire life was a wrestle for the blessings of God. Wrestling is one of the most physically demanding activities, and the length of Jacob’s wrestle indicated the intense effort he expended in order to overcome and receive the promised blessings.<br /><br />The effort of the first part of this story stands in opposition to the reconciliation that followed. In Gen 32 Jacob wrestled with a messenger, in Gen. 33 he embraced Esau, in Gen 32 he called the place Peniel (face of God) in Gen 33 he says that seeing the face of Esau is like seeing the face of God. The Hebrew word for “wrestle” is an intentional word play on the Hebrew word for “embrace” as Peniel forms a word play for seeing the face of God which followed. Thus Jacob’s intense effort (his wrestling) eventually resulted in reconciliation with his brother which is a type of his (and our) reconciliation with the Lord, the greatest of blessings offered in mortality. This teaches us that sometimes the greatest of the Lord’s blessings require intense effort on our part if we are to receive them. Furthermore, God will help us along our journey as he helped Jacob along his journey.<br /><br />Several comparisons between Jacob's wrestling and temple imagery have been made. Some have suggested that Jacob did not wrestle at all, but actually "embraced" the mysterious messenger. Given the context and intended moral of the story, (effort preceding reconciliation) it seemed that the wrestling must have been more than a simple embrace. On the other hand, temple imagery can still be found in the story, perhaps made even more intense by the idea that this "wrestle" is resolved into an "embrace" which follows, and which represents the concepts of reconciliation, forgiveness, and atonement so beautifully.<br /><br />In the Book of Mormon, Enos used many images from the Jacob story in his own account. He too “wrestled” “before God” (in Hebrew this would likely have literally read “to the face of God” or l-Peniel, a reference to the place where Jacob wrestled the messenger). His wrestle lasted all day and into the night as Jacob's lasted all night and into the day. Finally, he too was reconciled with God, finding forgiveness for his sins and personal assurance that his course in life was agreeable to God’s will. It was these themes of effort and reconciliation that Enos likely intended to convey through his comparison between his own experiences and the Jacob story.</span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;font-size:medium;" ><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse;font-size:medium;" >continued in <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate;font-family:Georgia,serif;font-size:16px;" ><a href="http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2009/11/wrestling-before-lord-continued.html">http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2009/11/wrestling-before-lord-continued.html</a></span></span></span></div>jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-62764074978802752932009-06-20T12:30:00.001-07:002017-07-12T09:18:42.798-07:00The Language of Symbolism Continued<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<br />
Continued from: <a href="http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2009/06/language-of-symbolsm.html">The Language of Symbolism</a><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<o:p> </o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
Another misconception about symbolism that I commonly see goes something like: “Your religion / churches / buildings / temples use symbols that were also used by pagans, so you are worshiping the devil.” I have already pointed out the most significant problem with this logic, namely that symbols have no inherent meaning outside their power to communicate ideas. As such, a symbol only means what the hearer thinks it means, and so, if its user doesn’t think it represents a Pagan idea, then for that user, it doesn’t. However, there is another important issue at work here, and that is that it is apparently standard operating procedure for God to use the images of the culture around His covenant people in order to teach them His eternal truths. One way to express this idea would be to say that God speaks to us “according to our own language and understanding” (see <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/31/3#3">2 Ne. 31:3</a>; <a href="http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/1/24#24">D&C 1:24</a>).<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: left;">
Let me give several illustrative examples. When the Israelites came out of Egypt, God commanded Moses to construct an "ark." The Ark of the Covenant was basically a portable representation of the throne of God carried by the priests on poles (see Figure 1).<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: left;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0ugK0aHaI/AAAAAAAAASs/-BWySduVVxQ/s1600-h/ark.JPG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5349483062580878754" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0ugK0aHaI/AAAAAAAAASs/-BWySduVVxQ/s320/ark.JPG" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 214px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
Figure 1: Israelite "Ark of the Covenant"<br />
</div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: left;">
The Egyptians of the time built very similar "portable shrines" and placed them in the holy of holies of their temples. These Egyptian shrines were carried on poles by priests like the ark; they were covered by cloths when carried, like the ark; and like the ark, they had a representation of the God's throne. Unlike the Israelite version, the Egyptian arks actually contained a statue of the deity (see Figure 2). The Egyptian versions were fashioned like boats, because the Egyptians believed that the sky was blue because it was made out of water. The idea was to represent the concept that the throne of the deity moves through the heavens, and that their god was a king of the heavens.</div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: left;">
<a href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0u2Fx17pI/AAAAAAAAAS0/nWWBlx6jSLs/s1600-h/egyptian+ark.JPG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5349483439185063570" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0u2Fx17pI/AAAAAAAAAS0/nWWBlx6jSLs/s320/egyptian+ark.JPG" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 236px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
Figure 2: Egytpian parallels to the Ark of the Covenant</div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
Both the similarities and the differences are important for understanding the symbols of the Ark of the Covenant. Since symbolism is a language, the right approach is to ask, "what would the Israelites, who just came out from Egypt understand by the symbolism of the Ark." Clearly, they would have recognized it as a portalbe throne for a king similar to those used in Egypt and Mesopotamia:</div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: left;">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0u_nnE25I/AAAAAAAAAS8/NJNxnte4CSw/s1600-h/Mvc_010s.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5349483602885532562" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0u_nnE25I/AAAAAAAAAS8/NJNxnte4CSw/s320/Mvc_010s.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 240px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align: center;">
Figure 3: A Kings throne guarded by Cherubim from Messopotamia<br />
</div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
Further, the Israelites would have understood the idea that God is a heavenly king. Since the throne was the seat of judgement for earthly kings, they would have understood the ark as a representation of the place of God's merciful judgment, and so it was called the "mercy seat." <br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
There are many more instances where God used Pagan symbolism to teach His eternal truths to the Israelites. For example, the Temple of Solomon looks like many of the Pagan temples that surrounded it. </div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<br />
This drawing of the temple at Tainat could be accidentally confused with Solomon's if you don't look closely. </div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0yRJW_AjI/AAAAAAAAATM/imXWH39omNo/s1600-h/composit.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5349487202537505330" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0yRJW_AjI/AAAAAAAAATM/imXWH39omNo/s320/composit.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 211px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
And there are many other examples, for example, this Pagan temple from Arabia:</div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0xiPS4MbI/AAAAAAAAATE/M2xBMiAbidE/s1600-h/Bar%27an.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5349486396677042610" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0xiPS4MbI/AAAAAAAAATE/M2xBMiAbidE/s320/Bar'an.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 232px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
And this one from Syria, which is perhaps the closest Solomonic Parallel [1]:</div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0zuN8aO6I/AAAAAAAAATU/XKPK5_mKGa4/s1600-h/%27ain+dara.JPG"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5349488801496054690" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0zuN8aO6I/AAAAAAAAATU/XKPK5_mKGa4/s320/'ain+dara.JPG" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 318px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0z59wPMWI/AAAAAAAAATc/TxBeJTVrMMc/s1600-h/enter.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5349489003308462434" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/Sj0z59wPMWI/AAAAAAAAATc/TxBeJTVrMMc/s320/enter.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; display: block; height: 201px; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; width: 320px;" /></a></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
This "similarity" was not restricted to the architecture of the Israelite temples, but extended to their rituals as well. The Day of Atonement ritual has many similarities to Babylonian year rituals, complete with the goat killed and cast out (although the Babylonians only used a single goat, which they both killed and cast out) [2].<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
So what are we to make of these similarities? If we were to take the approach taken by many critics of LDS temples, we would have to conclude that the Israelites were worshiping the devil. Clearly they are using pagan imagery, even "occult" imagery in their worship of God!<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
However, there could be many other explanations for the similarities between pagan traditions and the Israelite temples. A more balanced approach might see fragments of truth left over in the Pagan practices and worship, or one might see Satan imitating truth in the pagan traditions, or one might see God teaching the Israelites eternal truths using the symbolic language that they understood given their cultural contact with the pagans around them.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
Symbolism is a language. As such, the definitions of its "words" depend on how the people being spoken too would view the image or symbol. The Israelites contact with the pagans which surrounded them would have given the symbolic "words" meaning, but the message, the way those words were combined to teach eternal truths was still inspired despite the pagan (and even "occult" whatever that might mean) nature of some of the individual elements.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
Clearly the same sort of balanced approach should be applied when analyzing similarities between LDS temples and the religious and symbolic systems that surrounded Joseph Smith when the Endowment was revealed to him, or which surrounded Brigham Young when the design for the Salt Lake Temple was revealed to him.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
<span style="font-family: "fournier mt"; font-size: 130%;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">References:</span></span></div>
<hr />
<br />
<div class="MsoNoSpacing">
[1] "The New 'Ain Dara Temple: Closest Solomonic Parallel," by John Monson, in <i>Biblical Archaeology Review</i>, Vol. 26, No. 3 [May/June 2000]. The article says that the 'Ain Dara temple "has far more in common with the Jerusalem Temple described in the Book of Kings than any other known building" (p. 20). Its archaeology dates it to the period just preceding (Phase 1) Solomon's Temple, contemporary with Solomon's Temple (Phase 2) and just after (Phase 3). It is far better preserved than Tainat, and "is the most significant parallel to Solomon's Temple ever discovered (p. 22).</div>
[2] James L. Carroll "An Expanded View of the Israelite Scapegoat" in <u>Temples and Ritual in Antiquity</u>, presented by the BYU Religious Studies Center and SANE's Studia Antiqua, 2008.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-12911224476199937472009-06-18T11:56:00.000-07:002009-09-22T15:59:07.076-07:00The Language of SymbolsmI am always amused when people take the position: "you are actually worshipping the Devil, you don't know it, but you are doing it on accident, if you only knew what your own symbols meant, then you would understand that you are worshipping the Devil. I know YOU don't think that the symbols are about the Devil, but they are, and by using them you are actually accidentally worshipping the Devil." For one example of this ridiculous approach applied to the Mormons see:<br /><div class="im"><br /><a href="http://vigilantcitizen.com/?p=986" target="_blank">http://vigilantcitizen.com/?p=<wbr>986</a><br /><br /></div>The same page takes a similar approach with a lot of images/symbols for the monuments of many groups. Mormons typically respond to this sort of garbabe by pointing out instances where symbols like the pentagram have anciently been used to represent good things, not to represent evil, and that its modern use as a symbol of evil is relatively new (see <a href="http://en.fairmormon.org/Symbols_on_the_Nauvoo_Temple/Inverted_Stars_on_LDS_Temples">here</a> and <a href="http://www.templestudy.com/2008/02/04/the-ancient-pentagram-a-christian-symbol/">here</a>). For example the following is a great example of the pentagram (even with the point downward) used as a symbol of Christ. It is an icon of the transfiguration by Andrei Rublev in 1405, and now located in the Moscow Annunciation Cathedral (in Moscow Kremlin):<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/SjqOWG8DX2I/AAAAAAAAASk/nua1kf2Zn_k/s1600-h/transfiguration_icon_andrew_rublyov_01.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 237px; height: 320px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_veb4vkaQQVQ/SjqOWG8DX2I/AAAAAAAAASk/nua1kf2Zn_k/s320/transfiguration_icon_andrew_rublyov_01.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5348744017926643554" border="0" /></a>However, such evidence makes no difference to people who see the Devil everywhere, because they just see any early Christian use of the pentagram as due to those early Christians having been deceived (much in the same way that they see Mormons as having been deceived). Thus any early Christians who might have used the pentagram were worshipping the Devil too. Thus Mormons and their critics tend to talk past each other on this issue.<br /><br />The problem is that people don't understand that symbolism is a language, and the real question should not be "what does a symbol mean" but should be, "what does a symbol mean to those who used it when they used it." For example, a black cat symbolized witchcraft if you happen to have lived in Salem Mass..., on the other hand, if you lived in ancient Egypt, the black cat symbolized divinity.... This sort of confusion happens because symbolism is a language, with different vocabularies and different interpretations for different people at different times. You wouldn't expect all words to have the same meaning in Spanish that they do in English, so why should they in symbolism? So to accuse an English speaker of worshipping the Devil because of a confusion between the meaning of a word between English and Spanish would be silly. But when you begin to believe that Satan is behind it all, and that it is all some big conspiracy, then you believe that black cats mean witchcraft in Ancient Egypt too, and the Egyptians who saw black cats as symbols of divinity were just worshipping the devil, and didn't know it. After all, such people often think that all Pagans were worshipping the Devil (even when they didn't believe in him), so why not the Egyptians?<br /><br />But my understanding (and C.S.Lewis's understanding too) is that you can't worship the Devil on accident. Any good intentioned worship of the Devil IS worship of Christ, and any bad intentioned worship of Christ IS worship of the Devil (see CS Lewis' conclusion to the Narnia series, "The Last Battle" for his take on this idea). On this point I must agree with Lewis. Thus, Mormons are only worshipping the Devil with their pentagrams IF that is what THEY think the pentagram means... because they can't be "accidentally" worshipping the devil, it doesn't work that way. All that is good comes from Christ, and all that is evil comes from the Devil (see Moroni 7:5-19).<br /><br />Thus:<br /><br />1. symbolism is flexible,<br /><br />2. symbolism's meaning is only defined in the context of what someone, sometime thought it meant,<br /><br />and<br /><br />3. worship of God or the Devil must be intentional, some hidden meaning behind symbols can't cause you to somehow accidentally worship the Devil.<br /><br /><a href="http://amateurscriptorians.blogspot.com/2009/06/language-of-symbolism-continued.html">To be continued.....</a>jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-26958272623177418612009-04-01T12:04:00.000-07:002009-06-09T08:59:02.038-07:00Sacred Silence, Temple Types, a Changing World, and Big LoveI hate to bring this (Big Love) up again, but I believe that the world's response to this is telling. For those of you who don't know what happened, HBO's TV show, "Big Love" portrayed the LDS Endowment in one of their episodes, which started a large controversy on the web, and greatly offended many members of the LDS Church.<br /><br />Many of them can't understand what we are so upset about the portrayal of the endowment. One person said in effect: "there are many more offensive parts to the show than this, so why all the commotion? The show openly mocks Church leaders... why don't Mormons care about that, but are so upset about the Endowment? ... after all, they portrayed the endowment with 'reverence' and 'respect.'" It was those last two words that I found so interesting. One member responded to this line of reasoning: "that is like saying that you slept with my wife, but you treated her with all the reverence and respect that she deserved." Clearly these people are talking past each other, and as a community, we seem to no longer share a common vocabulary/understanding with which to communicate these ideas effectively. Especially lacking is a common understanding of the ideas of sacred silence and sacred space.<br /><br />There was a time when the world would have understand this idea of sacred silence. What makes something sacred? When evaluating the ancient world's use of the sacred, things/places/time are usually sacralized by exclusion and inclusion, you exclude the unclean, and you include sacred events that happened on/near the place/time/object, as well as sacred acts (such as dedication rituals) performed over/near/on the place/time/object. This concept has been largely forgotten I think. Especially by most Western Christian churches. Most of them have sacred rituals, but portraying them would not be offensive if they were done with "respect" or "reverence." What<br />Baptist would complain about a tv show portraying their sacrament or baptism rituals? Because the world has forgotten sacralization through exclusion by sacred silence, they no longer understand us, since we are one of the very few religions that still practices this once common ancient tradition.<br /><br />I thought this non-member's analysis was telling, he was one of the very few non-members that really got it I thought:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-blankenship/ibig-lovei-wife-watch-rou_b_175861.html">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-blankenship/ibig-lovei-wife-watch-rou_b_175861.html<br /></a><br />It was fascinating to listen to a non-member (and fan of the show) respectfully come to grips with the use of the sacred for entertainment, and with the ideas of sacred silence that he doesn't share, but that he finally came to understand because of the issues raised by the show. As is almost always the case, these things tend to end up doing more good than harm. This seems to be the case yet again.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-37609271823319981052009-02-20T11:28:00.001-08:002010-05-03T08:59:30.229-07:00Rough Stone Rolling Review<a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/236609.Joseph_Smith_Rough_Stone_Rolling?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_review" style="float: left; padding-right: 20px;"><img alt="Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling" src="http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1172985628m/236609.jpg" border="0" /></a> <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/236609.Joseph_Smith_Rough_Stone_Rolling?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_review">Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling</a> by <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/138368.Richard_L_Bushman">Richard L. Bushman</a><br /><br /><br /> <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2634629?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_review"><h3>My review</h3></a><br /> rating: 5 of 5 stars<br />I originally wrote this as a response to <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/13629857">someone else's review</a>. I think that it would also make a good review in its own right, so I am also posting it <a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/2634629">here</a>. First, let me briefly review the content of the review I was responding to. Their review said that they didn't like the book because they felt that it was "digging up dirt" on the prophet, and they quoted several of the brethren saying that this would be a bad idea. They pointed out that they believed that Joseph was a "hero" and that by portraying Joseph as a man and not as a hero, the book was un-faithful to Joseph. The following was my response to those thoughts:<br /><br />I have spoken to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Bushman">Richard Bushman</a> about his book at <a href="http://mormonwasp.wordpress.com/2007/11/28/joseph-smith-and-his-critics/">a symposium about helping people who's faith has been damaged by anti-Mormon propaganda</a>. I believe that his purpose wasn't to "dig up dirt" on the prophet to show that he was "human." I agree with all the quotes he gave that implied that such an approach isn't usually a good course. However, since we are living in a world where many other people are digging up such "dirt" it isn't healthy for the enemies of the prophet to be the only ones talking about the difficult questions. When that happens, people lose their testimonies. We need good people who can honestly say, "ya, I know that about Joseph, and I believe he is a prophet anyway." From what Bushman said at the symposium, I believe that this was his motivation and purpose, and I believe that he did a good job. If you already have questions about Joseph, then this is a great resource to find answers to your questions. Sticking our collective heads in the sand is not helpful for anyone's testimony. I believe that Richard Bushman and his book, have saved the testimonies of many many people, many of them people I know.<br /><br />Of course there is a danger here, in missionary speak, we don't want to "raise" the concern in order to "resolve" the concern. If you leave a cow-pie alone, it scabs over, but if you repeatedly kick it, then it stinks forever. Therefore, there must be a balance. The real question is, did Richard Bushman hit that balance? I believe that the answer to that question depends on what you think the purpose of the book was.<br /><br />If he was writing for the Church, or primarily for church members, I would agree with you that he missed the mark. On the other hand, "No Man Knows My History" (essentially an anti-Mormon book) has been the standard textbook in American History classes that deal with Joseph. If Richard was trying to write a balanced textbook to replace "No Man Knows My History" in such classes, one that non-members would accept and actually be willing to use as a replacement for their un-balanced current book, then he succeeded, and did so brilliantly! If he had instead shared his testimony, then they would not have been willing to use the book. He has a testimony, and shares it often, but in other places and for other audiences. It is all about who his intended audience was. Many non-members will now be getting a much more favourable view of the Prophet than they otherwise would have been getting.<br /><br />He also succeeded brilliantly if his audience was members of the Church who have questions about Joseph raised by enemies of the Lord's Prophet. Many members are now getting their questions about the prophet answered by someone who can say "yes, that happened, but does that really mean that Joseph wasn't a prophet?" Often what happens instead is that someone with a question who asks for answer is given the a response from a well meaning but ignorant member that goes something like: "I have never heard that before! It must be a lie!" Usually this is followed by the questioner turning to the history, only to find out that it isn't a lie, and really did happen. Then our questioning member feels lied to not by enemies of the Church, but by the Church itself, and then they leave the Church. This just should not happen. As a teacher of the Gospel, the book has been remarkably helpful for me, and has helped me to be better prepared to answer my student's questions.<br /><br />If Bushman had written another biography that praised all of Joseph's successes and ignored all the hard questions, (and we already have plenty of those) then the secular world would still be using "No Man Knows My History" and believers with questions about the first vision, seer-stones, treasure hunting, polygamy, and <a href="http://james.jlcarroll.net/LDS/temples/">the restoration of the endowment</a>, would still have no sympathetic source to go to. The enemies of the Church would again be the only people dealing with the hard questions. What a shame that would be!<br /><br />In the end, the world is better off because Bushman wrote this biography. Bushman's purpose wasn't to "dig up dirt" on the prophet, but rather to point out that the "dirt" that has already been dug up really isn't as bad as people sometimes think. Once it is placed in its historical context, and once we see Joseph as a man, then the so called "dirt" isn't such a big deal, and we can get back to the work of thinking of Joseph as the Prophet of God, and the "Hero" that he was.<br /><br />Information comes from bibliographies, certainty comes from the Spirit of God and in no other way. I know that Joseph was a prophet of God because the Spirit of God has told me that this is true. What I now have because of Brother Bushman's wonderful bibliography is more <b>information</b> about Joseph's life.<br /><br />Some have suggested censuring people, and preventing them from writing such biographies, thinking that this will save testimonies, but I believe that Bushman's book will help more people's testimonies than it will hurt. Further, if you believe that Bushman got Joseph's life wrong then the answer is that we need more biographies being written, not less. The great thing about biographies, is that if you disagree with the conclusions of one, by all means, write your own. As someone who has written and published a bit about Church topics, I know how hard it can be to do a good job, make everyone happy, and say the right things for your intended audience without offending some other audience. Let's see if you can do a better job! If you can, I will be happy to give your biography a good review too :-)<br /><br /><a href="http://www.goodreads.com/review/list/162048-James?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_review">View all my reviews.</a>jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-16275432809520983852008-12-30T17:40:00.000-08:002009-01-30T14:10:44.578-08:00BenjaminI have long known about the connections between King Benjamin's discourse and the feast of Tabernacles, and the Day of Atonement. <br /><br />However, just last semester, as I was teaching King Benjamin's discourse in my BYU 121 class, I suddenly remembered that Benjamin's name means "son of the right hand." I doubt that it is a coincidence that his most important discourse was therefore about becoming a son of Christ, and being found on His right hand. <br /><br />Just one of those random things that everyone else likely already knew, but that I had somehow miraculously missed all these years.<br /><br />Cheers!jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8032564549540545157.post-14165827974673053112008-11-17T13:39:00.001-08:002008-11-20T08:35:21.235-08:00Mormons, Polygamy, and Prop-8I would like to take a moment to comment on the connection between the gay marriage issue and <a href="http://mormon.org/">Mormon</a> <a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=bbd508f54922d010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=9887ec6f164b2110VgnVCM100000176f620a____">polygamy</a> that has <a href="http://www.sltrib.com/News/ci_10879061">appeared in the media recently</a>. It has been claimed by some that since Mormons were once persecuted for a non-standard definition of marriage, it is ironic that they should be <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/us/politics/15marriage.html?ex=1384491600&en=7ace7524c4c8af9c&ei=5124&partner=facebook&exprod=facebook">opposed to gay marriage</a>. This is a red herring, and misses the point entirely. There is very little that is similar about these two situations.<br /><br />It is true that Mormons practiced polygamy <a href="http://www.newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/background-information/polygamy-latter-day-saints-and-the-practice-of-plural-marriage">a hundred years ago</a>. It is also true that they were unconstitutionally <a href="http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=32c41b08f338c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=2213c106dac20110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&hideNav=1&contentLocale=0">persecuted for their unusual religious beliefs</a> concerning marriage. But the major difference is that Mormons were <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=MDAUqgjxlIgC&dq=prisoner+for+polygamy&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=O0I21Ts7uH&sig=cay06ADV25-f0XgOj1l1zjWP1tc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result">thrown in jail</a> for their practice of plural marriage. Mormons have never suggested that gays should be thrown in jail. If California’s prop-8 had attempted to throw gays in jail, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmunds%E2%80%93Tucker_Act">seize</a> all their property, or to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmunds_Act">disenfranchise</a> anyone who belonged to a church that performed gay marriages, then and only then would the comparison be justified.<br /><br />Unlike the Mormons, gays in California can still perform religions ceremonies that they can call “marriage” without any danger of being thrown in jail. The Mormons simply wanted to be left alone to marry (in religious ceremonies) who they wanted. What the gay marriage advocates want is not what the Mormon polygamists wanted. The gay marriage advocates want to change the definition of marriage for everyone and to force the rest of society to recognize their “marriages.” Mormons did not demand societal approval or recognition of their practice.<br /><br />Furthermore the Mormon polygamists had a good argument for why their practice was protected by the constitution. If a Mormon married one woman legally, and then had a religious ceremony before sleeping with a second woman, he was thrown in jail. If a non-Mormon married one woman legally, and then fooled around with another woman, no one seemed to care. This is as true today is it was back then. Today, if the other woman was the man's intern, then people seem happy to have him as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewinsky_scandal">President of the United States</a>. The only difference between the two is the religious ceremony. They were prosecuting one and not the other based on whether there was a religious ceremony beforehand. That means that they were throwing the Mormon polygamists in jail for the religious ceremony alone, and for no other reason. Yet the right of the Mormon to have the religious ceremony before having relations with the second “wife” should have been protected by the constitution of the United States. The problem was one of unequal prosecution under the law based on a religious ceremony. If the government equally prosecuted all instances of infidelity, then and only then would the government have had a truly constitutional stand to persecute the early Mormon polygamists.<br /><br />There can be no doubt that the constitution should protect the rights of a group to perform a religious ceremony if they want to, and to call that ceremony a “marriage” if they want to. It is not nearly as clear if the constitution gives a small minority the <a href="http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=324576">right</a> to redefine marriage for the rest of society. Whatever you believe on the Prop-8 issue there can be no real comparison to the Mormon polygamy persecutions of yesteryear.jlcarroll@gmail.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08870174344823829934noreply@blogger.com17