I just read this blog about a "make-believe" Mormon. It's the blog of a woman in her late 20's who met a boy when she was young and in love, converted to the church in order to marry this hot RM and was baptized, only to find herself trapped in a fake marriage where she's "pretending" and now making fun of the church. While I do empathize with this woman to a degree, I find her the equivalent of a gay man who pretends to be straight for societal purposes.
I don't think I understand the importance of marriage anymore. To the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints it's an important institution where two people, a man and a woman, unite to form a family. Usually these people have a common value system based on honesty, fidelity, and trust. That bond is broken when one "fakes" believing in a religion, or their sexual preference, or even hides secrets such as addiction. If one partner enters into the union hiding one of these things, then the marriage is going to be rough and the couple is going to need some major work or a divorce. I don't think I would want to marry a person who was pretending. Pretending to be a part of my religion, pretending to be straight, pretending to be legal if they were illegal (I know someone who did that). Religion, sexuality, citizenship, these are all pretty important identity definitions. It's one thing to have a crises and question your identity, it's wholly different to never believe it all and trick the person merely for selfish gain.
There are thousands of single Mormon women that would love a hot, hard working Mormon man. Throw him back to the singles ward sista! I'm sure there are plenty of single men who would love a single part-time teacher with alimony and wit.
As a woman who has spent time on the singles scene, it's laughable to watch spouses take each other for granted. I know, I know, the grass is always greener. Whenever one of my married friends wants to know what its like on the singles scene, I invite her to come to the singles ward.
Sure, there are 5-10 hot rich guys that you would like to date. You're in your late 20's early 30's? Those guys only import 18 year old girls from UVSC. Let's move onto the next selection of men: the average joes. Sure, those should be easy catches - you're an 8, he's a 6. Piece of cake. Except 40 women from the ages of 23-34 are clamouring to shine their shoes and bake cookies for them. You think women are catty and back biting in the family wards? Try the singles wards. Women will invent all sorts of nick names and rumors to ruin your reputation amongts the average joes so you'll be pariah and your late night Friday night date is Orvielle Redenbacher and a Lifetime movie.
The divorcees? Be prepared for alimony, child support, and an empty bank account. In other words: you're gonna work! For the rest of your adult life. No "Molly Mormon" mom of baking cookies. Sorry.
Okay, okay - you don't want the Mormon singles scene. You want out of the church. You want the Sex and the City lifestyle. Well Mr. Big doesn't exist honey, he's fiction. There are some nice guys with average looks, some extremely good looking guys trolling for sex, and everything in between. It's an adjustment to find someone who doesn't have a built in value system that you automatically share. You have to dig, search, ask questions, and argue about that value system. There are no "rules" set by a gospel and share culture albiet stifling and boring one. You make rules together and its not always agreed upon.
All I'm saying is sometimes we take things for granted, and sometimes it takes someone on the "other side of the grass" to point it out. I'm not currently single, but being single for so long made me really hang on to what I've got - even when it gets tough. The Church isn't perfect. And there are days I abhor the culture. I laugh at this woman's blog because of the annoying callings I get too and some of the things people say and do in Church- I totally see her point of view. However, I also think if you feel like you're faking you should confront the issue - delve into the matter. That's the purpose of my blog. Whenever I have an issue or a topic that I culturally disagree with, I confront the doctrine here.
I am not "Mormon". I believe in the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. To be Mormon is to label me as a stereotype - a woman who sits at home as a housewife with 7 children who was married at 19, attended BYU, grew up in Utah, smiles incessantly, owns a suburban, trampoline, and never drinks coffee or tea but is probably downing a diet pill/anti-depressant cocktail first thing in the morning. Only one of those apply to me.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Friday, February 19, 2010
Spirit and Elements Seperated vs. Saturday's Warriors = Sunday School Drama
Any valiant church teenager grew up tormented with the low budget musical Saturday's Warriors. Fortunately I was only exposed to this horrific script plagued with false doctrine once or twice because my parents never bought it, however several ward friends did own the video and I watched it a few times, and was fed the vision of the pre-existance as written by the authors. For anyone reading that needs a refresher: A family in pre-existance loves each other dearly, knows each other fully, promises each other with all their humanly emotions to find one another on Earth no matter what. On child is almost left behind, but is fortunately brought to this Earth by an accidental pregnancy, no child left behind. We follow this family through their hardships, pain, joys, etc. Whatever.
I find fault with the pre-existance. Mostly because now a whole generation gives Sunday School comments based on this pre-conceived notion of human emotions, lack of free agency (our families were chosen in the pre-existance therefore how can we have free agency to choose an earthly companion and how many children we have?), and familial relations behind the veil. All of these thoughts are absurd. In fact, men will sometimes tell women that they feel that she is his "eternal companion" based on some prayer and feeling he knew her in the pre-existance. Disturbing.
Based on my rigorous study of the scriptures, science, etc. I've concluded that Saturday's Warriors is nothing but a whimsical fantasy that might as well be attached to a paegan religion. In fact, perhaps we should show it to terrorists rather than water boarding as it's surely more torturous. According to D&C 93:
bIntelligence, or the clight of dtruth, was not ecreated or made, neither indeed can be.
We know from science, brainmapping, DNA, and all the technology from the past 100 years, that we have hormones which make us feel emotions. Without our body we feel no joy, no pain, no jealousy or guilt, or remorse. In the preexistance we had no endorphines, dopamine, seratonin.
We were little bits of math and logic. We possibly had personalities and functioning capibilities. Perhaps little computers with cognitive capabilities that defined us seperate from one another. Our DNA wasn't expressed until birth so we didn't have form - not that Saturday's Warriors could have shown figureless spirits (they didn't have a Steven Spielberg budget), however, to show emotional attachment, or even familial attachement to one another is impossible. Of course, that ruins their entire storyline.
Our decision to choose Christ's plan was based on intelligence - truth and light. It made logical sense to these spiritual beings. We wanted a body so we could feel joy and pain. That was a reasonable plan. To the other third part, a forced plan with no choice and a dictatorship following lucifer sounded logical. We voted, and we won. And now, we got what we wanted, and sometimes we love our choice, and other times, we resent it because the pain is overwhelming. The paradox of choice.
Of course, you mention this in Sunday School and you're likely to get dirty looks from those who would like to continue to drink the kool-aide. And maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Brigham hugged all 58 of his wives before he headed to Earth.
I find fault with the pre-existance. Mostly because now a whole generation gives Sunday School comments based on this pre-conceived notion of human emotions, lack of free agency (our families were chosen in the pre-existance therefore how can we have free agency to choose an earthly companion and how many children we have?), and familial relations behind the veil. All of these thoughts are absurd. In fact, men will sometimes tell women that they feel that she is his "eternal companion" based on some prayer and feeling he knew her in the pre-existance. Disturbing.
Based on my rigorous study of the scriptures, science, etc. I've concluded that Saturday's Warriors is nothing but a whimsical fantasy that might as well be attached to a paegan religion. In fact, perhaps we should show it to terrorists rather than water boarding as it's surely more torturous. According to D&C 93:
bIntelligence, or the clight of dtruth, was not ecreated or made, neither indeed can be.
30 All truth is independent in that asphere in which God has placed it, to bact for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.I'll paraphrase in how I understand this. Man is a. spirit and b. Body. We know from D&C 76 that that is also the soul of man. Which we did not have in the pre-existance. We were soul less. So what were we? We were intellegence. What is a soul? A soul has a body - that is the defining factor? What makes a body the so important in having a soul and so important to the intellegence?
31 Behold, here is the aagency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.
32 And every man whose spirit receiveth not the alight is under condemnation.
33 For man is aspirit. The elements are beternal, and cspirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;
34 And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.
We know from science, brainmapping, DNA, and all the technology from the past 100 years, that we have hormones which make us feel emotions. Without our body we feel no joy, no pain, no jealousy or guilt, or remorse. In the preexistance we had no endorphines, dopamine, seratonin.
We were little bits of math and logic. We possibly had personalities and functioning capibilities. Perhaps little computers with cognitive capabilities that defined us seperate from one another. Our DNA wasn't expressed until birth so we didn't have form - not that Saturday's Warriors could have shown figureless spirits (they didn't have a Steven Spielberg budget), however, to show emotional attachment, or even familial attachement to one another is impossible. Of course, that ruins their entire storyline.
Our decision to choose Christ's plan was based on intelligence - truth and light. It made logical sense to these spiritual beings. We wanted a body so we could feel joy and pain. That was a reasonable plan. To the other third part, a forced plan with no choice and a dictatorship following lucifer sounded logical. We voted, and we won. And now, we got what we wanted, and sometimes we love our choice, and other times, we resent it because the pain is overwhelming. The paradox of choice.
Of course, you mention this in Sunday School and you're likely to get dirty looks from those who would like to continue to drink the kool-aide. And maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Brigham hugged all 58 of his wives before he headed to Earth.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Thirty Pieces of Silver and a Kiss
Judas Iscariot: Traitor. Betrayer. Murderer. The most famous of Jesus' disciples and what Mormon's have declared one cast into outer darkness as a Son of Perdition- a fate designated for few of Christ's deniers. He is easily the most hated figure in all of Christianity although his act lead to the sacrifice and will of the Father. Chronologically examining the Gospels and Paul's letters, Judas goes from a Betrayer who "handed him over" ( Greek translation paradidomi) to the more evil version in Luke, where Satan literally enters Judas (Luke 22:3).
What have Prophets thought about the assumed fate of the most famed denier of Christ?
Joseph F. Smith Gospel Doctrine p 433-435
This contradicts Brigham Young's statement that Judas did commit the unpardonable sin in Journal of Discourses: "...committed the unpardonable sin by sinning against light and knowledge, as Judas did in betraying the Lord of life and glory..."(pg. 174)
The Prophet Joseph Smith spoke of Judas as one who seeks destruction and was "enlisted against truth". He also taught that Satan entered into him as taught in Luke.
Who was Judas?
Iscariot. Man of the City (Kerioth). Worldly (he was in charge of the money)? Last names not given, we know little of this man other than he was from the city unlike many of his Apostles who were from smaller towns such as Capernaum, Galilee, all fisherman from the North given that they were from the Tribe of Benjamin displaced from the south and moved into the north. Judas was slightly different than the other apostles in geographical background. He was from the Tribe of Judah, unlike his Galilean associates, the only Apostle to share the heritage of Christ.
Living in an actual city in Judea, Judas would have been more apt to experience Roman occupation and be subject to radical and conservative Jewish philosophy. Kerioth was 10 miles south of Hebron, which was a key religious site for Jews, home to Abraham and King David. He would have lived under Pontius Pilate's rule in 26 C.E. rather than Herod Antipas of Galilee and dealt with the using of tithes at the temple to pay for public works, and his attempts to place pagan inscriptions placed in the Jerusalem palace. These types of abuses would have outraged Jews. He began his rule with his soldiers marching into Jerusalem with statues of the prefect being placed around the city. Immediately the Jews objected. He taxed heavily, Rome's main purpose was to tax territories without killing them totally. The Zealots created an insurgency, however the revolt didn't work, and the Zealots used guerrilla warfare against the Roman soldiers in Jerusalem to rebel against heavy taxation.
Judas would also have experience with the Sadduccees, who were also being assassinated for their association with the Romans. The rich, elitist Sadduccees ran the Sanhedrin who would ultimately turn Christ over to the Pilate who would subject him to Roman law rather than Jewish law. These Sadduccees ruled the temple and believed not in oral law, heaven, resurrection, angels, and were a small minority of the Jews, yet these are the men that Judas colluded with. Given the political upheaval and marriage between Rome and the Sadducees, it's unlikely Judas would have liked doing business with these men, although with the right motive, perhaps they were the perfect conspirators.
Did Judas want Christ to die? Was He Motivated by Revolution or Money?
Thomas De Quincey asserts that Judas however, was not solely responsible for the death of Christ. He argues that Judas was merely attempting to push the Jews into a Holy War, to fight against the Romans and have Christ come in his Majesty as a wrathful God. He did not expect a peaceful death willing his life to the Father, and then a resurrection. Judas wanted a revolution. And he was going to start it with 30 pieces of silver and a kiss.
When passing Jesus to Caiaphus, Judas knew that it was a holiday (Passover) and that as it was the middle of the night, the trial would most likely take place in a few days. Unfortunately laws were broken as Caiaphus expedited the trial illegally and Christ was brought before Pilate in the middle of the night, and ultimately chosen by most likely a fixed Sadducceean crowd to be crucified. Caiaphus was threatened by Christ and his teachings, Pilate feared a Jewish King that might disrupt the waning peace, and it was in both their interest to quell the King of the Jews, much like Herod decapitated John the Baptist, rebel rouser.
When Christ failed to start a revolution and instead began a resurrection, Judas was beside himself. He attempted to return the 3o pieces of silver to the temple (equivalent to half a years pay?) and eventually hung himself. In 1990 the family of Caiaphus ossuaries were discovered in Jerusalem, and interestingly enough, Judas happened to hang himself in front of the family tomb, perhaps because he felt betrayed by Caiaphus and how he felt about the betrayal to him - the lack of a trial.
My question really hangs on the fact that maybe Judas was really taking matters into his own hands and trying to start a revolution. He colluded with the Sadduccees in order to push Christ into a Holy War - the War in which the Jewish Savior of wrath and war would save the Jews. What Judas perhaps underestimated is the true message of Christ. He never understood that Christ was there to save through the atonement, not through violence.
So is Judas misunderstood? Is he Satanic or misguided?
What have Prophets thought about the assumed fate of the most famed denier of Christ?
Joseph F. Smith Gospel Doctrine p 433-435
If Judas really had known God's power, and had partaken thereof, and did actually "deny the truth" and "defy" that power, "having denied the Holy Spirit after he had received it," and also "denied the Only Begotten," after God had "revealed him" unto him, then there can be no doubt that he "will die the second death. That Judas did partake of all this knowledge—that these great truths had been revealed to him—that he had received the Holy Spirit by the gift of God, and was therefore qualified to commit the unpardonable sin, is not at all clear to me. To my mind it strongly appears that not one of the disciples possessed sufficient light, knowledge nor wisdom, at the time of the crucifixion, for either exaltation or condemnation; for it was afterward that their minds were
opened to understand the scriptures, and that they were endowed with power from on high; without which they were only children in knowledge, in comparison to what they afterwards become under the influence of the Spirit.....But not knowing that Judas did commit the unpardonable sin; nor that he was a "son of perdition without hope" who will die the second death, nor what knowledge he possessed by which he was able to commit so great a sin, I prefer, until I know better, to take the merciful view that he may be numbered among those for whom the blessed Master prayed, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."
This contradicts Brigham Young's statement that Judas did commit the unpardonable sin in Journal of Discourses: "...committed the unpardonable sin by sinning against light and knowledge, as Judas did in betraying the Lord of life and glory..."(pg. 174)
The Prophet Joseph Smith spoke of Judas as one who seeks destruction and was "enlisted against truth". He also taught that Satan entered into him as taught in Luke.
There is a Superior intelligence bestowed upon such as obey the Gospel with full purpose of heart, which, if sinned against, the apostate is left naked and destitute of the Spirit of God, and he is, in truth, nigh unto cursing, and his end is to be burned. When once that light which was in them in taken from them, they become as much darkened as they were previously enlightened, and then, no marvel, if all their power should be enlisted against the truth, and they, Judas like, seek the destruction of those who were their greatest benefactors. What nearer friend on earth, or in heaven, had Judas than the Savior? And his first object was to destroy him.Was Judas so cunning, conniving, and evil? Was he an integral part of the plan? Is his role a lesson for all saints and sinners as a warning of what happens when you deny the Savior? If Christ knew he was a Betrayer, does this take away free will of Judas? These questions have plagued philosophers for centuries including St. Thomas Aquinas.
Who was Judas?
Iscariot. Man of the City (Kerioth). Worldly (he was in charge of the money)? Last names not given, we know little of this man other than he was from the city unlike many of his Apostles who were from smaller towns such as Capernaum, Galilee, all fisherman from the North given that they were from the Tribe of Benjamin displaced from the south and moved into the north. Judas was slightly different than the other apostles in geographical background. He was from the Tribe of Judah, unlike his Galilean associates, the only Apostle to share the heritage of Christ.
Living in an actual city in Judea, Judas would have been more apt to experience Roman occupation and be subject to radical and conservative Jewish philosophy. Kerioth was 10 miles south of Hebron, which was a key religious site for Jews, home to Abraham and King David. He would have lived under Pontius Pilate's rule in 26 C.E. rather than Herod Antipas of Galilee and dealt with the using of tithes at the temple to pay for public works, and his attempts to place pagan inscriptions placed in the Jerusalem palace. These types of abuses would have outraged Jews. He began his rule with his soldiers marching into Jerusalem with statues of the prefect being placed around the city. Immediately the Jews objected. He taxed heavily, Rome's main purpose was to tax territories without killing them totally. The Zealots created an insurgency, however the revolt didn't work, and the Zealots used guerrilla warfare against the Roman soldiers in Jerusalem to rebel against heavy taxation.
Judas would also have experience with the Sadduccees, who were also being assassinated for their association with the Romans. The rich, elitist Sadduccees ran the Sanhedrin who would ultimately turn Christ over to the Pilate who would subject him to Roman law rather than Jewish law. These Sadduccees ruled the temple and believed not in oral law, heaven, resurrection, angels, and were a small minority of the Jews, yet these are the men that Judas colluded with. Given the political upheaval and marriage between Rome and the Sadducees, it's unlikely Judas would have liked doing business with these men, although with the right motive, perhaps they were the perfect conspirators.
Did Judas want Christ to die? Was He Motivated by Revolution or Money?
Thomas De Quincey asserts that Judas however, was not solely responsible for the death of Christ. He argues that Judas was merely attempting to push the Jews into a Holy War, to fight against the Romans and have Christ come in his Majesty as a wrathful God. He did not expect a peaceful death willing his life to the Father, and then a resurrection. Judas wanted a revolution. And he was going to start it with 30 pieces of silver and a kiss.
When passing Jesus to Caiaphus, Judas knew that it was a holiday (Passover) and that as it was the middle of the night, the trial would most likely take place in a few days. Unfortunately laws were broken as Caiaphus expedited the trial illegally and Christ was brought before Pilate in the middle of the night, and ultimately chosen by most likely a fixed Sadducceean crowd to be crucified. Caiaphus was threatened by Christ and his teachings, Pilate feared a Jewish King that might disrupt the waning peace, and it was in both their interest to quell the King of the Jews, much like Herod decapitated John the Baptist, rebel rouser.
When Christ failed to start a revolution and instead began a resurrection, Judas was beside himself. He attempted to return the 3o pieces of silver to the temple (equivalent to half a years pay?) and eventually hung himself. In 1990 the family of Caiaphus ossuaries were discovered in Jerusalem, and interestingly enough, Judas happened to hang himself in front of the family tomb, perhaps because he felt betrayed by Caiaphus and how he felt about the betrayal to him - the lack of a trial.
My question really hangs on the fact that maybe Judas was really taking matters into his own hands and trying to start a revolution. He colluded with the Sadduccees in order to push Christ into a Holy War - the War in which the Jewish Savior of wrath and war would save the Jews. What Judas perhaps underestimated is the true message of Christ. He never understood that Christ was there to save through the atonement, not through violence.
So is Judas misunderstood? Is he Satanic or misguided?
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
We are SOOOO Wicked!
I love going to Sunday School and hearing how are generation is the most wicked generation of all time. Members of the ward LOVE citing the following examples of why we're so darn wicked:
-Internet porn (top reason cited by elderly gentlemen as to why we're wicked)
-School shootings
-Gangs
-Teen pregnancy
-Abortion
-Terrorism
-Obama (yes, they even mention Obama)
-Rampant homosexuality and gay marriage (a growing favorite since prop 8)
Oh the horror of our society, where if there is a murder or gang shooting, we have a police force who immediately investigates and tries to solve the crime of the shooting using modern science and forensic technology and a justice system that often prevails. Or if there is a teen pregnancy she is at least somewhat taken care of by a welfare system and churches who care for her. Or if there is a rape or molestation of a child, there is some sort of law that protects the harmed child, unlike our predecessors who married her.
Let's review the some of the wicked generations before us. I often want to use these examples during Sunday School to shock the minds of the class, but merely rage on the inside:
The ROMANS:
-Used Christians (that's us!) as torches at night in the streets so they could see the darkened cobbled roads
-Used Christians as fodder for the lions as entertainment
-Used slave women as actresses to reenact a play where a woman would rip out her uterus on stage and die on stage. This is reality TV for them. Only it was live. A live death of a woman ripping out her uterus. Delight.
-Popular entertainment included gambling and brothels. Think Vegas. All over the empire.
-Murder for political gain. Cleopatra and Antony - yes, Cleopatra was deemed a suicide but recent studies of the crime scene suggest that an asp couldn't have killed a human. Ah, modern forensics. Solving even ancient crimes. So wicked. Bring a flood.
-Volcanic remains in the ancient preserved town of Pompeii shows that pornographic paintings were actually displayed on the walls of homes as art. Sexual poses, large erections, breasts, all in your living room, rather than hidden on a hard drive, as seen here.
The GREEKS
-Gay. Gay. Gay. Socrates was really old - in his 60's, when he had a 17 yr old male lover, despite his wife and three sons. In Plato's works The Phaedrus and The Symposium he speaks of homosexuality and pederasty as if they are positive tools to understand love. Aristocrats and intelligent philosophers need women to procreate - but they must have the love of a man to really understand love! This was the rampant thought of Athens as the women slaved at home and the men gathered in the Acropolis. Wow. This seems like the modern thought of the Priesthood meeting! Just kidding. This is totally Satan's way of deceiving the Greeks by copying God's plan, and then luring them into homosexuality.
-Slaves. Our forefathers battled with this. But our country progressed passed enslaving our fellow men and seeking equality for all. Despite gangs, etc. at least we don't have slavery. Anymore.
-Dionysus: the god of wine. Maenads. Little nymph like creatures who got men and women drunk and follow Dionysus. I'm sensing a them of drunkenness here amongst the Greeks. Bacchus, Zeus, Ares. All these Gods, myths, and stories involved drinking, sex, violence, infidelity - and these were their deities! Although if you really think about it, Brigham Young might have as many wives as Zeus has lovers...but he was married under the convenant and Zeus was having affairs on Hera so totally not comparable. Just a stray thought.
The MIDDLE AGES
-Knights and maidens, the stories of heroic love and tragic tales that often leave women wishing their husbands were their "knight in shining armor". Wrong. Knights were never a woman's husband. They were warriors serving her husband, falling in love with their master's wife, and illicit affairs by bringing her gifts and writing her poems.
-Families lived in houses together, often one bedroom huts in which they all lived in the same bed. A husband and wife made babies while their other babies were right there in the bed with them.
-VD ran rampant. So did prostitutes. The uneducated peasant class which made up the majority of society couldn't read the bible, therefore they often were "unclean".
-The peasant class were pretty much slaves with zero prospect of owning land. Where's free agency and will when you had to serve a lord?
Don't even get me started on Mesopotamia, pirates, even the Utah 50's housewives and what drugs doctors were prescribing that I'm pretty sure ran contrary to the Word of Wisdom (use some common sense). My point is, the black and white thinking that our generation is so terrible and the worst of all-time is completely absurd if you historically look at the generations preceding us. WE'RE ALL THE SAME!!!!
The context of my rage of course came from Noah and his ark. They were so wicked! The Sunday School teacher of course forgets to mention that the particular generation that was flooded were Nephalim - giants who could have been the descendants of fallen angels. I mean, if angels looked down on women and decided to breed with them, God probably would have to say, "Ummm, no. Those fallen angel genes sure screwed up my plan and I need to baptize this earth and start over."
And maybe they weren't angels but monkey-men who hadn't yet become human from evolution. Or maybe they were just some type of genetic screw-up since it was the early part of the plan and maybe Jesus didn't really know what he was doing yet. He wasn't perfect until he came down, right? Learning curve. None of this was mentioned in the lesson, and of course, we were subjected to a basic morality play akin to 13th Century puppetry.
Rant over. I'm out.
-Internet porn (top reason cited by elderly gentlemen as to why we're wicked)
-School shootings
-Gangs
-Teen pregnancy
-Abortion
-Terrorism
-Obama (yes, they even mention Obama)
-Rampant homosexuality and gay marriage (a growing favorite since prop 8)
Oh the horror of our society, where if there is a murder or gang shooting, we have a police force who immediately investigates and tries to solve the crime of the shooting using modern science and forensic technology and a justice system that often prevails. Or if there is a teen pregnancy she is at least somewhat taken care of by a welfare system and churches who care for her. Or if there is a rape or molestation of a child, there is some sort of law that protects the harmed child, unlike our predecessors who married her.
Let's review the some of the wicked generations before us. I often want to use these examples during Sunday School to shock the minds of the class, but merely rage on the inside:
The ROMANS:
-Used Christians (that's us!) as torches at night in the streets so they could see the darkened cobbled roads
-Used Christians as fodder for the lions as entertainment
-Used slave women as actresses to reenact a play where a woman would rip out her uterus on stage and die on stage. This is reality TV for them. Only it was live. A live death of a woman ripping out her uterus. Delight.
-Popular entertainment included gambling and brothels. Think Vegas. All over the empire.
-Murder for political gain. Cleopatra and Antony - yes, Cleopatra was deemed a suicide but recent studies of the crime scene suggest that an asp couldn't have killed a human. Ah, modern forensics. Solving even ancient crimes. So wicked. Bring a flood.-Volcanic remains in the ancient preserved town of Pompeii shows that pornographic paintings were actually displayed on the walls of homes as art. Sexual poses, large erections, breasts, all in your living room, rather than hidden on a hard drive, as seen here.
The GREEKS
-Gay. Gay. Gay. Socrates was really old - in his 60's, when he had a 17 yr old male lover, despite his wife and three sons. In Plato's works The Phaedrus and The Symposium he speaks of homosexuality and pederasty as if they are positive tools to understand love. Aristocrats and intelligent philosophers need women to procreate - but they must have the love of a man to really understand love! This was the rampant thought of Athens as the women slaved at home and the men gathered in the Acropolis. Wow. This seems like the modern thought of the Priesthood meeting! Just kidding. This is totally Satan's way of deceiving the Greeks by copying God's plan, and then luring them into homosexuality.
-Slaves. Our forefathers battled with this. But our country progressed passed enslaving our fellow men and seeking equality for all. Despite gangs, etc. at least we don't have slavery. Anymore.
-Dionysus: the god of wine. Maenads. Little nymph like creatures who got men and women drunk and follow Dionysus. I'm sensing a them of drunkenness here amongst the Greeks. Bacchus, Zeus, Ares. All these Gods, myths, and stories involved drinking, sex, violence, infidelity - and these were their deities! Although if you really think about it, Brigham Young might have as many wives as Zeus has lovers...but he was married under the convenant and Zeus was having affairs on Hera so totally not comparable. Just a stray thought.
The MIDDLE AGES
-Knights and maidens, the stories of heroic love and tragic tales that often leave women wishing their husbands were their "knight in shining armor". Wrong. Knights were never a woman's husband. They were warriors serving her husband, falling in love with their master's wife, and illicit affairs by bringing her gifts and writing her poems.
-Families lived in houses together, often one bedroom huts in which they all lived in the same bed. A husband and wife made babies while their other babies were right there in the bed with them.
-VD ran rampant. So did prostitutes. The uneducated peasant class which made up the majority of society couldn't read the bible, therefore they often were "unclean".
-The peasant class were pretty much slaves with zero prospect of owning land. Where's free agency and will when you had to serve a lord?
Don't even get me started on Mesopotamia, pirates, even the Utah 50's housewives and what drugs doctors were prescribing that I'm pretty sure ran contrary to the Word of Wisdom (use some common sense). My point is, the black and white thinking that our generation is so terrible and the worst of all-time is completely absurd if you historically look at the generations preceding us. WE'RE ALL THE SAME!!!!
The context of my rage of course came from Noah and his ark. They were so wicked! The Sunday School teacher of course forgets to mention that the particular generation that was flooded were Nephalim - giants who could have been the descendants of fallen angels. I mean, if angels looked down on women and decided to breed with them, God probably would have to say, "Ummm, no. Those fallen angel genes sure screwed up my plan and I need to baptize this earth and start over."
And maybe they weren't angels but monkey-men who hadn't yet become human from evolution. Or maybe they were just some type of genetic screw-up since it was the early part of the plan and maybe Jesus didn't really know what he was doing yet. He wasn't perfect until he came down, right? Learning curve. None of this was mentioned in the lesson, and of course, we were subjected to a basic morality play akin to 13th Century puppetry.
Rant over. I'm out.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
History and Mystery of the Word of Wisdom
A smart woman behind me who had just finished her graduate studies at UCLA snidely doubted an idea under her breath during a lesson in Relief Society. I smiled knowing that her skepticism had a place with the story that was being told. After all, the most difficult challenge the Church has is getting their history straight. The story she was having a hard time swallowing was that of the Word of Wisdom.
I always knew that the Word of Wisdom revolved around an idea greater than Emma’s hatred for tobacco spit at the School of the Prophets, as she always was stuck cleaning it up. When reading Rough Stone Rolling I read Sylvester Graham may have influenced the Prophet Joseph, and I realized I needed to fully understand the truth behind the esoteric and elusive Word of Wisdom.
Knowledge and Revelation
Joseph Smith Sr. struggled with the drink. This fact must have plagued the Smith household. Let's face it - nobody likes a dad for a drunk unless he buys you great presents under the influence. The Revelation given to Joseph was at a time where public drunkenness had grown amongst Americans. Sylvester Graham, a Minister and temperance leader was speaking to New Yorkers by the thousands, particularly in 1831-1832. He believed in vegetarianism as well as abstaining from alcohol, tobacco, tea, and coffee and was inventor of the delicious and nutritious Graham cracker. He began the Pennsylvania Temperance Society, which then became the American Temperance Society. Joseph would have been very familiar with these organizations as they were popular in the Western Reserve of Ohio at this time. In May of 1843 the Prophet did speak about temperance societies vaguely as it seems the Saints wanted to start one, and the Prophet advised merely to live by the word.
John A. Widtsoe wrote that part of the Word of Wisdom was abstaining from refined flour – this also falls in line with the preaching of Sylvester Graham. He insisted that refined flour lacked the health benefits of wheat flour, and even published bread making books to guide followers on how to make their own bread, hence the creation of the healthy Graham cracker. We know now that this trend is fairly accurate and true wheat flour is far healthier as white flour was a popular choice for the rich kings and when it was readily available to the public, they jumped on the opportunity.
Is there a direct connection between Graham and Joseph Smith or merely a philosophical health code in which Joseph pondered and prayed about, especially since it was affecting his own family, the Saints, and the general public?
As far as I can tell Joseph did not attend any of these lectures nor did he speak directly with Graham, but plenty of material and Graham’s writings would have been available, as well as the word of mouth information regarding the health code. It makes perfect sense that Joseph would have pondered this idea for a long time. Not just because Emma was disgusted by the tobacco spit. Because of public drunkenness, because of his father’s struggles, because the Lord believed the Saints were ready for temperance because Graham had a movement on his hand and people were attracted to this revolution against the use of these drugs, Joseph revealed the Word of Wisdom.
Reasoning
Between a Times and Seasons article (Oct 1842) and President Young’s arguments, the early Church argued the following in adhering to the Word of Wisdom:
-To live as long as the Prophets in biblical times – Prophets of old lived up to 800 years
-God made our bodies so his wisdom would be useful in understanding what is right for the body
-When a man drink his “temporary relief only binds the cords of bondage more severely around him.”
-Disease can easily take hold when disobeying the Word of Wisdom
-To save money as many poor converts from Europe pilfered their money away on these commodities
My personal thought is that the first reasoning is farcical - I don't personally believe that the Prophets of old lived to 800 years. They lived under a different calendar. They also would have been possibly drinking given that Genesis 9:20 asserts that Noah had a vineyard and Jews were early winemakers. To think that they weren't drinking is a misconception by early saints without archaeological evidence.
Early Obedience
A discrepancy:
“No official member in this Church is worthy to hold an office after having the word of wisdom properly taught him; and he, the official member, neglecting to comply with and obey it.” –Joseph Smith\, 1834
“After this meeting closed I met with the Twelve & High Priest quorum: the word of wisdom was brought up B Young says shall I break the word of wisdom if I go home & drink a cup of tea: No wisdom is justified of her children, the subject was discussed in an interesting manner all concluded that it was wisdom to deal with all such matters according to the wisdom which God gave that a forced abstinence was not making us free but we should be under bondage with a yoak upon our necks...”-Wilford Woodruff Diary Nov 7, 1841
It’s thought that Joseph himself still occasionally drank wine, even perhaps drinking a glass of wine before his martyrdom. But the lax attitude would be changed when the leadership role was to be taken over by President Brigham Young. The discrepancy was probably explained over the incredibly hard habit to break. In 1834 it's easy to say that you want to quit. Doing so is quite a different story - changing a culture of drinkers and tobacco spitters is quite a task, even with faith on your side.
Brigham Young Fluctuates, The Saints are Habitual
Brigham Young made it a personal goal to create a commandment from the Word of Wisdom. Interestingly enough, the Saints took several generations to break the habits of the Word of Wisdom. Like a convert today, it’s difficult to break a habit. It’s even more difficult if it’s still a cultural norm. Converts today have the benefit of a society that shuns even the appearance of “evil”. In Joseph’s time many Saints continued to struggle with the Word of Wisdom, dare I say most Saints.
Fallacious facts have circulated that early members were excommunicated for failing to live up to the Word of Wisdom. Most excommunications were like trials of criminals– they included many charges to bolster the claim against the defendant. A minor charge of Word of Wisdom abuse would be like adding “sodomy” to a rapist’s charge.
Brigham himself controlled alcohol by himself owning the distilleries and breweries in the territory of Utah and arrested bootleggers. I have always heard “Brigham owned breweries” as a justification as to why the Word of Wisdom might be a fraud. This is a fact taken out of context. Brigham owned breweries to have better control over the Saints and the territory concerning the Word of Wisdom, although I believe that Brigham did drink tea and drank it during his death while he was sick – another mystery…
Brigham struggled to enforce the Word vacillating back and forth with agendas changing during a demanding time. Sometimes it would be a high priority and he would find it extremely important, other times it would be on the back burner and the Saints found freedom. He concentrated mostly on changing the habits of the Youth, as the older generations could not break their habits.
President Heber J. Grant's Mission
President Heber J. Grant officially changed the Word of Wisdom to cultural change when in 1930 obedience became part of the temple recommend interview. In 1933 the US voted to repeal the 18th Amendment which constituted Prohibition. I had heard that Heber J. Grant changed the recommend interview after the vote. This is clearly a falsehood, however we can see that President Grant was very upset with the Saints and probably did continue his agenda once the Saints showed a clear disregard - this would be like Utah voting for gay marriage in Utah today!
“We are fundamentally for prohibition, and let me promise you right here and now, that if you vote for the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment, there will be a great many more professing Latter-day Saints who will be drunkards than there have been while the Eighteenth Amendment has been in force."
After the vote when the Saints repealed Prohibition:
“I feel to have charity at the present time for the Latter-day Saints who have voted for the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment, notwithstanding the fact that they knew very well, without my coming out and saying, ‘I want you to do it,’ that I would have been mighty happy if they had voted the other way. I lived in hopes, and I announced myself in public, that if all other states in the Union went ‘wet,’ Utah would go ‘dry.’Some of my friends begged me to come out and appeal to the people individually, to ask each and every Latter-day Saint to vote to maintain the Eighteenth Amendment."
The Aftermath
Clearly I think that the Saints now have a very "black and white" attitude towards the Word of Wisdom. It's like if you drink a beer its the slippery slope to hell - which we apparently don't believe in anyway. Videos show teens in a precarious moment where their salvation is on the line - drink with their friends and never come back to the church - or CTR?! OH THE AGONY!
The truth is that if one does fall into the gray area - which most of the early apostles and even our founder did - repentance is always an option. However this isn't really clarified in any of the teachings. Neither is the fact that some of our newer members or members in foreign countries who are having cultural adaptation problems are facing the same issues of our earlier members. When given this paradigm shift, we can start seeing our fellow church goers who struggle with love, empathy, and embrace them with the true love of Christ. Who also turned water into wine. And that wine was probably one part water, one part fermented grape fruit juice. Not just grape fruit juice which is what Mormon mothers love to tell inquiring children. Just sayin.
I always knew that the Word of Wisdom revolved around an idea greater than Emma’s hatred for tobacco spit at the School of the Prophets, as she always was stuck cleaning it up. When reading Rough Stone Rolling I read Sylvester Graham may have influenced the Prophet Joseph, and I realized I needed to fully understand the truth behind the esoteric and elusive Word of Wisdom.
Knowledge and Revelation
Joseph Smith Sr. struggled with the drink. This fact must have plagued the Smith household. Let's face it - nobody likes a dad for a drunk unless he buys you great presents under the influence. The Revelation given to Joseph was at a time where public drunkenness had grown amongst Americans. Sylvester Graham, a Minister and temperance leader was speaking to New Yorkers by the thousands, particularly in 1831-1832. He believed in vegetarianism as well as abstaining from alcohol, tobacco, tea, and coffee and was inventor of the delicious and nutritious Graham cracker. He began the Pennsylvania Temperance Society, which then became the American Temperance Society. Joseph would have been very familiar with these organizations as they were popular in the Western Reserve of Ohio at this time. In May of 1843 the Prophet did speak about temperance societies vaguely as it seems the Saints wanted to start one, and the Prophet advised merely to live by the word.
John A. Widtsoe wrote that part of the Word of Wisdom was abstaining from refined flour – this also falls in line with the preaching of Sylvester Graham. He insisted that refined flour lacked the health benefits of wheat flour, and even published bread making books to guide followers on how to make their own bread, hence the creation of the healthy Graham cracker. We know now that this trend is fairly accurate and true wheat flour is far healthier as white flour was a popular choice for the rich kings and when it was readily available to the public, they jumped on the opportunity.
Is there a direct connection between Graham and Joseph Smith or merely a philosophical health code in which Joseph pondered and prayed about, especially since it was affecting his own family, the Saints, and the general public?
As far as I can tell Joseph did not attend any of these lectures nor did he speak directly with Graham, but plenty of material and Graham’s writings would have been available, as well as the word of mouth information regarding the health code. It makes perfect sense that Joseph would have pondered this idea for a long time. Not just because Emma was disgusted by the tobacco spit. Because of public drunkenness, because of his father’s struggles, because the Lord believed the Saints were ready for temperance because Graham had a movement on his hand and people were attracted to this revolution against the use of these drugs, Joseph revealed the Word of Wisdom.
Reasoning
Between a Times and Seasons article (Oct 1842) and President Young’s arguments, the early Church argued the following in adhering to the Word of Wisdom:
-To live as long as the Prophets in biblical times – Prophets of old lived up to 800 years
-God made our bodies so his wisdom would be useful in understanding what is right for the body
-When a man drink his “temporary relief only binds the cords of bondage more severely around him.”
-Disease can easily take hold when disobeying the Word of Wisdom
-To save money as many poor converts from Europe pilfered their money away on these commodities
My personal thought is that the first reasoning is farcical - I don't personally believe that the Prophets of old lived to 800 years. They lived under a different calendar. They also would have been possibly drinking given that Genesis 9:20 asserts that Noah had a vineyard and Jews were early winemakers. To think that they weren't drinking is a misconception by early saints without archaeological evidence.
Early Obedience
A discrepancy:
“No official member in this Church is worthy to hold an office after having the word of wisdom properly taught him; and he, the official member, neglecting to comply with and obey it.” –Joseph Smith\, 1834
“After this meeting closed I met with the Twelve & High Priest quorum: the word of wisdom was brought up B Young says shall I break the word of wisdom if I go home & drink a cup of tea: No wisdom is justified of her children, the subject was discussed in an interesting manner all concluded that it was wisdom to deal with all such matters according to the wisdom which God gave that a forced abstinence was not making us free but we should be under bondage with a yoak upon our necks...”-Wilford Woodruff Diary Nov 7, 1841
It’s thought that Joseph himself still occasionally drank wine, even perhaps drinking a glass of wine before his martyrdom. But the lax attitude would be changed when the leadership role was to be taken over by President Brigham Young. The discrepancy was probably explained over the incredibly hard habit to break. In 1834 it's easy to say that you want to quit. Doing so is quite a different story - changing a culture of drinkers and tobacco spitters is quite a task, even with faith on your side.
Brigham Young Fluctuates, The Saints are Habitual
Brigham Young made it a personal goal to create a commandment from the Word of Wisdom. Interestingly enough, the Saints took several generations to break the habits of the Word of Wisdom. Like a convert today, it’s difficult to break a habit. It’s even more difficult if it’s still a cultural norm. Converts today have the benefit of a society that shuns even the appearance of “evil”. In Joseph’s time many Saints continued to struggle with the Word of Wisdom, dare I say most Saints.
Fallacious facts have circulated that early members were excommunicated for failing to live up to the Word of Wisdom. Most excommunications were like trials of criminals– they included many charges to bolster the claim against the defendant. A minor charge of Word of Wisdom abuse would be like adding “sodomy” to a rapist’s charge.
Brigham himself controlled alcohol by himself owning the distilleries and breweries in the territory of Utah and arrested bootleggers. I have always heard “Brigham owned breweries” as a justification as to why the Word of Wisdom might be a fraud. This is a fact taken out of context. Brigham owned breweries to have better control over the Saints and the territory concerning the Word of Wisdom, although I believe that Brigham did drink tea and drank it during his death while he was sick – another mystery…
Brigham struggled to enforce the Word vacillating back and forth with agendas changing during a demanding time. Sometimes it would be a high priority and he would find it extremely important, other times it would be on the back burner and the Saints found freedom. He concentrated mostly on changing the habits of the Youth, as the older generations could not break their habits.
President Heber J. Grant's Mission
President Heber J. Grant officially changed the Word of Wisdom to cultural change when in 1930 obedience became part of the temple recommend interview. In 1933 the US voted to repeal the 18th Amendment which constituted Prohibition. I had heard that Heber J. Grant changed the recommend interview after the vote. This is clearly a falsehood, however we can see that President Grant was very upset with the Saints and probably did continue his agenda once the Saints showed a clear disregard - this would be like Utah voting for gay marriage in Utah today!
“We are fundamentally for prohibition, and let me promise you right here and now, that if you vote for the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment, there will be a great many more professing Latter-day Saints who will be drunkards than there have been while the Eighteenth Amendment has been in force."
After the vote when the Saints repealed Prohibition:
“I feel to have charity at the present time for the Latter-day Saints who have voted for the repeal of the Eighteenth Amendment, notwithstanding the fact that they knew very well, without my coming out and saying, ‘I want you to do it,’ that I would have been mighty happy if they had voted the other way. I lived in hopes, and I announced myself in public, that if all other states in the Union went ‘wet,’ Utah would go ‘dry.’Some of my friends begged me to come out and appeal to the people individually, to ask each and every Latter-day Saint to vote to maintain the Eighteenth Amendment."
The Aftermath
Clearly I think that the Saints now have a very "black and white" attitude towards the Word of Wisdom. It's like if you drink a beer its the slippery slope to hell - which we apparently don't believe in anyway. Videos show teens in a precarious moment where their salvation is on the line - drink with their friends and never come back to the church - or CTR?! OH THE AGONY!
The truth is that if one does fall into the gray area - which most of the early apostles and even our founder did - repentance is always an option. However this isn't really clarified in any of the teachings. Neither is the fact that some of our newer members or members in foreign countries who are having cultural adaptation problems are facing the same issues of our earlier members. When given this paradigm shift, we can start seeing our fellow church goers who struggle with love, empathy, and embrace them with the true love of Christ. Who also turned water into wine. And that wine was probably one part water, one part fermented grape fruit juice. Not just grape fruit juice which is what Mormon mothers love to tell inquiring children. Just sayin.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Purpose
I have many strong opinions concerning the gospel. Occasionally I see it fit to share these thoughts and ideas in Sunday school or in Relief Society, only to have a teacher retort with a baffled look or a comment, "That's not doctrine." Truthfully I'd like to discuss what doctrine is - that we have very little doctrine but perhaps Relief Society is not the forum to contemplate the idea of Brigham Young's Adam-God theory and how Prophets can be wrong.
I believe that the Church was founded on an idea that lends the Saints freedom of ideas allowing the Holy Ghost as a guide for truth. He is our liahona as we are seeking the mysteries of heavens, earth, our God, and the purpose of life. Prophets lead and guide us as well but they are one part of tools we may use - not the only tool along with the scriptures. I believe scientific discoveries, other theologians and philosophers, and mathematics can also provide insights that provide doctrinal truths and foundations that can in totality show that Joseph Smith restored Christ's correct Church.
After frustrating rameumptom-esque sheep mindlessly following the iron rod course without thought and believing that they are using their "faith", I finally decided the only outlet to really discuss my ideas and concepts with research and insight from many sources would be through this blog.
Like Hugh Nibley once said, "I refuse to be responsible for anything I wrote more than 3 years ago. Fore heaven's sake I hope we're moving forward here...I would say that 4/5 of everything I have put down has changed. Of course!" As well as "intelligence is examining your own inadequacy." I also subscribe to J. Bonner Ritchie's idea of protecting yourself against organizational abuse, and I think that certain members are far too judgmental keeping the less active from coming back and keeping those who are active constantly on their toes. I too can be critical (I just was!), but at the same time I also understand that there's room for both types of members in the Church.
The purpose of my blog is to explore some of my more "radical" ideas that I know I can't discuss openly with the core membership of the Church.
I believe that the Church was founded on an idea that lends the Saints freedom of ideas allowing the Holy Ghost as a guide for truth. He is our liahona as we are seeking the mysteries of heavens, earth, our God, and the purpose of life. Prophets lead and guide us as well but they are one part of tools we may use - not the only tool along with the scriptures. I believe scientific discoveries, other theologians and philosophers, and mathematics can also provide insights that provide doctrinal truths and foundations that can in totality show that Joseph Smith restored Christ's correct Church.
After frustrating rameumptom-esque sheep mindlessly following the iron rod course without thought and believing that they are using their "faith", I finally decided the only outlet to really discuss my ideas and concepts with research and insight from many sources would be through this blog.
Like Hugh Nibley once said, "I refuse to be responsible for anything I wrote more than 3 years ago. Fore heaven's sake I hope we're moving forward here...I would say that 4/5 of everything I have put down has changed. Of course!" As well as "intelligence is examining your own inadequacy." I also subscribe to J. Bonner Ritchie's idea of protecting yourself against organizational abuse, and I think that certain members are far too judgmental keeping the less active from coming back and keeping those who are active constantly on their toes. I too can be critical (I just was!), but at the same time I also understand that there's room for both types of members in the Church.
The purpose of my blog is to explore some of my more "radical" ideas that I know I can't discuss openly with the core membership of the Church.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)