I'm currently having a conversation on a political topic, and I'm actually almost enjoying it. Part of the reason for this is that most, if not all of the participants are being fairly respectful, which is refreshingly rare for a political discussion. Another reason I'm enjoying the conversation is that it's helping me to think about my beliefs and opinions in a way that encourages me to evaluate them and potentially reconsider some of them. This is also refreshingly rare for the shouting matches that occasionally pass for political discussions. I would much rather talk about philosophy than argue about politics, and this conversation I'm having feels more like a philosophical debate than a political one.
Of course, preferring philosophy over politics is a personal opinion, and I expect that some people get more of a thrill out of political debates than they get out of philosophical musings, and that's fine. My philosophy is that as long as you're not hurting anyone, you can do what you want. If you and your pals want to argue and debate, go for it. Personally, I find such arguments draining, and I find philosophical arguments interesting. Whatever floats your boat.
But what I'm most grateful for right now is that I live in a country where people can speak their minds and share their opinions. Certainly, people disagree on many topics, and those disagreements sometimes turn physical, and opinions differ on what should be done about that, but I'm glad we live in a place where we can discuss these issues and share our thoughts on them. And sometimes, we can even be respectful and open-minded while we do that, which I deeply appreciate.
Tuesday, February 28, 2017
Monday, February 27, 2017
Three Ways to Worship God Whenever and Wherever
The next Conference talk I'm going to blog about is about worship. As I listened to it, I thought of a scripture we read in our family scripture study recently. In Alma 32, Alma taught a group of Zoramites that we can worship God anywhere, not just in our meetinghouses, and we can worship God every day, not just on Sundays. Listening to Bishop Dean M. Davies describe the true nature of worship, I began to wonder how it's possible to maintain that feeling of reverence constantly.
I don't know about "constantly," but I know how we can worship God daily, no matter where we are, no matter what day of the week it is, and so does almost every Primary child and seminary student. We can worship God daily by praying to Him and studying His words. These simple practices, often repeated as being essential and of great benefit, are just that, and they are also a good way to help us direct our thoughts to the Lord in worship.
Another way to worship God is through appreciation. Many of us spend at least a small portion of our daily lives outside, if only to travel from one building to another. Whenever we go outside or near a window, we can think about the wonders of nature and how grateful we are to the Lord, who created them. Also, we all have bodies and spirits, and as limited as our bodies and spirits may be, they are all still marvellous gifts from God, and we can be thankful to God for all that we can do with them. Additionally, though this may not be a gift from God, per say, but I find myself frequently impressed by the capabilities of modern technology (and the blessing of modern conveniences), and I occasionally remember to thank God for the many blessings we enjoy and often take for granted. Expressing thanks to God is a fine way to worship Him, and it's something we can do any time.
A third way to worship God daily is to keep His commandments and strive to become like Him. These two practices are actually the same because God's commandments were designed to help us become more like Him. As we keep His commandments, we develop His attributes. I've heard it said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I don't know if flattering God is quite what we're going for, and imitating God doesn't sound quite right to me, but emulating God is a decent way to worship Him.
Studying the scriptures, praying, giving thanks, and keeping God's commandments are all things we can do frequently - nearly constantly - throughout the day. It takes conscious effort, at least at first, but the blessings we'll receive for doing so can certainly be worth it. In the Sacramental prayer over the water, we're promised that we can "always have His [God's] Spirit to be with us," so long as we "always remember Him." Worshipping God through study, prayer, gratitude, and obedience is how we can "always remember" God. Emphasis on always. We don't have to wait until Sunday to worship God, and we don't have to be in a church either. Those things can help us worship Him, but if we put our minds to it, we can worship God any time, and anywhere.
I don't know about "constantly," but I know how we can worship God daily, no matter where we are, no matter what day of the week it is, and so does almost every Primary child and seminary student. We can worship God daily by praying to Him and studying His words. These simple practices, often repeated as being essential and of great benefit, are just that, and they are also a good way to help us direct our thoughts to the Lord in worship.
Another way to worship God is through appreciation. Many of us spend at least a small portion of our daily lives outside, if only to travel from one building to another. Whenever we go outside or near a window, we can think about the wonders of nature and how grateful we are to the Lord, who created them. Also, we all have bodies and spirits, and as limited as our bodies and spirits may be, they are all still marvellous gifts from God, and we can be thankful to God for all that we can do with them. Additionally, though this may not be a gift from God, per say, but I find myself frequently impressed by the capabilities of modern technology (and the blessing of modern conveniences), and I occasionally remember to thank God for the many blessings we enjoy and often take for granted. Expressing thanks to God is a fine way to worship Him, and it's something we can do any time.
A third way to worship God daily is to keep His commandments and strive to become like Him. These two practices are actually the same because God's commandments were designed to help us become more like Him. As we keep His commandments, we develop His attributes. I've heard it said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. I don't know if flattering God is quite what we're going for, and imitating God doesn't sound quite right to me, but emulating God is a decent way to worship Him.
Studying the scriptures, praying, giving thanks, and keeping God's commandments are all things we can do frequently - nearly constantly - throughout the day. It takes conscious effort, at least at first, but the blessings we'll receive for doing so can certainly be worth it. In the Sacramental prayer over the water, we're promised that we can "always have His [God's] Spirit to be with us," so long as we "always remember Him." Worshipping God through study, prayer, gratitude, and obedience is how we can "always remember" God. Emphasis on always. We don't have to wait until Sunday to worship God, and we don't have to be in a church either. Those things can help us worship Him, but if we put our minds to it, we can worship God any time, and anywhere.
An Uphill Hike With a Good Guide
In his talk "To Whom Shall We Go?" Elder M. Russell Ballard spoke of the importance of staying on the path of discipleship. In his talk, he acknowledged that doing so is not always easy. He related life to hiking up "a steep and arduous trail." He acknowledged that it is sometimes necessary and wise to "pause on the path to catch our breath, to recalculate our bearings, and to reconsider our pace." He also noted that these rest breaks are especially helpful when we "refresh themselves with the living water of the gospel of Christ."
Life is tough, and living the Gospel presents us with a unique set of challenges and blessings that make life simultaneously harder and easier for us than it is for others. If we focus on the wrong things, it could seem like life would be easier if we abandoned the Gospel path and walked downhill instead. However, living the Gospel gives us access to the living water and the bread of life, which sustains us through the added difficulty of trying to maintain Gospel standards as we try to get through life.
This uphill hike is difficult, but we're not alone. Christ is walking with us, offering us help and support and guidance every step of the way. Following the Gospel path is difficult, but it's even more difficult to try to make our own paths without the strength and nourishment the Gospel provides. Jesus Christ is leading us to a great destination which we cannot reach by following any other path. Following Him may be harder in some ways, but it's also easier in others, so while we may need to pause on the path every now and again, this is definitely the right path to be on.
Life is tough, and living the Gospel presents us with a unique set of challenges and blessings that make life simultaneously harder and easier for us than it is for others. If we focus on the wrong things, it could seem like life would be easier if we abandoned the Gospel path and walked downhill instead. However, living the Gospel gives us access to the living water and the bread of life, which sustains us through the added difficulty of trying to maintain Gospel standards as we try to get through life.
This uphill hike is difficult, but we're not alone. Christ is walking with us, offering us help and support and guidance every step of the way. Following the Gospel path is difficult, but it's even more difficult to try to make our own paths without the strength and nourishment the Gospel provides. Jesus Christ is leading us to a great destination which we cannot reach by following any other path. Following Him may be harder in some ways, but it's also easier in others, so while we may need to pause on the path every now and again, this is definitely the right path to be on.
Sunday, February 26, 2017
The Forgotten Fount of Inspiration
I keep finding myself in the position of trying to think of something to blog about, trying to come up with something clever or meaningful or analogous about something that happened to me recently, forgetting that I have a wealth of inspirational messages available to me in the Gospel Library app, on LDS.org, and in the nearest set of scriptures. It's incredible that, even after all my years as a member, I forget that we always have access to the inspiring (and blogworthy) word of God. Next time I don't know what to blog about, I know where I'll go to look for inspiration.
Friday, February 24, 2017
Words Are Small Hinges
Not long ago, I had a conversation about conversations, specifically about how any particular comment could influence a potentially meaningful decision. Case in point, we were trying to decide whether to buy bananas, and which bunch(es) of bananas to buy, and everyone involved made comments that swayed the decision. Now, it probably wasn't a terribly important decision, but some decisions are, and many of them are determined by the culmination of countless subtle forces, including what we say. They say that the world turns on small hinges, and as far as hinges go, words can be about as small as they come. A comment or suggestion may be quickly forgotten, or it may change the course of a person's life. So be cautious when making comments and suggestions. Someone might actually listen to them, and, more importantly, act on them.
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Peace With or Without Answers
I was about to write a blog post about how I worry too much and how I shouldn't let my questions and concerns bother me, and that's still both perfectly true, But while I should make peace with my questions for as long as I still have them, a comment that was made on my last blog posted reminded me of something: I may not be able to answer or even articulate my questions, but that doesn't mean that God can't answer them.
Last night, I expressed my doubts that I would be able to understand God's answers to my questions, assuming I could even figure out how to ask them, but God knows what my questions and their answers are, even if I don't. In saying that I wouldn't be able to understand God's answers, I may or may not have been underestimating my ability to recognise and understand the whisperings of the Spirit, but I was certainly underestimating God's ability to speak and explain.
I know that God knows everything, and I know that He can do anything. Why, then, should it seem impossible to me for Him to (miraculously) convey a message to me in a way that even I could understand? Stranger things have happened. If He wanted to explain agency and sociology to me, or how I can know whom I can trust, or how I can determine what choices I should make, He could do that. He has the ability to tell me everything I ever wanted to know, and then some, in a way in which I could understand.
The fact that He hasn't already done so was momentarily troubling for me, but I realise that, again, God has His reasons. In this case, I would guess that there are many possible reasons why God hasn't explained certain things to me yet. Maybe I just haven't asked Him enough times yet. Maybe He wants me to figure things out on my own. Maybe I'm not supposed to know yet, in that knowing the answers now might spoil part of God's plan for me. Or maybe God hasn't told me the answers because it doesn't really matter.
I don't need to know everything right now. I don't even need to know everything I'm curious or concerned about right now. I know that God can answer my questions, but I may not need Him to. I can have inner peace and a fulfilling life, even if I don't understand everything about that life. I can let go of my concern and let my questions go unanswered for as long as God sees fit. I'll still ask about them, ponder them, and study about them, but I won't worry about them. Not any more.
Last night, I expressed my doubts that I would be able to understand God's answers to my questions, assuming I could even figure out how to ask them, but God knows what my questions and their answers are, even if I don't. In saying that I wouldn't be able to understand God's answers, I may or may not have been underestimating my ability to recognise and understand the whisperings of the Spirit, but I was certainly underestimating God's ability to speak and explain.
I know that God knows everything, and I know that He can do anything. Why, then, should it seem impossible to me for Him to (miraculously) convey a message to me in a way that even I could understand? Stranger things have happened. If He wanted to explain agency and sociology to me, or how I can know whom I can trust, or how I can determine what choices I should make, He could do that. He has the ability to tell me everything I ever wanted to know, and then some, in a way in which I could understand.
The fact that He hasn't already done so was momentarily troubling for me, but I realise that, again, God has His reasons. In this case, I would guess that there are many possible reasons why God hasn't explained certain things to me yet. Maybe I just haven't asked Him enough times yet. Maybe He wants me to figure things out on my own. Maybe I'm not supposed to know yet, in that knowing the answers now might spoil part of God's plan for me. Or maybe God hasn't told me the answers because it doesn't really matter.
I don't need to know everything right now. I don't even need to know everything I'm curious or concerned about right now. I know that God can answer my questions, but I may not need Him to. I can have inner peace and a fulfilling life, even if I don't understand everything about that life. I can let go of my concern and let my questions go unanswered for as long as God sees fit. I'll still ask about them, ponder them, and study about them, but I won't worry about them. Not any more.
Wrestling With and Without Questions
I've found myself wrestling with some pretty deep concepts lately, and most of them are interconnected in ways that makes them difficult to blog about. I wonder about personal freedom in the face of social influences. I worry about trust in the face of dishonesty and deception. I anguish over the spiritual importance of making the right decisions and the difficulty of determining what the right choices are. I have more questions than answers, I have more concerns than questions, and I'm not sure how to find the answers to my questions and concerns. I suppose I could pray about it, but I doubt my ability to correctly interpret any answer that comes. I wish I understood these things well enough to blog about them, or at least well enough to have meaningful questions to ponder, but all I really have right now is a vague dissatisfaction with life and a non-optimistic desire to learn more about it.
I still feel like I can trust God enough to trust in His plan and have faith that everything is going to make sense eventually. I just wish it all made more sense in the here and now.
I still feel like I can trust God enough to trust in His plan and have faith that everything is going to make sense eventually. I just wish it all made more sense in the here and now.
Tuesday, February 21, 2017
Monday, February 20, 2017
Easy XP
In many roleplaying games, characters earn XP mainly by defeating monsters. The tougher the monsters the characters defeat, the more XP they earn, and that XP helps them to "level up" and become stronger. It's like exercising. Generally speaking, the heavier the weights a person lifts, the more strength they gain from lifting that weight. However, in some games, it's possible to gain a significant amount of XP for surprisingly little effort. For example, I know of one D&D adventure module in which a group of characters can "earn" a fair chunk of XP by merely opening a door and staying out of the way of the creature that passes through that door.
Life isn't that easy. In life, gaining experience takes real effort. If we want to get stronger in real life, we need to face real challenges. This is true with spiritual strength as well as physical strength. There is no easy way to gain the strength to resist temptation and choose the right. We can and should pray for such strength, and God will help us develop it, but the process will still take a good deal of effort on our part. There is no "easy XP" in the gospel.
A D&D character may gain easy XP by exploiting cheap tricks, but we won't get off so easily. If we want to gain spiritual experience and spiritual strength, we have to truly earn it.
Life isn't that easy. In life, gaining experience takes real effort. If we want to get stronger in real life, we need to face real challenges. This is true with spiritual strength as well as physical strength. There is no easy way to gain the strength to resist temptation and choose the right. We can and should pray for such strength, and God will help us develop it, but the process will still take a good deal of effort on our part. There is no "easy XP" in the gospel.
A D&D character may gain easy XP by exploiting cheap tricks, but we won't get off so easily. If we want to gain spiritual experience and spiritual strength, we have to truly earn it.
Sunday, February 19, 2017
"As I Have Loved You"
This evening, I had a conversation about the commandment "As I have loved you, love one another," in which we discussed what it meant to love others as Jesus loves us. It was determined fairly quickly that we can't love others to the degree that Jesus loves us. It would be impossibly difficult for us to feel that infinite an amount of love. However, that doesn't mean that this commandment is impossible to keep. Even if we can't love others as much as Jesus loves us, we can still love them in the same manner as He loves us. So, then the question became "How does Jesus show His love for us, and how can we show our love for each other?"
As I was typing that, my fingers accidentally changed "does" into "doesn't," which I believe is appropriate. How doesn't Jesus show His love for us? He loves us in so many ways. He heals us, He teaches us, He strengthens us, He provides for us, He sacrificed Himself for us, He forgives us, He advocates for us, and I could go on. Jesus loves us in an uncountable number of ways.
When we consider all that He does for us, loving others as Jesus loves us simultaneously becomes both harder and easier. It's harder in that it would be difficult to love everyone in all of those ways. Thankfully, we don't have to. At least, not all at the same time. Jesus' love manifests as mercy at some times and as justice at others, and it manifests in healing some and comforting others. We don't have to love everyone in all ways at all times.
Given that, loving others "as I have loved you" becomes easy, if only because Jesus loved us in so many ways. We can love others by serving them, or being kind to them, or by being patient with them, or in any other way we can think of, and we'll still (probably) be loving them in one or more of the ways in which Jesus loves us. It still takes effort, of course. Love always does. But at least we can spend that effort in almost any loving way we see fit. There are many, many ways in which Jesus has shown His love for us. Thus, we have many, many options for how we can show our love for others.
As I was typing that, my fingers accidentally changed "does" into "doesn't," which I believe is appropriate. How doesn't Jesus show His love for us? He loves us in so many ways. He heals us, He teaches us, He strengthens us, He provides for us, He sacrificed Himself for us, He forgives us, He advocates for us, and I could go on. Jesus loves us in an uncountable number of ways.
When we consider all that He does for us, loving others as Jesus loves us simultaneously becomes both harder and easier. It's harder in that it would be difficult to love everyone in all of those ways. Thankfully, we don't have to. At least, not all at the same time. Jesus' love manifests as mercy at some times and as justice at others, and it manifests in healing some and comforting others. We don't have to love everyone in all ways at all times.
Given that, loving others "as I have loved you" becomes easy, if only because Jesus loved us in so many ways. We can love others by serving them, or being kind to them, or by being patient with them, or in any other way we can think of, and we'll still (probably) be loving them in one or more of the ways in which Jesus loves us. It still takes effort, of course. Love always does. But at least we can spend that effort in almost any loving way we see fit. There are many, many ways in which Jesus has shown His love for us. Thus, we have many, many options for how we can show our love for others.
Saturday, February 18, 2017
Choosing the Moral
The story of the loss of the 116 pages is basically a parable, and one thing that's both good and bad about parables is that many different lessons can be drawn from them. The good news is that, as we learn the story, we can learn whichever of a variety of lessons we need most. Whether the story is about trusting the Lord, the dangers of peer pressure, the consequences of sin, or the hope of reinstated blessings, is completely up to us. The bad news is that, as the teacher, I need to pick which lesson to focus on. Which, of the many possible lessons we could learn from this story, should I try to convey to the kids? At first, I thought I should pick whichever lesson I need most, but this lesson isn't about me. Unlike this blog, I'm teaching this class for others' benefit, not mine. But which lesson do the kids need? I don't know any of these kids well enough to make a logical guess.
But I know Someone who does.
I've decided that I'm going to pray about it. God knows which lesson(s) these kids need, and if I listen hard enough, He might be able to tell me which specific lesson I should teach. Of course, no matter what lesson I try to leave with the kids at the end of the class, the basic information will be the same. I'll tell the story mostly the same way, no matter which moral we're supposed to learn from it. I might emphasize some details over others, depending on which lesson we're going for, but the basics of the story won't change, which is fortunate, since the raw facts are what I've been studying about this lesson so far. Now, it's time for me to decide on the specific focus of the lesson, and I hope that the guidance of God can help me make the right decision.
But I know Someone who does.
I've decided that I'm going to pray about it. God knows which lesson(s) these kids need, and if I listen hard enough, He might be able to tell me which specific lesson I should teach. Of course, no matter what lesson I try to leave with the kids at the end of the class, the basic information will be the same. I'll tell the story mostly the same way, no matter which moral we're supposed to learn from it. I might emphasize some details over others, depending on which lesson we're going for, but the basics of the story won't change, which is fortunate, since the raw facts are what I've been studying about this lesson so far. Now, it's time for me to decide on the specific focus of the lesson, and I hope that the guidance of God can help me make the right decision.
God Plans Ahead
Before 592 B.C., the Lord commanded Nephi to make a record of the ministry of his people, separate from his record of the history of his people. One thousand years later, Mormon abridged the record of the history, and then found the record of the ministry, which he decided, perhaps as a result of a prompting, to add at the end of his abridgement. One thousand four hundred years later, the abridgement of the record of the history was translated and subsequently lost, but the record of the ministry remained intact, was translated, and now accounts for the first several books of The Book of Mormon.
God knew the 116 pages would be lost.
God knew that Martin Harris would want to show his family some of what he had translated. God knew that Joseph Smith, at Martin Harris's insistence, would ask again and again for permission to let Martin Harris borrow the 116 pages. God knew that the pages would get lost or stolen and that conspiring men would use them for evil intent. God knew that the first part of the Plates of Mormon wasn't going to make it into The Book of Mormon.
So He made a buffer. He made sure Nephi and his descendants kept an historical record and that Mormon included at least part of that record, so that when Martin Harris lost the 116 pages, all he would end up losing (besides blessings) was a summary of a history book. The ministry of Nephi, his teachings, his testimony, and the rest of the record Mormon would later include and abridge, would remain intact and ultimately get published as The Book of Mormon, partly because God made sure there would be something there that Martin Harris and Joseph Smith could translate and then lose without losing anything too terribly important.
Because God knew, more than two thousand years before it happened, that Smith and Harris would lose the first part of whatever they translated, and He planned ahead to account for that.
I think that now I might understand what God meant when He said that His plans cannot be frustrated (D&C 3:1). No matter what's going to happen next, God knew it was going to happen, and He already accounted for it in His master plan. Now, this raises a few interesting questions, which I should probably explore later, but first, I just want to appreciate the fact that God plans ahead, even multiple millennia in advance.
God knew the 116 pages would be lost.
God knew that Martin Harris would want to show his family some of what he had translated. God knew that Joseph Smith, at Martin Harris's insistence, would ask again and again for permission to let Martin Harris borrow the 116 pages. God knew that the pages would get lost or stolen and that conspiring men would use them for evil intent. God knew that the first part of the Plates of Mormon wasn't going to make it into The Book of Mormon.
So He made a buffer. He made sure Nephi and his descendants kept an historical record and that Mormon included at least part of that record, so that when Martin Harris lost the 116 pages, all he would end up losing (besides blessings) was a summary of a history book. The ministry of Nephi, his teachings, his testimony, and the rest of the record Mormon would later include and abridge, would remain intact and ultimately get published as The Book of Mormon, partly because God made sure there would be something there that Martin Harris and Joseph Smith could translate and then lose without losing anything too terribly important.
Because God knew, more than two thousand years before it happened, that Smith and Harris would lose the first part of whatever they translated, and He planned ahead to account for that.
I think that now I might understand what God meant when He said that His plans cannot be frustrated (D&C 3:1). No matter what's going to happen next, God knew it was going to happen, and He already accounted for it in His master plan. Now, this raises a few interesting questions, which I should probably explore later, but first, I just want to appreciate the fact that God plans ahead, even multiple millennia in advance.
Thursday, February 16, 2017
What Was On the 116 Pages?
In studying my lesson on the story of the 116 pages, I began to grow curious about what was actually lost. I vaguely remembered having heard something about "the Book of Lehi," but I wasn't sure whether that was validated, or just speculation. In my search for answers, I found D&C 10: 44, which describes the lost pages as "only . . . a part, or an abridgment of the account of Nephi."
Mormon expands on this in Words of Mormon 1:3:
So, then, the 116 pages contained an abridgement of the account of Nephi, taken from the plates of Nephi. But then, where did the rumor of the Book of Lehi come from? Was it just a logical step that Lehi, having been the prophet before Nephi, would have kept some records, which should have been the first part of the Book of Mormon, perhaps even the first 116 pages, which were lost?
As it turns out, that wasn't just a guess or some educated speculation. The Doctrine & Covenants and Church History Seminary Manual, Lesson 12, says that "the lost document contained the translation of the book of Lehi, which was in Mormon’s abridgment of the large plates of Nephi." So, there was a Book of Lehi, and it was in the lost 116 pages as part of Mormon's abridgement of the large plates of Nephi, which, according to 1 Nephi 9:4, contained "account of the reign of the kings."
What we lost seems to have been a summary of the historical record of the people of Nephi from Lehi to King Benjamin. The good news is that that doesn't sound terribly important. History tends to be somewhat boring, and what we really need to know about Nephite history, we can pretty much gather from the resources we have. The bad news, as Elder Holland told a group of religious educators on August 9, 1994, is that "We do not know exactly what we missed in the 116 pages." There may have been snippets or insights that would have been really nice to have. Still, we can be satisfied with the records we do have, just as I am reasonably satisfied with the answers I found about what was on those 116 pages.
Mormon expands on this in Words of Mormon 1:3:
And now, I speak somewhat concerning that which I have written; for after I had made an abridgment from the plates of Nephi, down to the reign of this king Benjamin, of whom Amaleki spake, I searched among the records which had been delivered into my hands, and I found these plates, which contained this small account of the prophets, from Jacob down to the reign of this king Benjamin, and also many of the words of Nephi.The "small account" Mormon found seems be referring to what we have now as the first part of the Book of Mormon, from 1 Nephi through Omni, and possibly a little bit into the Book of Mosiah.
So, then, the 116 pages contained an abridgement of the account of Nephi, taken from the plates of Nephi. But then, where did the rumor of the Book of Lehi come from? Was it just a logical step that Lehi, having been the prophet before Nephi, would have kept some records, which should have been the first part of the Book of Mormon, perhaps even the first 116 pages, which were lost?
As it turns out, that wasn't just a guess or some educated speculation. The Doctrine & Covenants and Church History Seminary Manual, Lesson 12, says that "the lost document contained the translation of the book of Lehi, which was in Mormon’s abridgment of the large plates of Nephi." So, there was a Book of Lehi, and it was in the lost 116 pages as part of Mormon's abridgement of the large plates of Nephi, which, according to 1 Nephi 9:4, contained "account of the reign of the kings."
What we lost seems to have been a summary of the historical record of the people of Nephi from Lehi to King Benjamin. The good news is that that doesn't sound terribly important. History tends to be somewhat boring, and what we really need to know about Nephite history, we can pretty much gather from the resources we have. The bad news, as Elder Holland told a group of religious educators on August 9, 1994, is that "We do not know exactly what we missed in the 116 pages." There may have been snippets or insights that would have been really nice to have. Still, we can be satisfied with the records we do have, just as I am reasonably satisfied with the answers I found about what was on those 116 pages.
Wednesday, February 15, 2017
On Accepting and Receiving Answers (In That Order)
I previously puzzled over what the possible difference could be between two consecutive Primary lessons: "Joseph Smith Begins to Translate the Gold Plates" and "Joseph Smith Translates the Gold Plates." What, besides the word "begins," is different about these two lessons? After reading through both of the lessons, I think I have a rough idea about what sets them apart. The first lesson includes the story about Martin Harris and the 116 lost pages, while the second lesson includes the story of Oliver Cowdery's failed attempt to translate the plates. Through these stories, the two lessons convey their practical messages. The first lesson is about accepting the Lord's answers, while the second lesson tells us how we can receive answers from the Lord in the first place.
I wonder about the order of these two lessons. I understand that these stories are being told chronologically, but I wonder if there's a reason we're taught the importance of accepting the Lord's answers before we're taught the best method for how to receive such answers. Actually, come to think of it, the answer is actually fairly clear.
In order to receive guidance from God, we need to have something called "real intent," which basically means "willingness to act on the answer we receive." Given that that's true, it makes sense to learn the importance of accepting the Lord's answers before we learn how to receive them. When Joseph Smith asked the Lord for permission for Martin Harris to show the 116 translated pages to his family, the prophet was told "No." However, Joseph Smith ultimately disregarded this answer, with disastrous results. Joseph Smith learned the hard way that it's important to listen to the Lord when He answers our questions and gives us guidance. Perhaps part of the reason we learn this lesson first is to help us learn from his example so we can avoid making the same mistake.
When God gives us answers and instructions, it's important for us to obey them. Once we receive guidance from God, it becomes important to follow it. Thus, praying to God for instructions without a personal commitment to follow those instructions is a spiritually-risky endeavour. If we receive counsel and act against it, it would probably be better if we hadn't received any guidance at all. For that reason, it makes sense to learn the importance of obeying God's counsel before we learn how we can get it.
Of course, the real reason these lessons are in this order is probably to keep the stories in chronological order, and the reason "Joseph Smith Begins to Translate the Gold Plates" and "Joseph Smith Translates the Gold Plates" are two separate lessons is probably because there is too much material in these two stories to cram them both into one lesson, especially when teaching children. Still, it was fun to speculate about these two lessons, and it taught me a lesson that might be important later: Don't seek out Heavenly guidance until you're ready to commit to act on it. That's probably not the best lesson to take from this, or at least it's not the best way to phrase it, but it's an important lesson nonetheless.
I wonder about the order of these two lessons. I understand that these stories are being told chronologically, but I wonder if there's a reason we're taught the importance of accepting the Lord's answers before we're taught the best method for how to receive such answers. Actually, come to think of it, the answer is actually fairly clear.
In order to receive guidance from God, we need to have something called "real intent," which basically means "willingness to act on the answer we receive." Given that that's true, it makes sense to learn the importance of accepting the Lord's answers before we learn how to receive them. When Joseph Smith asked the Lord for permission for Martin Harris to show the 116 translated pages to his family, the prophet was told "No." However, Joseph Smith ultimately disregarded this answer, with disastrous results. Joseph Smith learned the hard way that it's important to listen to the Lord when He answers our questions and gives us guidance. Perhaps part of the reason we learn this lesson first is to help us learn from his example so we can avoid making the same mistake.
When God gives us answers and instructions, it's important for us to obey them. Once we receive guidance from God, it becomes important to follow it. Thus, praying to God for instructions without a personal commitment to follow those instructions is a spiritually-risky endeavour. If we receive counsel and act against it, it would probably be better if we hadn't received any guidance at all. For that reason, it makes sense to learn the importance of obeying God's counsel before we learn how we can get it.
Of course, the real reason these lessons are in this order is probably to keep the stories in chronological order, and the reason "Joseph Smith Begins to Translate the Gold Plates" and "Joseph Smith Translates the Gold Plates" are two separate lessons is probably because there is too much material in these two stories to cram them both into one lesson, especially when teaching children. Still, it was fun to speculate about these two lessons, and it taught me a lesson that might be important later: Don't seek out Heavenly guidance until you're ready to commit to act on it. That's probably not the best lesson to take from this, or at least it's not the best way to phrase it, but it's an important lesson nonetheless.
Tuesday, February 14, 2017
Play Through Mistakes
This morning, I heard some some fantastic piano-playing advice: Learn to play through mistakes. When a person hits a wrong note on a piano, it can really throw off the music. Not only can the wrong note sour the song for the listeners, the embarrassment of having played a wrong note can stun or distract the pianist, which can cause him or her to make more mistakes. Of course, the best way to react to a piano-playing mistake isn't to go back to the beginning and start over or to stop playing, but to keep playing as though the mistake never happened. Distract the audience from the mistake you made with the beautiful music you're making now. Move on as quickly as possible, and put the memory out of your mind. Instead, focus on what you're playing now and what you will play a few measures ahead.
The analogy to repentance is clear and powerful, if a bit flawed. When we sin, it's like hitting a wrong note on a piano. It sounds bad, both to us and to anyone else who hears it. When we make such a mistake, we sometimes compound the mistake by believing that our sin is a major setback or that celestial behavior is beyond our capability. We freeze up, go back, or give up, when what we should do is push forward. God knows we're human. God knows we make mistakes; it's part of the plan. That's why a key component of God's plan is repentance.
And repentance does not mean setting ourselves back and starting our spiritual journey over from the beginning. Repentance means changing our behavior. Repentance isn't about the past. It's about the present and the future. When we sin, it's not up to us to fix the mistake. God does that part. Our job is to learn from the mistake and use that wisdom to do better going forward. That's where reality breaks from the analogy. While the pianist would do well to put the misstep out of his or her mind so it doesn't distract him or her, the sinner might do well to remember his or her sin, to remind him or her not to make the same mistake again.
Still, while remembering the past can be helpful, the key thing is to get back on track and to resume moving forward as soon as possible. Our enemy would love to have us agonize over our mistakes and live in paralysed fear of repeating them, but doing nothing is just as damning as doing evil. We need to move forward. We need to move passed our mistakes. The sooner we get back on track and put our past mistakes behind us, the better, even if we made those mistakes only a few moments ago. We still need to pray for forgiveness, but we must not let the memory of our sins hold us back or convince us to resign ourselves to continue sinning. Just as a pianist must play through it quickly when he or she makes a mistake, so too should we repent quickly when we sin. Making mistakes is inevitable. What's important is that we learn from them quickly and not let them trip us up or hold us back.
The analogy to repentance is clear and powerful, if a bit flawed. When we sin, it's like hitting a wrong note on a piano. It sounds bad, both to us and to anyone else who hears it. When we make such a mistake, we sometimes compound the mistake by believing that our sin is a major setback or that celestial behavior is beyond our capability. We freeze up, go back, or give up, when what we should do is push forward. God knows we're human. God knows we make mistakes; it's part of the plan. That's why a key component of God's plan is repentance.
And repentance does not mean setting ourselves back and starting our spiritual journey over from the beginning. Repentance means changing our behavior. Repentance isn't about the past. It's about the present and the future. When we sin, it's not up to us to fix the mistake. God does that part. Our job is to learn from the mistake and use that wisdom to do better going forward. That's where reality breaks from the analogy. While the pianist would do well to put the misstep out of his or her mind so it doesn't distract him or her, the sinner might do well to remember his or her sin, to remind him or her not to make the same mistake again.
Still, while remembering the past can be helpful, the key thing is to get back on track and to resume moving forward as soon as possible. Our enemy would love to have us agonize over our mistakes and live in paralysed fear of repeating them, but doing nothing is just as damning as doing evil. We need to move forward. We need to move passed our mistakes. The sooner we get back on track and put our past mistakes behind us, the better, even if we made those mistakes only a few moments ago. We still need to pray for forgiveness, but we must not let the memory of our sins hold us back or convince us to resign ourselves to continue sinning. Just as a pianist must play through it quickly when he or she makes a mistake, so too should we repent quickly when we sin. Making mistakes is inevitable. What's important is that we learn from them quickly and not let them trip us up or hold us back.
Monday, February 13, 2017
A Good Life
I just watched a video, the last in the Crash Course: Philosophy videos, which talks about what it means to live a good life. Some believe that a good life is a comfortable one, or maybe a fun and exciting one, and I won't fault them for thinking so. I think that a good life would and should contain elements of comfort, excitement, and fun. But for a life to be truly "good," the bulk of it must be spent doing good, which is seldom comfortable or exciting. Unfortunately for those of us who are too fond of leisure time and idle amusement, these are not the things that bring one lasting happiness, and they are not the core elements of a rewarding life. I live to have a rewarding life. I want to live a good life. And if I want to live a good life and truly be a good person, I'm going to have to spend less of my time seeking after the fun and leisure I desire, and instead, I'm going to have to spend more of my time doing good.
Sunday, February 12, 2017
"My Pleasure" and "Any Time"
I've been meaning to blog about two more ways to say "you're welcome," and I guess now's as good a time as any, especially since I was reminded of this earlier today. Previously, I had blogged about what "you're welcome" really means and when it would or would not be appropriate to say it. I also blogged about the phrase "no problem" which is appropriate even less frequently. There are at least two other ways to respond to thanks: "my pleasure" and "any time."
I can say from personal experience that doing service is not always a pleasure. Sometimes, it's just a bunch of hard work which isn't much fun and doesn't seem fairly rewarding. Of course, that seems to depend largely on a person's attitude. There are occasions when it really is a pleasure to serve someone. With the right attitude, many forms of service can become enjoyable. This happens to me most frequently when the help I'm doing for someone involves doing something I consider fun, or when I'm doing something for someone that I have a strong desire to serve. There are a handful of people that I would gladly go out of my way to help, and it usually is "my pleasure" to help them.
Along the same lines, one cannot always promise to give service "any time." Sometimes, we're busy. Sometimes, we literally cannot help others. For this reason, I don't consider "any time" a promise. I consider it more of a statement of willingness. To me, it means "I would do that for you any time." The word would here is important. It means that we will always be willing to perform that service, when we can. I suppose, in a sense, "any time" is a promise, but it has a few conditions, ability and availability being among them. Still, it's something you can say to someone to tell them that you'd be willing to help them again.
You can't always say "my pleasure" or "any time" to someone and really mean it, just as you can't always honestly say "no problem" or even "you're welcome." But "my pleasure" and "any time" do have their usefulness, and they are sometimes appropriate to say. There are times when it's a pleasure to serve someone, and there are some people we'd be willing to serve, or some acts of service we'd be willing to give, "any time." And when we're in a situation when one of those phrases may apply, we might as well be open and polite and say what we really mean.
I can say from personal experience that doing service is not always a pleasure. Sometimes, it's just a bunch of hard work which isn't much fun and doesn't seem fairly rewarding. Of course, that seems to depend largely on a person's attitude. There are occasions when it really is a pleasure to serve someone. With the right attitude, many forms of service can become enjoyable. This happens to me most frequently when the help I'm doing for someone involves doing something I consider fun, or when I'm doing something for someone that I have a strong desire to serve. There are a handful of people that I would gladly go out of my way to help, and it usually is "my pleasure" to help them.
Along the same lines, one cannot always promise to give service "any time." Sometimes, we're busy. Sometimes, we literally cannot help others. For this reason, I don't consider "any time" a promise. I consider it more of a statement of willingness. To me, it means "I would do that for you any time." The word would here is important. It means that we will always be willing to perform that service, when we can. I suppose, in a sense, "any time" is a promise, but it has a few conditions, ability and availability being among them. Still, it's something you can say to someone to tell them that you'd be willing to help them again.
You can't always say "my pleasure" or "any time" to someone and really mean it, just as you can't always honestly say "no problem" or even "you're welcome." But "my pleasure" and "any time" do have their usefulness, and they are sometimes appropriate to say. There are times when it's a pleasure to serve someone, and there are some people we'd be willing to serve, or some acts of service we'd be willing to give, "any time." And when we're in a situation when one of those phrases may apply, we might as well be open and polite and say what we really mean.
Saturday, February 11, 2017
Taking It On Faith
For a few days now, I've been trying to wrap my head around something that I don't know if I'll ever understand. Now, I could spend hours trying to explain the various arguments I've heard and discuss the many questions and theories that have crossed my mind lately, but I'm not sure how helpful any of that would be. Besides, it'd take so much time! For now, I think I'm going to have to be content with knowing that I'm not going to understand it any time soon, and that this is just one of those things that I'm going to have to take on faith. Some might consider that foolish, and maybe it is. Maybe God wants me to try and puzzle it out. But I'm not going to figure it out. At least, not tonight. For tonight, I'm just going to have to accept that the teachings of the Gospel are true, even if this one particular teaching I've been thinking about doesn't seem to make logical sense. Maybe I'll have God explain it to me when I see Him next. In the meantime, I'll just take it on faith.
Friday, February 10, 2017
Are We Willing?
Yesterday, I admitted that willingness probably wasn't the strongest factor in how I felt about something I did, but now I wish it had been, as that would have led perfectly into what I wanted to share from the next Conference talk.
In the talked titled "The Sacrament Can Help Us Become Holy," Elder Peter F. Meurs singles out a phrase from the Sacrament prayers that I, too, would like to highlight:
This is a decision that we each have to make for ourselves multiple times each day. Every time we're faced with a choice, it becomes our responsibility to make a decision. And our eternal destiny is shaped by our decisions. There are factors that may influence our decisions, and there are forces outside of our control, but at the end of the day, it's what we decide to do that matters. No one can force us to do the right or wrong thing, and going through the motions isn't going to do us much good anyway. We each have to determine for ourselves whether we are willing to choose the right.
In the talked titled "The Sacrament Can Help Us Become Holy," Elder Peter F. Meurs singles out a phrase from the Sacrament prayers that I, too, would like to highlight:
The prayers introduce the covenants with the phrase “that they are willing” (Moroni 4:3). This phrase has so much potential power for us. Are we willing to serve and participate? Are we willing to change? Are we willing to address our weaknesses? Are we willing to reach out and bless others? Are we willing to trust the Savior?Note that this isn't a question of ability, or even one of desire. What God asks of us goes beyond desire and is utterly independent of ability. God doesn't ask us if we can serve, participate, change, address our weaknesses, reach out, bless others, and trust Him. He already knows that we can, even if we need His help to do so. He is also not asking if we want to do those things, because merely wanting to is not enough. He asks if we are willing to do them, if we can. Would we choose to do the right things? Will we?
This is a decision that we each have to make for ourselves multiple times each day. Every time we're faced with a choice, it becomes our responsibility to make a decision. And our eternal destiny is shaped by our decisions. There are factors that may influence our decisions, and there are forces outside of our control, but at the end of the day, it's what we decide to do that matters. No one can force us to do the right or wrong thing, and going through the motions isn't going to do us much good anyway. We each have to determine for ourselves whether we are willing to choose the right.
Thursday, February 9, 2017
The Tale of Two Handouts
A short time ago, I had an opportunity to perform two acts of charity back-to-back, but the two acts, though similar in nature, were far different in context and result. The first act of charity was to give some money to someone who hadn't asked for it, but whom I knew and felt indebted to, and who had just experienced some unexpected and financially-detrimental bad luck. The second act of charity was to give a much smaller amount of money to a stranger who had asked for it, and whom I suspected hadn't needed it quite as badly as he said he had. After the first act of charity, I felt like a good Christian and a good friend. After the second act, I felt like a sucker.
I think that the main difference between these two acts, or at least, the difference that had the greatest impact on my feelings, was my willingness. The first act of charity, I performed because I wanted to. The second act of charity, I performed because I was asked to. Often, I do good things of my own volition, and I feel good, and just as often, if not more often, I do good things because someone asks me to, and I frequently feel weak.
Of course, this aversion to providing asked-for help does not apply when I am helping someone I feel very close to. When a good friend or close family member asks me for help, I am usually more than happy to provide it. Perhaps this was part of the reason I felt good about the first act and bad about the second. I was friends with the first recipient, but I was a stranger to the second.
Granted, a lack of familiarity isn't a good reason to withhold aid. Jesus famously counselled His followers to bless strangers. We should do so. I just sometimes worry that those strangers who ask for help may be abusing our charity.
The first person I gave money to had a very real and obvious financial need. I was certain he wasn't going to misspend the money, but was going to use it to help offset his recent misfortune. Of the second person's financial plans, I was less certain. He claimed that he needed the money for transportation, and I wish I had watched him more closely, to see if he actually used it for that, but I don't think he did. Perhaps I shouldn't be so judgemental, but I would rather be sure that my charitable funds are going toward worthwhile endeavors.
At times, I feel like I give too much in general, in both time and money, but the amount of money was not a factor this time. The second act of charity cost me less than the first one had, but I felt better about the first act than I did about the second. There are many factors that contributed to my satisfaction, or lack thereof, at the end of those two acts, but I don't think monetary quantity was one of them.
Upon further review, I don't think my willingness to give away the money played the biggest role in determining how I felt afterwards. I have given less-than-willing service before and felt fully satisfied by the end of the service. Perhaps my level of satisfaction is based mostly upon the recipient, but I don't know why that might be. Perhaps it's because I'd rather help trusted friends than unknown beggars, though that sounds rather selfish of me. I don't fully understand why I felt so differently about those two acts of charity, but I do understand that there were several differences that each might have had an influence on how I felt about the two handouts.
I think that the main difference between these two acts, or at least, the difference that had the greatest impact on my feelings, was my willingness. The first act of charity, I performed because I wanted to. The second act of charity, I performed because I was asked to. Often, I do good things of my own volition, and I feel good, and just as often, if not more often, I do good things because someone asks me to, and I frequently feel weak.
Of course, this aversion to providing asked-for help does not apply when I am helping someone I feel very close to. When a good friend or close family member asks me for help, I am usually more than happy to provide it. Perhaps this was part of the reason I felt good about the first act and bad about the second. I was friends with the first recipient, but I was a stranger to the second.
Granted, a lack of familiarity isn't a good reason to withhold aid. Jesus famously counselled His followers to bless strangers. We should do so. I just sometimes worry that those strangers who ask for help may be abusing our charity.
The first person I gave money to had a very real and obvious financial need. I was certain he wasn't going to misspend the money, but was going to use it to help offset his recent misfortune. Of the second person's financial plans, I was less certain. He claimed that he needed the money for transportation, and I wish I had watched him more closely, to see if he actually used it for that, but I don't think he did. Perhaps I shouldn't be so judgemental, but I would rather be sure that my charitable funds are going toward worthwhile endeavors.
At times, I feel like I give too much in general, in both time and money, but the amount of money was not a factor this time. The second act of charity cost me less than the first one had, but I felt better about the first act than I did about the second. There are many factors that contributed to my satisfaction, or lack thereof, at the end of those two acts, but I don't think monetary quantity was one of them.
Upon further review, I don't think my willingness to give away the money played the biggest role in determining how I felt afterwards. I have given less-than-willing service before and felt fully satisfied by the end of the service. Perhaps my level of satisfaction is based mostly upon the recipient, but I don't know why that might be. Perhaps it's because I'd rather help trusted friends than unknown beggars, though that sounds rather selfish of me. I don't fully understand why I felt so differently about those two acts of charity, but I do understand that there were several differences that each might have had an influence on how I felt about the two handouts.
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Emotion Contagion
Today, in my Interpersonal Communication class, we talked about emotions. We talked about the fact that emotions are contagious (though, apparently, there aren't any solid theories as to why that is), and that, given that emotions are contagious, it's important to spread positive emotions and not catch negative ones. We can spread positive emotions by expressing them. This can be as simple as smiling, or as blunt as talking about how we feel when we're feeling good. Spreading positive emotions is fairly easy. What's harder is not catching negative ones.
We can avoid catching negative emotions in much the same way that we can avoid catching a disease: by avoiding those who carry them, by wearing a surgical mask, by washing our hands frequently, and by keeping our immune system strong. Avoiding those who are being negative is not always possible. You can try to "cure" their negative emotions, but that doesn't always work, either. Other methods include placing a mental barrier between their emotions and yours, basically deciding not to let their emotions affect yours; frequently "curing" the negative emotions you get from them; and developing a positive attitude that's hard to bring down.
It is possible to avoid catching negative emotions, and it's easy to spread good ones. May we apply our medical knowledge to our feelings, so we can maintain and spread good emotional health.
We can avoid catching negative emotions in much the same way that we can avoid catching a disease: by avoiding those who carry them, by wearing a surgical mask, by washing our hands frequently, and by keeping our immune system strong. Avoiding those who are being negative is not always possible. You can try to "cure" their negative emotions, but that doesn't always work, either. Other methods include placing a mental barrier between their emotions and yours, basically deciding not to let their emotions affect yours; frequently "curing" the negative emotions you get from them; and developing a positive attitude that's hard to bring down.
It is possible to avoid catching negative emotions, and it's easy to spread good ones. May we apply our medical knowledge to our feelings, so we can maintain and spread good emotional health.
Decisive, but not Divisive
Last night, a friend of mine introduced me to Hamilton, a musical about Alexander Hamilton and his involvement in the American Revolution. I found the story compelling and the music catchy. There are many clever rhymes and rhyming patterns. However, if you look into it, I should warn you that many of the songs are laced with strong language and some of them address adult topics. If that sort of stuff doesn't bother you, I'd recommend looking it up, though I've only heard the music of the musical; I can't give any review about the rest of the play.
Anyhow, at one point, Alexander Hamilton tells Aaron Burr that he'd "rather be divisive than indecisive," and I couldn't help thinking that that's kind of a false dichotomy. I believe that a person can disagree with someone else about something, and disagree firmly, without necessarily driving a wedge between themselves and the other person.
Of course, that may just be wishful thinking on my part. Like Rex from Toy Story, "I don't like confrontations," but at the same time, I believe that it's morally important for a person to stand by their principles. I certainly hope that a person can stand by their principles without causing a confrontation. People can agree to disagree, can't they?
Maybe some people can, about some things, but it also depends largely on the other person. If I make the decision to support a politician or political ideology (or any ideology, really) which you absolutely despise, you can terminate our friendship, and there'd be nothing I could do to prevent it. And the same thing is true in reverse. No matter how nice you are about it, if I decide I can't be friends with you because of some choice you've made, there's not much you can do about that.
Of course, that's not going to happen. I believe in bridges, acceptance (or at least tolerance), and open communication. Even when two people firmly decide on opposing ideologies or candidates, I think it's possible for them to keep the channels open and their friendship alive. One doesn't have to sever ties with those who disagree with them. Hamilton may be right in thinking that it's better to be divisive than indecisive, but I believe that a person doesn't actually have to be either.
Anyhow, at one point, Alexander Hamilton tells Aaron Burr that he'd "rather be divisive than indecisive," and I couldn't help thinking that that's kind of a false dichotomy. I believe that a person can disagree with someone else about something, and disagree firmly, without necessarily driving a wedge between themselves and the other person.
Of course, that may just be wishful thinking on my part. Like Rex from Toy Story, "I don't like confrontations," but at the same time, I believe that it's morally important for a person to stand by their principles. I certainly hope that a person can stand by their principles without causing a confrontation. People can agree to disagree, can't they?
Maybe some people can, about some things, but it also depends largely on the other person. If I make the decision to support a politician or political ideology (or any ideology, really) which you absolutely despise, you can terminate our friendship, and there'd be nothing I could do to prevent it. And the same thing is true in reverse. No matter how nice you are about it, if I decide I can't be friends with you because of some choice you've made, there's not much you can do about that.
Of course, that's not going to happen. I believe in bridges, acceptance (or at least tolerance), and open communication. Even when two people firmly decide on opposing ideologies or candidates, I think it's possible for them to keep the channels open and their friendship alive. One doesn't have to sever ties with those who disagree with them. Hamilton may be right in thinking that it's better to be divisive than indecisive, but I believe that a person doesn't actually have to be either.
Monday, February 6, 2017
Privileged
Right now, I'm in a house, listening to the rain. I'm sitting on a couch. There's a light on above me. I am warm. As we speak, I am practising a talent that allows me to communicate, almost effortlessly, with everyone in the world.
I am privileged. I wish more people were.
The Earth is not a Zero-Sum planet. There don't have to be "have-nots." Everyone can be, and should be, at least as privileged as I am.
I am comfortable. I have a decent job doing something I enjoy and do well. I have the privilege of learning. And yes, I have to walk half a mile to the bus stop every morning and evening, but I do so in safety. I am not in fear for my life. Everyone should be so privileged.
People listen to me. Some people even like me. Off of the top of my head, I can't think of anyone who especially dislikes me. No one mistreats me or disrespects me because of my gender, religion, or ethnicity, even when they disagree with me. Everyone should be so lucky.
I live in the land of the free and of opportunity. I live where hard work and grit can bring prosperity. There should be more lands like that. The whole Earth should be a land like that.
I'm not a revolutionary. I don't want to grab a flag in one hand and a gun in the other and go out to change the world. I believe that the world can change gradually and peacefully, perhaps through writing. Maybe I'm naive. Maybe this is a pipe dream, but I dream of a day when everyone is at least as privileged as me.
I am privileged. I wish more people were.
The Earth is not a Zero-Sum planet. There don't have to be "have-nots." Everyone can be, and should be, at least as privileged as I am.
I am comfortable. I have a decent job doing something I enjoy and do well. I have the privilege of learning. And yes, I have to walk half a mile to the bus stop every morning and evening, but I do so in safety. I am not in fear for my life. Everyone should be so privileged.
People listen to me. Some people even like me. Off of the top of my head, I can't think of anyone who especially dislikes me. No one mistreats me or disrespects me because of my gender, religion, or ethnicity, even when they disagree with me. Everyone should be so lucky.
I live in the land of the free and of opportunity. I live where hard work and grit can bring prosperity. There should be more lands like that. The whole Earth should be a land like that.
I'm not a revolutionary. I don't want to grab a flag in one hand and a gun in the other and go out to change the world. I believe that the world can change gradually and peacefully, perhaps through writing. Maybe I'm naive. Maybe this is a pipe dream, but I dream of a day when everyone is at least as privileged as me.
Sunday, February 5, 2017
Final Preparations
As is typical for me when I have to give a lesson or talk in church, I'd like to use this blog of mine as a platform to prepare a working outline for my lesson. For this lesson, I think I'll keep the children engaged by asking them questions related to the lesson. I'll try to keep most of the questions open-ended so there'll be few, if any, wrong answers.
When was a time when you had to wait for something?
This will be the icebreaker question. I'll invite the kids to share an experience, and I'll ask them how it felt to have to wait. If no one thinks of anything they want to share, perhaps I'll remind them that, since it's Fast Sunday, we all have to wait until dinner to eat anything today.
I'll try not to convey the impression that having to wait is a bad thing. I'll testify that, often, waiting is important, even necessary. Then I'll tie this all into the lesson by teaching the kids that Joseph Smith had to wait to receive the gold plates, and that he wasn't just waiting - he was preparing.
How long did Joseph Smith have to prepare to receive the gold plates?
Four years after having met Moroni, seven years after the First Vision, or 21 years.
Even numeric questions with clearly correct answers can become open-ended, if you interpret the question creatively. Plus, I'm pretty sure the kids won't know the answer to this question. Personally, I had to look it up. If I ask this question, I'll mostly just be asking for guesses.
How did Moroni help prepare Joseph?
Joseph Smith went back every year, to receive "instruction and intelligence . . . respecting what the Lord was going to do, and how and in what manner his kingdom was to be conducted in the last days."
This might be a good place for us to start looking into the scriptures, especially the one I quoted above. This class likes looking up and reading scriptures, so I'll prepare a list of scriptures we can turn to throughout the lesson. In fact, it'd be a good idea to use the scriptures in Joseph Smith - History to answer the question of how long Joseph Smith had to wait to obtain the plates.
What are we preparing for?
Callings, Missions, Priesthood, Parenthood.
This is the practical application part of the lesson. It's one thing to know that Joseph Smith had to prepare to become a prophet; it's another thing to know that we have some preparation to do as well. If these Primary kids I'm teaching today continue in the Gospel, they'll all become leaders and teachers someday, and it wouldn't hurt if they started, now, to think about how they can prepare themselves for that.
How can we prepare ourselves, and how does God help us prepare?
There are many answers to this one, and most of them are "Sunday School" answers, like Scriptures and Church. God also prepares us by giving us experiences, like how He prepares Primary children to be leaders and teachers by having them give short lessons and leading the others in scripture recital during Sharing time. We can help the preparation process along by thinking about and learning from our experiences.
What happens when we don't prepare for important things?
We fail. Usually badly.
I might not ask this one. It's hardly a Sunday School lesson without some kind of warning, but these are just kids. I'll ask the question if I get an opportunity and it feels right. Otherwise, I'll just make do with the other questions.
Scriptures
JS-H 1:27 and 1:59 give the years in which Joseph Smith saw and retrieved the plates, and we could do the math from there, but they also include a good deal of information that's unnecessary (for this lesson) and could be distracting. JS-H 1:53 gives away the answer to our little math problem and emphasizes that Joseph Smith needed to wait and prepare. Perhaps I'll ask the first two questions in relatively quick succession, and then follow them up by having someone read JS-H 1:53. JS-H 1:54 tells about how Joseph Smith was prepared to receive the gold plates and what he was taught during those four years.
I'm having trouble thinking of additional scriptures, and I'm running out of time. Perhaps if I had spent more time preparing for this lesson, I'd have half a dozen scriptures by now, but there's no use thinking about that now, except to remind myself to do better next time. Maybe I'll look for more scriptures during Sacrament Meeting. Anyhow, this is probably enough of an outline to go off of. This plan will probably take up most of the time I'll be given, and if we have any time left over, we can play a few rounds of hangman, which the children enjoy about as much as looking up scriptures. Of course, scriptures would be preferable, and I'll try to find more I can share, but we'll probably end up playing a round or two of hangman as well.
Okay, I have a plan, and I have plans to improve my plan. Right now, and hoping I'm not jinxing myself, I'm feeling fairly well-prepared to give this lesson.
When was a time when you had to wait for something?
This will be the icebreaker question. I'll invite the kids to share an experience, and I'll ask them how it felt to have to wait. If no one thinks of anything they want to share, perhaps I'll remind them that, since it's Fast Sunday, we all have to wait until dinner to eat anything today.
I'll try not to convey the impression that having to wait is a bad thing. I'll testify that, often, waiting is important, even necessary. Then I'll tie this all into the lesson by teaching the kids that Joseph Smith had to wait to receive the gold plates, and that he wasn't just waiting - he was preparing.
How long did Joseph Smith have to prepare to receive the gold plates?
Four years after having met Moroni, seven years after the First Vision, or 21 years.
Even numeric questions with clearly correct answers can become open-ended, if you interpret the question creatively. Plus, I'm pretty sure the kids won't know the answer to this question. Personally, I had to look it up. If I ask this question, I'll mostly just be asking for guesses.
How did Moroni help prepare Joseph?
Joseph Smith went back every year, to receive "instruction and intelligence . . . respecting what the Lord was going to do, and how and in what manner his kingdom was to be conducted in the last days."
This might be a good place for us to start looking into the scriptures, especially the one I quoted above. This class likes looking up and reading scriptures, so I'll prepare a list of scriptures we can turn to throughout the lesson. In fact, it'd be a good idea to use the scriptures in Joseph Smith - History to answer the question of how long Joseph Smith had to wait to obtain the plates.
What are we preparing for?
Callings, Missions, Priesthood, Parenthood.
This is the practical application part of the lesson. It's one thing to know that Joseph Smith had to prepare to become a prophet; it's another thing to know that we have some preparation to do as well. If these Primary kids I'm teaching today continue in the Gospel, they'll all become leaders and teachers someday, and it wouldn't hurt if they started, now, to think about how they can prepare themselves for that.
How can we prepare ourselves, and how does God help us prepare?
There are many answers to this one, and most of them are "Sunday School" answers, like Scriptures and Church. God also prepares us by giving us experiences, like how He prepares Primary children to be leaders and teachers by having them give short lessons and leading the others in scripture recital during Sharing time. We can help the preparation process along by thinking about and learning from our experiences.
What happens when we don't prepare for important things?
We fail. Usually badly.
I might not ask this one. It's hardly a Sunday School lesson without some kind of warning, but these are just kids. I'll ask the question if I get an opportunity and it feels right. Otherwise, I'll just make do with the other questions.
Scriptures
JS-H 1:27 and 1:59 give the years in which Joseph Smith saw and retrieved the plates, and we could do the math from there, but they also include a good deal of information that's unnecessary (for this lesson) and could be distracting. JS-H 1:53 gives away the answer to our little math problem and emphasizes that Joseph Smith needed to wait and prepare. Perhaps I'll ask the first two questions in relatively quick succession, and then follow them up by having someone read JS-H 1:53. JS-H 1:54 tells about how Joseph Smith was prepared to receive the gold plates and what he was taught during those four years.
I'm having trouble thinking of additional scriptures, and I'm running out of time. Perhaps if I had spent more time preparing for this lesson, I'd have half a dozen scriptures by now, but there's no use thinking about that now, except to remind myself to do better next time. Maybe I'll look for more scriptures during Sacrament Meeting. Anyhow, this is probably enough of an outline to go off of. This plan will probably take up most of the time I'll be given, and if we have any time left over, we can play a few rounds of hangman, which the children enjoy about as much as looking up scriptures. Of course, scriptures would be preferable, and I'll try to find more I can share, but we'll probably end up playing a round or two of hangman as well.
Okay, I have a plan, and I have plans to improve my plan. Right now, and hoping I'm not jinxing myself, I'm feeling fairly well-prepared to give this lesson.
Saturday, February 4, 2017
Lengthy Lesson Schedule - Digging Into Details
For a couple of weeks now, I've been playing the role of a substitute helper in a Primary class at church, but this week, I'll be doing a bit more than trying to convince the boys to stop leaning their chairs back. This week, I'm going to teach a lesson in Primary.
In Primary, lessons happen slowly. While an adult class might spend one lesson on the Restoration, the Primary kids, or at least the ones I've been asked to teach, stretch out the Joseph Smith story so that there are three separate lessons for Moroni's visit to Joseph Smith, Joseph Smith receiving the gold plates, and the four-year span of time between those two events. I will be teaching about that four-year time span.
Incidentally, this Primary lesson manual also has distinct lessons for "Joseph Smith Begins to Translate the Gold Plates" and "Joseph Smith Translates the Gold Plates," and odds are that I'll teach at least one of those lessons, so it'll be interesting to explore what the distinctions are.
This stretching of the story over a long period of time accomplishes many good things. First, it gives the Primary kids enough time to learn all of the essential elements of the Restoration, despite only being able to focus on a lesson for a handful of minutes at a time. And second, it allows those who teach the Primary kids an opportunity to dive deeply into the details of a story they already knew fairly well.
For example, I already knew that a few years passed between the time Joseph Smith first saw the plates and the time he actually obtained them, and I knew that he received annual lessons during that time, but I never really stopped to think about what he must have been learning over those years, or why it was important for Joseph Smith to spend so much time preparing to receive the plates. In adult classes, we sometimes gloss over the time between the First Vision and Joseph obtaining the plates, little realizing that that period of time is a few months over seven years long. Joseph Smith was 14 years old when he learned that God had a work for him to do, and he was 21 by the time he and the world were ready for that work to begin. A lot can happen during that period of time. I think that God was wise to provide for such a long period of preparation and learning.
The same is true in Primary. The lessons are drawn out over long periods of time, partly so there's time for each part of the message to sink in, partly to give the learners time to apply and practice what they're learning, and partly to give the students enough time to learn as they mature and mature as they learn. I like this drawn-out lesson schedule. I think it's helpful, both for the young students and the experienced teachers, to be able to spend so much time focussing on each detail. In fact, even with this lesson schedule, I'm sure there are still many details we miss. There's a lot more to the Gospel and the history of the church than can be covered in a handful of lessons, which is partly why I'm grateful that I'll have the opportunity to dig into the details that I usually overlook.
In Primary, lessons happen slowly. While an adult class might spend one lesson on the Restoration, the Primary kids, or at least the ones I've been asked to teach, stretch out the Joseph Smith story so that there are three separate lessons for Moroni's visit to Joseph Smith, Joseph Smith receiving the gold plates, and the four-year span of time between those two events. I will be teaching about that four-year time span.
Incidentally, this Primary lesson manual also has distinct lessons for "Joseph Smith Begins to Translate the Gold Plates" and "Joseph Smith Translates the Gold Plates," and odds are that I'll teach at least one of those lessons, so it'll be interesting to explore what the distinctions are.
This stretching of the story over a long period of time accomplishes many good things. First, it gives the Primary kids enough time to learn all of the essential elements of the Restoration, despite only being able to focus on a lesson for a handful of minutes at a time. And second, it allows those who teach the Primary kids an opportunity to dive deeply into the details of a story they already knew fairly well.
For example, I already knew that a few years passed between the time Joseph Smith first saw the plates and the time he actually obtained them, and I knew that he received annual lessons during that time, but I never really stopped to think about what he must have been learning over those years, or why it was important for Joseph Smith to spend so much time preparing to receive the plates. In adult classes, we sometimes gloss over the time between the First Vision and Joseph obtaining the plates, little realizing that that period of time is a few months over seven years long. Joseph Smith was 14 years old when he learned that God had a work for him to do, and he was 21 by the time he and the world were ready for that work to begin. A lot can happen during that period of time. I think that God was wise to provide for such a long period of preparation and learning.
The same is true in Primary. The lessons are drawn out over long periods of time, partly so there's time for each part of the message to sink in, partly to give the learners time to apply and practice what they're learning, and partly to give the students enough time to learn as they mature and mature as they learn. I like this drawn-out lesson schedule. I think it's helpful, both for the young students and the experienced teachers, to be able to spend so much time focussing on each detail. In fact, even with this lesson schedule, I'm sure there are still many details we miss. There's a lot more to the Gospel and the history of the church than can be covered in a handful of lessons, which is partly why I'm grateful that I'll have the opportunity to dig into the details that I usually overlook.
Should Hector Kill the Coffin-Maker?
More moral dilemmas courtesy of D&D.
My character, Hector, has been charged with the task of recovering a holy relic that belongs to, and protected, a local church. The relic had been stolen, and without it, the church is vulnerable to attacks by undead monsters. Hector has learned the identity of the thief, a coffin-maker named Henrik, and may now go confront him. But here's the dilemma: After recovering the stolen relic, Hector will likely have an opportunity to either kill the coffin-maker, or spare him. Hector has decided that he should have killed the ruffians. Now he must decide whether he will kill the coffin-maker.
On one hand, killing is usually wrong. When there is a peaceful solution, killing is almost always wrong. It is very likely that Hector will be able to reclaim the relic without killing the man who stole it.
However, if the coffin-maker is spared, what would prevent him from stealing the relic again? And there is the law of justice to consider. There must be some punishment or recompense.
Yet, this is not like the encounter with the ruffians on the road. This isn't the lawless wilderness. We're in a town. This town is certain to have laws and those whose job it is to enforce those laws. Certainly, this thief could be satisfactorilly penalized by the local law-enforcers.
But that requires the local law to be just, and one cannot always count on the law to be just.
Then, should Hector take the law into his own hands? Should he mete out his own form of justice? Probably not. Though, perhaps it depends on the coffin-maker's motives. If the coffin-maker's motives were evil and the corrupt legal system would let him go unpunished, perhaps Hector should mete out a more just punishment (though killing is probably still too much). However, if the coffin-maker's motives were good, perhaps no punishment is deserved at all.
As before, I wish I knew more about the situation, but fortunately, this time, Hector still has time to ask. Hector can learn about the thief's motives and the justice of the local legal system before making any permanent decisions.
Still, I suspect it will be a tough moral decision, but ultimately, I think it would probably be best to err on the side of mercy. Hector probably shouldn't kill the coffin-maker, and he probably won't, but it's interesting to think about these moral decisions and to speculate about the situations in which he actually should kill the coffin-maker, as unlikely as those situations might be. There is a line that divides those who should be killed and those who shouldn't, but I wonder where, exactly, that line is, and how Hector can determine whether or not the coffin-maker has crossed it.
My character, Hector, has been charged with the task of recovering a holy relic that belongs to, and protected, a local church. The relic had been stolen, and without it, the church is vulnerable to attacks by undead monsters. Hector has learned the identity of the thief, a coffin-maker named Henrik, and may now go confront him. But here's the dilemma: After recovering the stolen relic, Hector will likely have an opportunity to either kill the coffin-maker, or spare him. Hector has decided that he should have killed the ruffians. Now he must decide whether he will kill the coffin-maker.
On one hand, killing is usually wrong. When there is a peaceful solution, killing is almost always wrong. It is very likely that Hector will be able to reclaim the relic without killing the man who stole it.
However, if the coffin-maker is spared, what would prevent him from stealing the relic again? And there is the law of justice to consider. There must be some punishment or recompense.
Yet, this is not like the encounter with the ruffians on the road. This isn't the lawless wilderness. We're in a town. This town is certain to have laws and those whose job it is to enforce those laws. Certainly, this thief could be satisfactorilly penalized by the local law-enforcers.
But that requires the local law to be just, and one cannot always count on the law to be just.
Then, should Hector take the law into his own hands? Should he mete out his own form of justice? Probably not. Though, perhaps it depends on the coffin-maker's motives. If the coffin-maker's motives were evil and the corrupt legal system would let him go unpunished, perhaps Hector should mete out a more just punishment (though killing is probably still too much). However, if the coffin-maker's motives were good, perhaps no punishment is deserved at all.
As before, I wish I knew more about the situation, but fortunately, this time, Hector still has time to ask. Hector can learn about the thief's motives and the justice of the local legal system before making any permanent decisions.
Still, I suspect it will be a tough moral decision, but ultimately, I think it would probably be best to err on the side of mercy. Hector probably shouldn't kill the coffin-maker, and he probably won't, but it's interesting to think about these moral decisions and to speculate about the situations in which he actually should kill the coffin-maker, as unlikely as those situations might be. There is a line that divides those who should be killed and those who shouldn't, but I wonder where, exactly, that line is, and how Hector can determine whether or not the coffin-maker has crossed it.
Thursday, February 2, 2017
Joy in This Life
I just read and listened to President Russell M. Nelson's talk Joy and Spiritual Survival, in which he reminded us that "men are, that they might have joy" (2 Nephi 2:25), that the purpose of life is to find joy. I've known this for a long time, but one thing that bugs me about it is the thought that the joy that we're supposed to have will only become available in the next life. For years, I've thought that the purpose of life is to suffer through the afflictions of life long enough to become worth of the joy that God wants to give us . . . eventually.
But that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. God loves us now; He wants us to be happy now. Is that possible? Is it possible to have peace, happiness, and even joy, while we struggle through the afflictions of life?
I believe that we can have joy, even in this life, but it's tricky. It requires faithfulness to Jesus Christ and a commitment to live by His teachings. It requires an eternal perspective, or at least a great deal of patience. It requires that we do good as often as we can and that we repent whenever we fall short. Fortunately, President Nelson said in his talk that whenever we do anything good, including repenting, we can have joy.
Of course, doing good is harder than doing evil or doing nothing, but the rewards are worth it, even if you're only considering the rewards we get after we pass on. When you consider God's offer of peace and joy in this life, then, once again, that reward alone would be worth the effort of earning it. We would all love to have more peace and joy, and we'd love to experience it for eternity, but what's more, if we're righteous (or even just striving to be righteous), we can also experience joy here and now.
But that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. God loves us now; He wants us to be happy now. Is that possible? Is it possible to have peace, happiness, and even joy, while we struggle through the afflictions of life?
I believe that we can have joy, even in this life, but it's tricky. It requires faithfulness to Jesus Christ and a commitment to live by His teachings. It requires an eternal perspective, or at least a great deal of patience. It requires that we do good as often as we can and that we repent whenever we fall short. Fortunately, President Nelson said in his talk that whenever we do anything good, including repenting, we can have joy.
Of course, doing good is harder than doing evil or doing nothing, but the rewards are worth it, even if you're only considering the rewards we get after we pass on. When you consider God's offer of peace and joy in this life, then, once again, that reward alone would be worth the effort of earning it. We would all love to have more peace and joy, and we'd love to experience it for eternity, but what's more, if we're righteous (or even just striving to be righteous), we can also experience joy here and now.
Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Short, Basic Messages
As I watched President Monson's Sunday Morning Session talk, The Perfect Path to Happiness, this evening, I was struck by how similar it was to his Priesthood Session talk, Principles and Promises. Both are, according to Youtube, about four minutes and forty seconds long. Both talks were about one of the basic, fundamental teachings of the church. And yet, both of those teachings are unique to our church. In just over nine minutes, spread over two days, President Monson shared stories and testimonies about two of the principle teachings that make our church unique.
I'm thankful for President Monson's example here. It proves that a message doesn't have to be long to be worthy of sharing. It illustrates the importance of frequently reviewing the basics. And it highlights the truth that no Gospel topic is too humble for the President of the church to address. All Gospel topics are worth learning and teaching, even if that means the prophet himself giving the kind of talk a bishop might ask a youth speaker to give -- A five minute message on a subject with which much of the audience is already familiar.
As a person who posts spiritual(ish) messages on my blog every day, I appreciate that President Monson's example proves that a message doesn't have to be drawn out or complicated. A few paragraphs and a simple testimony would suffice.
I feel that I have come to over-complicate this blogging habit of mine. When I have a complex, unique, and interesting insight that takes several paragraphs and a few analogies to accurately describe, I can share that, but when I don't have anything earth-shattering to share, perhaps it'd be enough for me to write a paragraph about how nice it was that I got to see the sun today. Simple appreciation of nature's beauty and the wonders of the universe could make a decent blog post, even if the message only ended up being a few sentences long.
I worry too much. My blog posts don't all need to be long and insightful. Some of them can be just testimonies or, like President Monson's most recent talks, quick reviews of some basic, essential Gospel principles. I hope that you're okay with short blog posts every once in a while, and I hope that this means that I don't always have to stay up until midnight writing them.
I'm thankful for President Monson's example here. It proves that a message doesn't have to be long to be worthy of sharing. It illustrates the importance of frequently reviewing the basics. And it highlights the truth that no Gospel topic is too humble for the President of the church to address. All Gospel topics are worth learning and teaching, even if that means the prophet himself giving the kind of talk a bishop might ask a youth speaker to give -- A five minute message on a subject with which much of the audience is already familiar.
As a person who posts spiritual(ish) messages on my blog every day, I appreciate that President Monson's example proves that a message doesn't have to be drawn out or complicated. A few paragraphs and a simple testimony would suffice.
I feel that I have come to over-complicate this blogging habit of mine. When I have a complex, unique, and interesting insight that takes several paragraphs and a few analogies to accurately describe, I can share that, but when I don't have anything earth-shattering to share, perhaps it'd be enough for me to write a paragraph about how nice it was that I got to see the sun today. Simple appreciation of nature's beauty and the wonders of the universe could make a decent blog post, even if the message only ended up being a few sentences long.
I worry too much. My blog posts don't all need to be long and insightful. Some of them can be just testimonies or, like President Monson's most recent talks, quick reviews of some basic, essential Gospel principles. I hope that you're okay with short blog posts every once in a while, and I hope that this means that I don't always have to stay up until midnight writing them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)