I was recently made aware of an individual, Chris McCandless, who decided to "live off the land," but who had prepared poorly and subsequently died of either starvation or food poisoning. This highlights the importance of knowledge and preparation. I believe that, with enough forethought, McCandless could have lived off the land, as people used to, if he could have found enough land on which to do so. McCandless didn't die because he was attempting the impossible. He died because he hadn't prepared himself correctly.
Similarly, our spiritual survival depends strongly on our knowledge and preparation. We need to know what spiritual nourishment we need and where we can find it. We need to know what spiritual poisons we need to avoid and how to recognize them. We live in a spiritually inhospitable environment, but we can survive here, if we know how.
There are many hazards that we face in life, both physically and spiritually, but we can survive them if we prepare ourselves for them. Facing challenges can help us develop the strength and wisdom we need to face even greater challenges, even life-threatening ones. Through sufficient exercise and practice, we can prepare ourselves for almost anything life can throw at us.
Life is dangerous. Everyone dies by the end of it. Some die sooner than they needed to. Many physical and spiritual deaths can be prevented if we have the right set of knowledge and preparation. We can overcome life-threatening challenges. We just need to know how to and be ready to do it.
Friday, August 31, 2018
Thursday, August 30, 2018
Valiant Knight
In the most recently released set of Magic cards, there's a card called Valiant Knight. It's a 3/4 Human Knight for (3)W that has "Other Knights you control get +1/+1" and "(3)WW: Knights you control gain double strike until end of turn."
Don't worry; I don't expect you to understand any of that. It doesn't matter. I'm not sharing this card with you all for its mechanical attributes, impressive as they are in the right deck. The reason I'm telling you all about Valiant Knight is because of its flavor text: “Defeat is no reason for retreat. It is a sign we must redouble our efforts to win this fight.”
This may not always be tactically true in physical conflicts, but it is always true in spiritual conflicts, or at least in our conflict with sin. When we sin, that doesn't mean that we are failures or that we should give up. It means that we need to pray harder and fight harder for control of our own souls. Unlike physical battles, our spiritual battles are never hopeless. In physical fights, it makes some sense to retreat from foes that we have no chance of defeating. But we always have a chance of defeating our spiritual foe, and once we have made up our minds to defeat him, he has no chance of defeating us.
I am grateful that, because of the Atonement and power of Jesus Christ, we never have to retreat from or surrender to our spiritual enemy or the enemies within ourselves. We can defeat them. We can become strong and clean. We can "redouble our efforts" as many times as we need to, and we can win this fight. We will win it. I am thankful that God and the people who created that Magic card have reminded me to be a Valiant Knight and to never retreat, even when I am occasionally defeated. I'm grateful for this reminder to "redouble [my] efforts to win this fight." I pray to God that I will.
Don't worry; I don't expect you to understand any of that. It doesn't matter. I'm not sharing this card with you all for its mechanical attributes, impressive as they are in the right deck. The reason I'm telling you all about Valiant Knight is because of its flavor text: “Defeat is no reason for retreat. It is a sign we must redouble our efforts to win this fight.”
This may not always be tactically true in physical conflicts, but it is always true in spiritual conflicts, or at least in our conflict with sin. When we sin, that doesn't mean that we are failures or that we should give up. It means that we need to pray harder and fight harder for control of our own souls. Unlike physical battles, our spiritual battles are never hopeless. In physical fights, it makes some sense to retreat from foes that we have no chance of defeating. But we always have a chance of defeating our spiritual foe, and once we have made up our minds to defeat him, he has no chance of defeating us.
I am grateful that, because of the Atonement and power of Jesus Christ, we never have to retreat from or surrender to our spiritual enemy or the enemies within ourselves. We can defeat them. We can become strong and clean. We can "redouble our efforts" as many times as we need to, and we can win this fight. We will win it. I am thankful that God and the people who created that Magic card have reminded me to be a Valiant Knight and to never retreat, even when I am occasionally defeated. I'm grateful for this reminder to "redouble [my] efforts to win this fight." I pray to God that I will.
Planning the Introduction to the David and Bathsheba Lesson
I know where I want my lesson to end up: staying, analogously, as far away from the edge of the cliff as possible. But I haven't figured out yet how I want my lesson to begin. I'll have to tell (a kid-friendly version of) the story of David and Bathsheba, but how should I set it up?
Should I just jump right in? You remember from last week that David got married to Michal, one of King Saul's daughters, making David technically a prince. When King Saul died, David became king. One evening, while King David was standing on his rooftop... And the story can proceed from there. It's simple. It's direct. It still includes some summary, which I might expand on slightly, to remind the children that Saul got jealous of David and tried to kill him, but Jonathan, Saul's son and David's friend, saved David. It shouldn't take more than a minute or two to review the previous lesson and jump into the story of the current lesson. But is that what I want to do?
When teaching a lesson, it's sometimes customary to start by telling the class what the lesson is about, or perhaps by illustrating the main point of the lesson by using an attention-grabbing activity. For example, in the lesson on David and Goliath, Brother Dahm used pieces of paper with challenges written on them to illustrate how challenges can help us grow and make progress. I could do something similar with this lesson. However, the Attention Activity for this lesson involves tying children's hands up with thread, and I'd rather not do that. Perhaps I could bring in the cliff analogy instead. We usually play a round of hangman at the beginning of the lesson, but we usually play without stakes. That is, there is no hangman. But this time, I might draw a cliff on the chalkboard and have a paper man take a step toward the edge of the cliff with every wrong guess and a step away from the cliff with every right guess. Then I can explain that wrong choices lead us into spiritual danger while right choices lead us away from danger.
That introduction sounds fun, but how could I transition into the story from there? I could say something vague about one person's wrong choices leading himself and a few others into great spiritual and/or spiritual danger and then jump into the summary and story. Or perhaps I could use the hangman phrase to help form a smoother transition from the activity to the story, but I can't think of such a phrase right now. Anyhow, I have a plan that'll get the job done. I'll start with "cliffman," say that wrong choices can lead to spiritual danger, and begin the summary and story from there. It's not the best introduction, but it'll work, and I still have a few days to think about how I could make the introduction better.
Should I just jump right in? You remember from last week that David got married to Michal, one of King Saul's daughters, making David technically a prince. When King Saul died, David became king. One evening, while King David was standing on his rooftop... And the story can proceed from there. It's simple. It's direct. It still includes some summary, which I might expand on slightly, to remind the children that Saul got jealous of David and tried to kill him, but Jonathan, Saul's son and David's friend, saved David. It shouldn't take more than a minute or two to review the previous lesson and jump into the story of the current lesson. But is that what I want to do?
When teaching a lesson, it's sometimes customary to start by telling the class what the lesson is about, or perhaps by illustrating the main point of the lesson by using an attention-grabbing activity. For example, in the lesson on David and Goliath, Brother Dahm used pieces of paper with challenges written on them to illustrate how challenges can help us grow and make progress. I could do something similar with this lesson. However, the Attention Activity for this lesson involves tying children's hands up with thread, and I'd rather not do that. Perhaps I could bring in the cliff analogy instead. We usually play a round of hangman at the beginning of the lesson, but we usually play without stakes. That is, there is no hangman. But this time, I might draw a cliff on the chalkboard and have a paper man take a step toward the edge of the cliff with every wrong guess and a step away from the cliff with every right guess. Then I can explain that wrong choices lead us into spiritual danger while right choices lead us away from danger.
That introduction sounds fun, but how could I transition into the story from there? I could say something vague about one person's wrong choices leading himself and a few others into great spiritual and/or spiritual danger and then jump into the summary and story. Or perhaps I could use the hangman phrase to help form a smoother transition from the activity to the story, but I can't think of such a phrase right now. Anyhow, I have a plan that'll get the job done. I'll start with "cliffman," say that wrong choices can lead to spiritual danger, and begin the summary and story from there. It's not the best introduction, but it'll work, and I still have a few days to think about how I could make the introduction better.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
How to Not Fall Off a Cliff
One of the "Enrichment Activities" that I intend to take up the bulk of our class time is to depict a man walking toward the edge of a cliff. Obviously, the man is putting himself in great danger, but the danger is lessened somewhat by a guardrail that would be drawn in front of him. This is supposed to illustrate how having pure thoughts (the guardrail) can protect us from spiritual danger (falling off the cliff), but if falling off the cliff represents the commission of potentially serious sin, then I have a huge problem with this analogy.
While it may be fine to teach children that it's safe to approach cliffs as long as they stay behind the guardrail, this is terrible advice when we apply it to committing sin. We should not teach our kids or anyone, including ourselves, that it's safe to approach sin as long as we have a guardrail to keep us from falling into it. There are certain situations and temptations that we should avoid, even if we have strong protections against committing sin. We shouldn't think, or teach our kids to think, that it's fine to go to bars as long as we don't think about drinking beer. We should stay as far away from temptation as we can, and we should teach our kids to do the same.
So, rather than using pure thoughts as a guardrail in this falling-off-a-cliff analogy, I'm going to use the man's distance from the edge of a cliff as a scale of how far away he is from committing that sin. If he's in the bar, he's already pretty close to the cliff. If he thinks about ordering a beer, he's even closer. If he orders the beer, he gets closer. If he picks the beer up, puts the glass to his lips, and lets the beer into his mouth, each of those represent the last few steps toward the edge of the cliff, with the last one possibly counting as that last step off the cliff. On the opposite end of the scale, we have a person who doesn't spend a lot of time near bars, who never goes anywhere near bars if he can help it, and who is actively doing something else somewhere else.
Theoretically, one can avoid the sin of drinking beer despite going to a bar, ordering a beer, and raising the beer to one's mouth, but why let it go that far? Even if you have a guardrail, why test it? Personally, I think it's wiser to stay as far from the rail as possible rather than counting on it standing as the last line of defense against sin.
While it may be fine to teach children that it's safe to approach cliffs as long as they stay behind the guardrail, this is terrible advice when we apply it to committing sin. We should not teach our kids or anyone, including ourselves, that it's safe to approach sin as long as we have a guardrail to keep us from falling into it. There are certain situations and temptations that we should avoid, even if we have strong protections against committing sin. We shouldn't think, or teach our kids to think, that it's fine to go to bars as long as we don't think about drinking beer. We should stay as far away from temptation as we can, and we should teach our kids to do the same.
So, rather than using pure thoughts as a guardrail in this falling-off-a-cliff analogy, I'm going to use the man's distance from the edge of a cliff as a scale of how far away he is from committing that sin. If he's in the bar, he's already pretty close to the cliff. If he thinks about ordering a beer, he's even closer. If he orders the beer, he gets closer. If he picks the beer up, puts the glass to his lips, and lets the beer into his mouth, each of those represent the last few steps toward the edge of the cliff, with the last one possibly counting as that last step off the cliff. On the opposite end of the scale, we have a person who doesn't spend a lot of time near bars, who never goes anywhere near bars if he can help it, and who is actively doing something else somewhere else.
Theoretically, one can avoid the sin of drinking beer despite going to a bar, ordering a beer, and raising the beer to one's mouth, but why let it go that far? Even if you have a guardrail, why test it? Personally, I think it's wiser to stay as far from the rail as possible rather than counting on it standing as the last line of defense against sin.
Monday, August 27, 2018
The Oddly Less Taboo, More Serious Sin
When I teach about David and Bathsheba next week, I'm going to water down the whole adultery thing. I'll say that David wanted to be married to Bathsheba, and, if I can make it sound innocuous, I might even say that David and Bathsheba "acted like they were married," but that'll be the extent of it. However, I will be much more direct and straightforward about David having Uriah, Bathsheba's husband, killed.
It's a bit odd to think that, despite being a more serious sin, murder is easier to talk about than adultery. This is certainly true when talking to children, but I think that it's also true in general, and I wonder why. I would guess that it has something to do with our culture. Committing adultery is somehow more taboo than committing murder.
Now, I'm not entirely sure whether this holds true in the wider American culture our only in our culture as members of the church. In American culture, sleeping around seems almost common, but cheating on one's significant other is still a serious breach of the social contract. Meanwhile, murder is certainly more frowned upon than promiscuity or even cheating. I have not had enough conversations with nonmembers to be confident which sin is harder or easier for them to talk about, but I know which sin is harder for me to talk about, and it's not the more serious one.
But even given that the reason one sin is easier to discuss than another has to do with culture, it's hard to say what that says about that culture. Is it that adultery is so taboo that even murder is easier to talk about or is it that murder has become such a casual topic that it, like many other topics, is easier to discuss than adultery? It could be some combination of the two possibilities. They could both be right. There could also (or instead) be other factors that makes one of the topics easier to discuss than the other.
However you slice it, the fact remains that I find it easier to say that David killed somebody than to say that David slept with somebody else's wife. That could be either good or bad. It could be true of society in general, or it could be just me, or anywhere in between. I don't know why murder is an easier topic than adultery. I'm just kind of glad that it is. Otherwise, this lesson would be even harder to teach.
It's a bit odd to think that, despite being a more serious sin, murder is easier to talk about than adultery. This is certainly true when talking to children, but I think that it's also true in general, and I wonder why. I would guess that it has something to do with our culture. Committing adultery is somehow more taboo than committing murder.
Now, I'm not entirely sure whether this holds true in the wider American culture our only in our culture as members of the church. In American culture, sleeping around seems almost common, but cheating on one's significant other is still a serious breach of the social contract. Meanwhile, murder is certainly more frowned upon than promiscuity or even cheating. I have not had enough conversations with nonmembers to be confident which sin is harder or easier for them to talk about, but I know which sin is harder for me to talk about, and it's not the more serious one.
But even given that the reason one sin is easier to discuss than another has to do with culture, it's hard to say what that says about that culture. Is it that adultery is so taboo that even murder is easier to talk about or is it that murder has become such a casual topic that it, like many other topics, is easier to discuss than adultery? It could be some combination of the two possibilities. They could both be right. There could also (or instead) be other factors that makes one of the topics easier to discuss than the other.
However you slice it, the fact remains that I find it easier to say that David killed somebody than to say that David slept with somebody else's wife. That could be either good or bad. It could be true of society in general, or it could be just me, or anywhere in between. I don't know why murder is an easier topic than adultery. I'm just kind of glad that it is. Otherwise, this lesson would be even harder to teach.
Sunday, August 26, 2018
Drained
I feel drained. I frequently feel drained. Especially on Sundays. Especially at the end of Sundays.
Maybe I'm just an introvert and spending so much time surrounded by people who want to shake my hand and talk at me for an uncomfortable amount of time is tiring to me. Maybe I'm just a bad person who's tired of hearing about the hundred-some things that I should or should not be doing. Maybe I just see Sunday as the end of the week rather than the beginning, and all the week's tiredness catches up with me then.
Whatever the reason, I always feel drained at the ends of Sundays rather than replenished. Sunday is supposed to be a day of rest, but I never feel rested by the end of them.
Ironically, I get far more rest from riding my bike and talking walks, where I can be alone with just myself and some fresh air. I also get more rest by singing a hymn to myself than by singing it with the rest of the congregation.
I must be an introvert. That's the problem. I just wonder if that's the whole problem or if there's more to it. Is that the whole reason going to church drains me, or is there something else?
Regardless, I think I need (and this is going to sound truly insane) another hour of church, or rather an hour of worship before or after church. I need to take some time to enjoy some quiet. Maybe some relaxing, instrumental hymns. Maybe some scripture-reading. Definitely a lot of prayer. I need to spend some time every day, but especially on Sundays, restoring my spiritual strength.
Church doesn't do it for me. Church does the opposite to me. I don't need more church. I need more worship.
Maybe I'm just an introvert and spending so much time surrounded by people who want to shake my hand and talk at me for an uncomfortable amount of time is tiring to me. Maybe I'm just a bad person who's tired of hearing about the hundred-some things that I should or should not be doing. Maybe I just see Sunday as the end of the week rather than the beginning, and all the week's tiredness catches up with me then.
Whatever the reason, I always feel drained at the ends of Sundays rather than replenished. Sunday is supposed to be a day of rest, but I never feel rested by the end of them.
Ironically, I get far more rest from riding my bike and talking walks, where I can be alone with just myself and some fresh air. I also get more rest by singing a hymn to myself than by singing it with the rest of the congregation.
I must be an introvert. That's the problem. I just wonder if that's the whole problem or if there's more to it. Is that the whole reason going to church drains me, or is there something else?
Regardless, I think I need (and this is going to sound truly insane) another hour of church, or rather an hour of worship before or after church. I need to take some time to enjoy some quiet. Maybe some relaxing, instrumental hymns. Maybe some scripture-reading. Definitely a lot of prayer. I need to spend some time every day, but especially on Sundays, restoring my spiritual strength.
Church doesn't do it for me. Church does the opposite to me. I don't need more church. I need more worship.
Saturday, August 25, 2018
Helping Kids Learn From Adultery and Murder
Tomorrow's Primary lesson is an easy one about David and Jonathan, but that's not the one I'm teaching this time around. I have next week's lesson, the one about David and Bathsheba.
This is going to be tough. It'll be hard enough to take a Bible Hero like David and highlight (what I can only hope was) the darkest sins he ever committed. It's going to be difficult to explain to the kids how David fell victim to a temptation that they might not even understand. In fact, the manual even says "Do not explain the exact nature of David’s sin with Bathsheba." Instead, the lesson says to be vague.
Thankfully, the manual also provides several "Enrichment Activities" that can help us apply the message and purpose of this lesson without dwelling too much on the story in the lesson. I'm thankful for these enrichment activities because they're going to help me teach the lesson without spending too much time on David's sins. Of course, this is an important story for the kids to learn about, when they're old enough, but in the meantime, we can still learn from the story, even if I don't give them many details about the story.
This is going to be tough. It'll be hard enough to take a Bible Hero like David and highlight (what I can only hope was) the darkest sins he ever committed. It's going to be difficult to explain to the kids how David fell victim to a temptation that they might not even understand. In fact, the manual even says "Do not explain the exact nature of David’s sin with Bathsheba." Instead, the lesson says to be vague.
Thankfully, the manual also provides several "Enrichment Activities" that can help us apply the message and purpose of this lesson without dwelling too much on the story in the lesson. I'm thankful for these enrichment activities because they're going to help me teach the lesson without spending too much time on David's sins. Of course, this is an important story for the kids to learn about, when they're old enough, but in the meantime, we can still learn from the story, even if I don't give them many details about the story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)