Google Webmaster Tools
 
Well, it is going down just like I said it would. In a previous post I wrote about how the gay activists have an underlying goal in mind when it comes to marriage - that is repealing the federal defense of marriage act (DOMA) signed into law by President Bill Clinton.

Click here for the latest efforts by the Democrat-controlled Senate to repeal DOMA.

Why is repealing DOMA a major goal of the gay activists? It's not really about letting gay people marry so that they can enjoy a life of monogamous committment within the bonds of holy matrimony. And it's not really about getting access to insurance and other benefits traditionally reserved for heterosexual spouses. While those two motives do apply in some cases, the real purpose for repealing DOMA is more sinister from a traditional Judaeo-Christian perspective.

The real reason for repealing DOMA is that it is a major barrier to normalizing same-sex relations in America. If DOMA is repealed there will be nothing but a few churches standing in the way of normalizing same-sex relations in America, and even some of the churches are giving in to pressure. 

Gay people deserve respect and, in some cases, our sympathies - it is certainly difficult being gay in a largely heterosexual world. But this does not mean that Christians should kowtow to the gay activists' demands. Latter-day Saints have been urged to take a stand for traditional marriage, not because we are anti-gay, as President Hinckley put it, but because we are pro-marriage. Taking a stand will certainly lead to more strife in the future, not because Latter-day Saints are unfairly prejudice or discriminatory, but because we recognize that marriage is a divinely appointed union between a man and woman.

(Gentle reminder: This is not a venue for venting or attacking the doctrines of the LDS faith.)



1 Comment
 
 
Harmonizing science and religion is a noble pursuit and one that is consistent with the Lord’s instruction to avoid contention. Harmonization is fairly easy when overlapping scientific and gospel teachings agree. However, complete harmonization eludes us because several gospel doctrines are at odds with science.

Disagreements between the gospel and science will continue to exist for the simple fact that science is imperfect and ever changing. The very thing that makes science so wonderful, namely that it is a self-correcting endeavor, precludes it from being 100% consistent with the gospel. If we ever claim that a scientific theory is absolutely consistent with the gospel and then see that theory change later on, then that theory never was completely consistent with the gospel as we had supposed.

Will complete harmony ever be achieved? Yes, most likely during the millennium when the Savior returns and circumscribes all truth into one great whole. Until such time, what shall we do when differences arise? Should we trust religion or should we trust science?

If a religious truth claim arises from theological conjecturing, of which there is plenty in the church (nothing wrong with this though), then science may be right and religion may be wrong. Remember that our understanding of the gospel is continually evolving. The Lord gives us gospel truths line upon line, precept upon precept, according to our righteousness. Consider that when the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon is made available, it might change our understanding of some gospel principles, even to the point of bringing them more in line with established scientific theory.

On the other hand, if a religious doctrine comes through direct revelation such as scripture or prophetic edict, then we should definitely go with religion.

Here are some examples.

Science claims that the sun will expand and eventually destroy the earth. We know that is false because modern day revelation tells us that the earth will be celestialized and receive a paradisiacal glory.   

Science claims that we need to restrict population growth or else we will overpopulate the earth and exhaust our resources. We know this is false because the Lord has declared “there is room and enough to spare.”

Science claims that Adam and Eve’s immortal bodies were created through macroevolutionary processes. We know this is wrong because the scriptures and prophets teach us that the creation was a purposeful and directed process, not something left to the vicissitudes of natural selection and random mutations (even if those processes are sufficient to create a living human being). 

So what are we to do with scientific theories that disagree with revealed truth? Should we throw them out with the trash? No. Science is the best we’ve got when it comes to understanding the natural world. As long as we rely on the arm of the Lord, He will bless our science to progress, self-correct, and steer humankind toward the absolute truth of all things.
15 Comments
 
 
Marriage and family are essential to the Plan of Salvation.  The Proclamation on the family issued in 1995 says this much. Hence Latter-day Saints and Christians should pay close attention to efforts to redefine marriage.

Ross Douthat, a New York Times columnist, wrote an article exploring the impact of gay marriage on the marriage culture. One thing people on both sides of the marriage debate can agree on is that the surge of gay marriage will change our culture's understanding of marriage. Douthat highlights three possible directions marriage will go.

Some argue that gay marriage will be good for gays in the sense that it will promote stable, monogamous relationships in the gay community. Gay commitment to marriage will, in turn, strengthen marriage as a whole, as being a stable and enduring institution. An author who has written on this subject predicts that same-sex marriages will strengthen “marriage’s standard for committed relationships” across all society.

A somewhat different prediction is that gay marriage will “partially transform marriage from within.” Most noteworthy is the change in marriage sexual mores, away from sexual monogamy toward sanctioned infidelity. One gay activist hopes that same-sex marriage will end up redefining marriage “simply as a pact of mutual love and care” wherein gay and straight married couples are free to negotiate occasional sexual encounters outside the bonds of marriage.

The final prediction is the direst. There are some activists “who hope that gay marriage will knock marriage off its cultural pedestal altogether.” They want to abolish marriage as a “gold standard” for committed relationships. They hope to achieve this objective by having same-sex couples who have no intent on honoring marriage vows get married. They want to weaken marriage by denigrating it. They don’t want marriage. They want marriage to go away.

With regard to the first prediction, we do not need gay marriage to strengthen the institution of marriage, and I doubt that same-sex marriage would ever accomplish such a thing. If the gay community wants to strengthen marriage it could support traditional marriage as being between a man and woman and stop pushing for a redefinition. To their credit, some gay people are doing this. The traditional concept of marriage isn’t broken, so let’s not try to fix it.

The second prediction is very troublesome. It wants to redefine acceptable sexual relations within the bonds of marriage. Sanctioned infidelity would end up destroying marriage because it would eliminate a core component of marriage, namely sexual commitment to one person. Take out monogamy and marriage becomes little more than a relationship driven by economic and sexual convenience.    

The final prediction involves complete obliteration of marriage. Activists who take this position see marriage as promoting emotional and sexual fidelity that is antithetical to their vision of a free-for-all, sexual anarchy. They cannot live in long term, committed relationships themselves so they want to eliminate anything that promotes fidelity as the norm. They want infidelity and promiscuity to be the norm. The only way to achieve this is goal is to tear down the current norm.

Clearly we are facing forces that will, if they get their way, lead to the disintegration of marriage and the traditional family. Such changes will have dire consequences. The Proclamation warns that “the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.” I hope this doesn't happen, but it seems that as a society, we are headed in that direction.

10 Comments
 
 
A recent research report in the journal Pediatrics suggests that children of gay parents are not adversely affected by their parents’ sexual orientation. Results showed that kids raised by lesbian parents are psychologically well-adjusted and even experience fewer behavioral problems than kids raised by heterosexual parents. 

This report is creating quite a stir.

As a statistician and researcher who has both published and evaluated peer review articles for professional journals, there is always a room for debate when it comes to arguing the legitimacy of results. There are questions such as: Was the study adequately powered? What is the effect size? What kind of test was used? What sampling method was followed? Who funded the study? While these are important issues in the debating the results of the aforementioned study, I shall leave these issues to groups that have much more interest in the issue than I.   

I do not find the results of the study surprising. It does not surprise me that children of lesbian parents are psychologically well-adjusted. Why should a lesbian not be a good parent in terms of loving, providing, and caring for her child? I want children of lesbian parents to do well; I want them to be just as well-adjusted as children from homes with heterosexual parents. In a way, the results or this study are good news – I want psychologically well-adjusted kids no matter what the home environment is like. 

For me there is a more important issue that the study did not address. I want to know what effect growing up with lesbian parents has on one’s morals. Put differently, I want to know if the kids of lesbian parents are morally well-adjusted, in a Judaeo-Christian sense. Do they ever receive Christian teachings which tell them that homosexuality is a sin? Are they taught that sexual orientation is merely a matter of personal preference?

I suspect that lesbian parents are downplaying the Judaeo-Christian viewpoint which is that homosexuality is a sin. They are likely emphasizing the homosexual viewpoint which is that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle. So my concern does not center on psychological adjustment; it centers on moral adjustment. 

If lesbian parents are teaching their children that homosexuality is normal, then that teaching is contributing to the normalization of homosexuality in our society. This is a dangerous trend. The normalization of homosexuality could lead to our nation’s downfall. Mosiah put it this way: “if the time comes that the [greater] voice of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land” (Mosiah 29:27).

The concern is not psychological adjustment; it is moral adjustment.
7 Comments
 
 
Picture
With an ecological disaster currently underway in the Gulf of Mexico, I could not help but wonder if this calamity falls under the last days' calamities listed in the scriptures.

Presently four angels on our world have been given the power to save and destroy life, to spread the gospel to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, and to seal up things unto life or to cast things down into darkness and despair. (D&C 77:8)

These four angels have another important responsibility - as destroyers. At God’s command they will send great calamities upon the earth. The Lord said “For all flesh is corrupted before me; and the powers of darkness prevail upon the earth, among the children of men, in the presence of all the hosts of heaven—Which causeth silence to reign, and all eternity is pained, and the angels are waiting the great command to reap down the earth.” (D&C 38: 11-12).

Given their direct involvement with mankind, it would seem that these four have an intimate knowledge of the wickedness that is in the world; this might explain why they have been pleading with the Lord to let them carry out their duties as destroyers. D&C 86:5 tells us that these “angels are crying unto the Lord day and night . . . to be sent forth to reap down the fields.” It appears that they have grown weary of the wickedness that covers the earth. They have seen enough and are anxious to get on with the business of punishing and purging wickedness. Certainly they have marveled over God’s patience.

Why have they been held back? The Lord has held them back because He does not want their calamities to disrupt his growing church, which is why He said “pluck not up the tares while the blade is yet tender, lest you destroy the wheat also.” (D&C 86:6). However, I wonder if things are beginning to change.

The BP oil disaster has me thinking about angel #2. What is in his vial? His vial contains destruction in the seas. Revelation 16:3 says that when “the second angel poured out his vial upon the sea . . . it became as the blood of a dead man: and every living soul died in the sea.” And Revelation 8:8-9 says that when “the second angel sounded . . . it [was as though] a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood; And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died.”

When I view the video of oil gushing from the ocean floor, it reminds me of a volcano blowing fire and dust (“a great mountain burning”). Pictures of the oil washing up on shore resemble the “blood of a dead man”. And the oil is killing many creatures in the sea. With no end to the gusher in sight, the spill may once day cover an area large enough to qualify as “a third part of the sea” (what the ‘sea’ refers to, I don’t know).

4 Comments
 
 
Picture
The recent death of four-year-old Ethan Stacy at the hands of his abusive step father has been heart wrenching for many Utahns. Recent evidence indicates that he was repeatedly beaten by his step dad, left alone to suffer from his injuries, and left alone to suffer through traumatic brain injury during the final days of his life. 

Where was Ethan’s mother through all of this? She was physically present, yet emotionally detached. A former friend of the mother told KSL news that the mother telephoned her in Florida days before Ethan died and complained that Ethan would not stop crying and would not stop calling for his “mommy”. Apparently his cries were irritating the mother. The woman who should have loved and helped her son turned into an unfeeling bystander. Ethan cried for help as he slowly died.

Picture
A similar event took place a few years ago in Galveston, Texas. In October 2007 the body of a young girl was discovered in a plastic container partially buried in a watery bog. Investigators called the child Baby Grace until they found out that it was the body of Riley Ann Sawyers.

During the trial it came out two-year-old Riley was repeatedly beaten with a belt and had her head repeatedly pushed into a pillow and under water for not saying “please” and “yes sir” to her parents. During her final beating she cried out to her mother for help by saying “I love you.” Her plea for her mother to save her went unheeded. Moments later she died after her rampaging stepfather threw her across a room and fractured her skull. 

In both cases the parents tried to cover up the murders. Ethan’s parents bashed in his face and teeth with a blunt object (probably a hammer) and set fire to his body before burying him. Riley’s parents let her body decompose in a plastic container for a month or two before putting her out to sea.

I am not going to go into behavioral science explanations of infanticide or discuss the issue of insanity as a legal defense (which seems to be the defense that Ethan’s step father is cooking up). Also, I am not going to discuss the anger and sorrow that I feel whenever I contemplate these events. Instead I am going to finish this blog post with an expression of light and hope.

Because of the great plan of happiness of our God, Ethan and Riley will be taken into God’s presence where they will be surrounded by His love and compassion for eternity. They will be exalted on high as a prince and princess to the most high God, and become heirs to all that He has. This is God’s blessing to all children who die before the age of accountability. This realization helps replace feelings of anger and sorrow with feelings of hope and peace.
3 Comments
 
 
In my study of epistemology (i.e., knowing and how we know), I have come to the conclusion that spiritual ways of knowing can be just as certain as empirical (visual) ways of knowing. 

For some time I believed that spiritual knowing lacked the certainty that we attribute to empirical knowing. I mean, most people would agree that seeing something is more certain than spiritually ‘feeling’ something. After re-evaluating this position and the evidence, I think it is false.

I have come to the conclusion that there is just as much certainty in spiritual experience as there is in empirical experience. Consider times when the spirit bears powerful testimony of the Book of Mormon, when the Lord directly answers heartfelt prayers, and when the power of God is felt through priesthood blessings. We can know that those experiences are real. For many they are just as real as reading this post on a computer screen. I have experienced this sort of thing myself. I have had spiritual experiences where I know something supernatural happened.

Alma commented on the certainty of spiritual experiences in his address to the Amalekites. Regarding the experiment of planting a seed of faith (Alma 32), he wrote that when we plant a seed of faith, it will swell, sprout, and begin to grow. This swelling, sprouting, and growing refer to the spirit working in our lives. Planting a seed of faith causes us to feel the spirit more strongly, to see that it is good.

Can we be certain that something good is happening to us? Alma’s answer is “Yea.” He wrote that “ye must needs know that the seed is good.” Herein lies the certainty. “Your knowledge is perfect in that thing . . . for ye know that the word hath swelled your souls, and ye also know that it hath sprouted up, that your understanding doth begin to be enlightened, and your mind doth begin to expand.” In other words, we know that the spiritual experiences are real. We know that something good and supernatural has happened to us.

But wait a minute; I thought faith was not having a perfect knowledge. Where does the uncertainty come into play? Alma explains it this way: “and now behold, after ye have tasted this light is your knowledge perfect? Nay.” He is saying that while we are certain of having had spiritual experiences, we still lack perfect knowledge of God and the power of the priesthood and prayer. There is so much more for us to learn. The more we exercise faith in the Lord, the more knowledge we will receive. We can continue to acquire knowledge through faith until we reach the point where, like the Brother of Jared, we receive a perfect knowledge of the Lord.

Our certain spiritual experiences are what allow us to rationally declare “I know God lives”, “I know the priesthood power is real”, and “I know the Book of Mormon is true.” Although we lack a perfect knowledge of these things, the experiences which led to our testimony of these things are as real as the chair you are sitting on. As Alma pointed out, these experiences are clearly “discernible.”
16 Comments
 
 
Unfortunately, following the death of Paul and the other apostles, apostolic authority was taken from the earth and the gospel of Jesus Christ fell into obscurity and darkness. This decline in spiritual truth and apostolic authority corresponded with a sharp decline in secular scholarship, indicating that as the plain and precious truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ were being lost, so too were secular truths being lost.

The simultaneous loss of both was not a coincidence. The spiritual apostasy and wickedness of man diminished the enlightening power of the Spirit of the Lord. Because so much of humanity’s secular knowledge comes from the Spirit of the Lord, this diminishment affected mankind not only spiritually, but secularly as well. As the power of the Spirit of the Lord waned during the apostasy, so too did mankind’s ability to receive enlightenment.

The spiritual apostasy contributed to the decline of secular knowledge in another way. During the apostasy mankind tried to compensate for the loss of spiritual enlightenment and apostolic authority by appealing to human reason. The philosophical contributions of ancient Greek scholars were monopolized by misguided theologians and scholars who wanted to settle doctrinal disputes and make Medieval Christianity more appealing to the masses. The works of famous scholars like Plato and Aristotle now served the interests of a powerful apostate church.

Because the church controlled a large number of educational institutions and most medieval scholars were clergy members, few people dared interpret Classical Greek principles in a manner contrary to the teachings of the church. Those who attempted to enlighten mankind faced reprisal from the church if their ideas opposed church doctrine. The hijacking of Classical Greek philosophy by dogmatic religious authority, diminished blessings from the Spirit of the Lord, and the loss of priesthood authority all combined to create the Dark Ages. 

(Source: Truth & Science)
6 Comments
 
 
Evangelical Albert Mohler's comment communicates my thoughts on the matter of Tiger's return to Buddhism very well.

“[T]he statement by Tiger Woods points to the radical distinction between Christianity and Buddhism -- between the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the dharma of the Buddha. . . .  [T]he most remarkable aspect of his confession is its Buddhist shape. American Christians should look at those words with care.”

“A Christian looking at those words sees just how distant they are from the Gospel. The distinction between the Christian and Buddhist worldviews is laid bare for all to see. Tiger Woods should be taken at his word when he grounds his apology and confession in Buddhism. . . . Christians should see this as further reason to pray for Tiger Woods. We should respect the integrity and honesty of his statement, but hope and pray that he will one day come to know the salvation and forgiveness of sin that comes only through faith in Christ. We believe that he will not find salvation in renouncing all desire. We would hope instead that he might hear the Gospel and desire Christ.”
Add Comment
 
 
I’ve always thought that the proportion of spirits cast out of heaven for rebelling against the Plan of Salvation was 1/3. To give you an idea of how much this is in relation to the whole, it is like cutting a blueberry pie into 3 equal sections and tossing one piece into the garbage. Just as I cringe at the thought of so much good blueberry pie being tossed out, I cringe at the thought of so many souls losing their first estate and being cast into hell.

Last week I discussed this issue with Craig, a member of our HP quorum. He said that it wasn’t 1/3 of the hosts of heaven; rather, it was a “third part” (D&C 29:43) which, in all likelihood, is much smaller than 1/3 of the whole. In other words, he claims that 3 groups were present during the war in heaven: (1) the noble and great ones who are leaders; (2) those who kept their first estate; and (3) those who rejected God’s plan. According to this viewpoint, these 3 groups were NOT equal in size. Those who did not keep their first estate in group 3 were likely much smaller than 1/3 of the entire whole.

To put this theory into blueberry pie terms, there are three slices of pie: a very small piece representing the leaders; a very large piece representing those who kept their first estate; and a smaller piece representing those who did not keep their first estate. The last small piece is taken out and thrown away. I’d feel better knowing that just a small piece of the yummy pie was tossed out.

So which is it? 1/3 or a third part?

The Bible Dictionary (BD) says it is 1/3. It reads: “The war broke out because one-third of the spirits refused to accept the appointment of Jesus Christ as the Savior.” However, the BD is not canonized scripture and the introduction even states “It is not intended as an official or revealed endorsement by the Church of the doctrinal, historical, cultural, and other matters set forth.” Also, the scriptures never say one-third; they say “a third part”.

I’d like to think that those who did not keep their first estate were a third part smaller in size than 1/3 of the whole. Yet having been taught for so long that it was 1/3, I tend to think that it was one-third of the whole.

To help me decide, I am putting it to a vote.
Add Comment
 
Google Analytics