Sunday, June 09, 2019

What exactly do you mean 'to Love God?'

Today was a little sad to say goodbye to precious child in my Sunday school class who was moving out of state.  It was most fitting then that we discussed the most important assertion about God that we should love Him.

So we discussed 1st what love is. Do you love your Mom, Dad? Why? The kids offered the usually expected answers that could be cynically summed up as "Whats in it for me?!" Nothing wrong with that as it shows awareness and awareness begets gratitude - and we know that a real good thing...but that is not love...we continued...

Recounting a fun song the children were just learning - about their Dad being their hero, I brought their attention to the last line; "I want to be a hero just like him!"  When admiration and gratitude becomes a desire to emulate and aspire THEN one is entering the realm of 'Love' where you desire that good trait enough to make a real effort to inculcate those traits into your own thoughts, actions, habits and personality.  

The much quoted line "When we are in the service of others, we are only in the service of God" actually misses the mark just a bit because God does not need servants but to those who aspire to His Godly traits He calls His children! We serve others ideally because we love the Godly traits; not to earn gold stars with God - it's just who we are. I'm sure that was the intent of the author.

Emulation of God can seem a lofty goal so we discussed the immensity of their spirit and the inherent ability to follow in Jesus' footsteps and that he was limited on earth too. See a previous essay 

44. Seriously? How can someone like me ever be anything like Him?


Then with my filled treasure chest at hand and recounting the conversation the resurrected Lord Jesus had with Peter about fish, I asked, "Lovest thou God more than these?" - pointing to the fresh baked chocolate Chip Cookies in the treasure chest and other items of universal interest.  That took a moment for a few of the ravenous young wolves to ponder on! Ha.


I leave you as I did the youngsters with these questions to ponder:
What does it mean to love something?
Is it a selfish thing?
Is it a service thing?
Is it a point of intense admiration?

Brother Steve


Tuesday, June 04, 2019

What, Another Save a Mormon Web site?


A dear friend and Missionary from the Church of Jesus Christ (LDS) sent me a note about yet another save-a-mormon web site.

That particular Mormon Hope site was an exceptionally well written attack on the latter-day saints concept of testimony. But despite being superbly readable he makes one fatal flaw after another by creating what we call straw-man arguments or “paper tiger” foes which he easily dispatches. This is a common debate tactic. Sound eminently reasonable up front. Get the attention and approval of your audience with reasoned, even keel speech and then slowly begin building your tigers and straw men ....

For example he leads out with this classic. "You can’t trust your feelings". (Can’t tell you how often I hear Protestant radio preachers speak just like we do that the Lord speaks to your mind AND your heart(feelings). These events become testimony experiences but then he asserted that Mormons only talk about feeling’.  "How does the HG feel?" Well, he is justified in some regard as I too have heard some LDS sermons even in high places speak almost exclusively to feelings. I hear missionaries teach investigators - this is how the Holy Ghost “feels”.  So the author of this hit piece is somewhat justified but unless he is ignorant - and might truly be just that - he would know that others in high and lowly pulpits treat the experience with deity more even handed - as the DC speaks - "I will tell you in your mind and your heart"...DC8:2 So His premise is just wrong, but reinforced by too much emphasis by some and our missionaries on the feeling part. I accept his critique but not his conclusion. Nor do I accept that the Vulcan way is realistic. God made us capable as a multidimensional being and feelings are part of the package. That’s what’s real.
Then that author went straight away to the next old saw - 'you have to really put your trust in the Bible' not your feelings but then skates away like anyone's conclusion taken from 'the Word' were as solid and immovable as Gibraltar.  That's where he really loses me as I know he knows that there are a 1000 Christian religions that all claim the Bible says this or that and yet the Bible says NOTHING whatsoever. Its a book and it doesn't talk (unless you have a kindle.ha) So we have to read and interpret and study and debate and if you are an LDS - encouraged to seek the further inspiration and epiphany that the Holy Ghost can provide to your mind and heart - hmmmm and there we go right back to that gut thing......but reality that's just an expression and the Holy Ghost comes to a Man and it is an experience. Its hard to explain how pure enlightenment, sudden understanding, Joy, clarity, peace and settled resolve all wrap up together to speak deeply to one’s soul - It takes all that and more sometimes to change one’s life and trajectory - it comes with power that when yielded to enables one to make that course correction that the person now can see. 

So, Is that Holy ‘body and mind’ experience what this author wants us to jettison for his clever sophistry?   I believe Jesus is Lord, My God, My Savior and that praying the Father in Jesus’ Name (Yes I believe Jesus has a Father - He said so despite what this trinitarian dogmaton is asserting) will bring power and enlightenment to me and those I pray for. I’ve seen it, heard it, felt it, experienced it. You want to take that from me and claim it was from the dark side? Really???  

My life was altered dramatically to care about others. Miracles have been done and I’ve seen it– I have been His hand in accomplishing it! Did not Jesus argue that the devil cannot fight against himself by doing good and teaching Jesus! Luke 11:17-18. Think about what he said about this! As far as I can see many honest Christian preachers are doing a decent job and reaching folks my voice could never reach. People are just plain complex and shifting paradigms is hard to do – so big shifts are fairly rare and that's just life. God will look kindly on those honest brokers of the limited light and understanding they had. That’s my merciful God.

Personally with the help of His Holy Spirit, my family is stable and love the Lord. I have full hope in the power of Jesus to continue to refine me and make me compatible with the kingdoms he has prepared for the faithful. Man - What else do these fear mongering 'get out of hell' salesmen want from me? Cynically, maybe my 10% but that's not it,  I know..they are just bloated with an over developed sense of hubris that their particular Hell fire and damnation version of the Almighty is the real ma-coy and if you don't pass their litmus test you are going to burn- so I can see why he'd be freaked out about another viewpoint. Im sorry for that hopeless view - like the fiddler on the roof - indeed a most precarious place to stand and try and preach "the joy" of the Lord.

Going down his litmus test – next was the concern that our visualization of God meant I guess that the God he prays to would not be home when our prayer wafted His way. See where that goes?…If you don’t see my incomprehensible God my way – hit the Highway!   Just to let you know, the Bible can indeed support a wide range of visuals for God, I recommend these several essays that I wrote many years back (Excepting one by Millet) that now I draw your attention to:

24. A Different Jesus? The Christ of the Restoration by Robert Millet BYU


25. Is God by any other name still God?

31. So Just Who Exactly Do We Pray To?

All my best to you seekers of truth and maybe a shaft of light to the feet of those who haven’t quite found the path yet…

Forgive the typos and flaws of my human condition!
Your Brother in Christ
Steve

Sunday, May 26, 2019

Consciousness theory Creates a Crack in Darwin's Dam.

You can tell that a nerve has been struck in academia when one lame attempt after another is exploding to plug the hemorrhage in the Darwinian dam. Consciousness theory is what I am talking about. Sometimes the best way to verify a theory is to 1) see if it survives critique and 2) examine if there are any viable alternate theories…and there turns out to be a real attempt to do the latter. One scholar gave the same idea I proposed in recent essays the name “dualism” ie we are dual beings. Ironically, he rejected the idea that a spirit entity could be influencing/interacting with the physical for just one poorly articulated reason; he did not know a means to measure the interaction! Since he didn’t know a means, it must not be there!
This reminds me of a recent critique to the new but solidly demonstrated relationship between cosmic rays, solar magnetic cycles and cloud formation – hence – weather! The government paid scientists are in a bit of a tizzy over the fact that it trounces the C02 claim- Their models don’t predict the measured results ….so the measured results have to be wrong…right??? Couldn’t be their models. Nooooo, That would imply they and the Chicken Little's in the media and politics have been spectacularly wrong for a decade or two. Arrogance and pride are very much alive and thriving in science – believe me. Thriving!
Back to Consciousness. So this clever fellow, a physicist by trade, having come to the same conclusion I brought up in my Babbage Calculator essay, that no quantity of mechanistic elements could transcend their own darkness suggested that in the quantum world waves of interactions could create unpredictable patterns – and patterns he advance with a great ah-hahh- that must be thought and awareness. Not the right patterns and you are dead. Huh. So, before, we interconnected the neurons with wires(synapses) and he acknowledges that cannot produce awareness but somehow interconnecting them wirelessly with quantum entangles states does.  I’d ask the simple question, Why so? Its just another way to create more complicated interactions with the same mechanistic elements. The fundamental critique I levied, and that speaker acknowledged, is not actually overcome by the sweep of his hand – patterns…
Also not overcome is the plain obvious implication that by his argument you are just a machine with no inherent value. A marvelous machine as he opines, but I remind, just a machine with no inherent value.
Another author advances that self-awareness, thought and consciousness are just our brain functions doing simulation and synthesis. Now for sure that is exactly what our brain does do. It synthesizes sensor inputs and anticipates complex interactions with the world and stores memory and emotion states, but my Dell computer can do that and its for sure dead dark inside as previously proven in that earlier essay. Since those same things, simulation and synthesis, are simply algorithms then that entity doing just that would too be all darkness inside; reacting but not acting, calculating and storing states but with no awareness of the fact that states were being stored.
The only thing that does make sense is that our bodies are tools, not unlike the Avatar movie and that besides matter and energy there is one more element - fundamental and eternal. The Restored Church of Jesus Christ explains it as an eternal property they call, for lack of a better words, "Intelligence or Light of Truth" and that also handily answers another conundrum that had plagued the std Christian posture about creation; ie if God made you then why is He not responsible for the good and the bad? If "intelligence" or "Spark of Life" or as I like to call it "Life force" is an eternal property, like matter and energy, then it starts to make sense for once why God would consider us kin (His children). It all starts to make sense why we would in fact be valuable – inherently valuable – not just a Talkie 2.1 gadget.

Tuesday, April 23, 2019

A place to Post questions and discussion topics

Friends,

This post is a place to petition the group & myself for topics of interest. No topic would be off limits as the goal is to build faith or rebuild it if you have struggled with a issue. I've written full paragraph/page by page rebuttals of a work attacking our faith and blogged on a variety of hot button topics - always with the intent of building faith. I've seen God's hand in my affairs, seen striking miracles - the sort you write about in the Bible so - when you have seen the equivalent of the Burning bush, you can understand I have patience with naysayers and hard questions and in the value of time...

Feel free to Comment with your proposed topics.

Steve

Monday, April 22, 2019

Letter to a friend on the nature of Agency

Letter to a friend on the nature of Agency

I shared this with a friend I met in San Francisco. I’ve removed the personal detail – but this touches on the fundamentals of what this life is all about and is a suitable introduction to the Essay Just Whose Fault Is It Anyway, Thoughts on Immortality and Agency.
Dear [redacted]
I’ve been meaning to write you since our conversation last Thursday, I want to express how grateful I am that there are good men and women like you and your wife trying to make a positive dent.
Again my deepest condolences for recent the death of your son. I’d like to say I don’t have any words, but knowing me you know that would be a lie, but perhaps what’s true is that I may not have the right words to assuage what pain you and your wife must feel.
No matter what one believes or knows to be true about afterlife/eternal life, in the best of circumstances we will miss our loved ones greatly. I just shipped my wife off to Los Alamos to do her grandmother thing with a new arrival but I will miss her in even that month she is gone. Even though she is alive – she is yet gone. I feel to say the similar thing to you {redacted}, though your son is gone, yet is he alive; not in a book nor a God’s tape player.
I was very curious and I think it was you that I asked “why you believed strongly enough to find yourself standing on a street corner when so many competing beliefs might vie for your acceptance” and I think the reply was not that “God spoke to me” or something direct and definitive but simply – “this was the most logical explanation for the holy writ you could find.” Perhaps I have you mixed up with another fellow but I’ve heard that more than once. But even with that best guess strategy, It is generally acknowledged that some views espoused by {redacted} have changed on a few topics as better enlightenment presented; so perhaps, maybe you might be open to more of that?
I’ve never approached our conversation as me trying to argue my perspectives or directly challenge yours. I genuinely wanted to know why you believed and have appreciate your explanations. Obviously I have my concerted views and my own reasoning’s that I don’t mind sharing - but its not my mission to persuade – I’m perfectly satisfied that God will have a mansion in heaven for anyone like you with his heart set on doing right. Still if I could offer you and your wife, in your time of trial, a glimpse of something even more grand than being a “memory stick” in God's archive - a more sure relationship with the divine, I would, if I could.
As we broached the topic the other day of our inherent worth or worthlessness, it seemed clear that scriptural references could readily interpolate the fundamental nature of man as either an inherently eternal spiritual being OR with a different perspective be interpreted much more glumly as just “talking gadgets -Memorex tape.” That latter interpretation also leaves us sadly with the unavoidable conclusion that whether we are resurrected or not doesn’t matter at all to the individual Not resurrected. AND if you believe the promise about “no tears” in the future heaven/paradise then even those that are resurrected won’t miss them! Huh! Yup that’s what you have to walk away with – the logic is solid and most poignant.
In my efforts to come to grips with my own previous dabbling with atheism and the scientific attempt to claim that artificial intelligence can be achieved, I dug in and came away with what I feel was some enlightenment from God. There is just so much evidence that our ability to choose is a God like characteristic that cannot be duplicated with gears and levers. Trust me that’s essentially all that electronics is. I can make a machine that chooses. That’s not a problem, a traffic light computer chooses but it’s just a machine that is all darkness inside, whirling gears and sliding levers, mere electrons running around – That ability to be self-aware, to step outside of yourself- actually proves that our root entity IS essentially “outside of ourselves” or at least this physical part. And when this shell fails, that sentient, self-aware part that's outside of ourselves “goes back to God who gave it. “
I captured this in a short writing that I hope you can find useful. You seem like a searcher and unless your truth bucket is already full up, then perhaps something God gave to me may be useful to you.
God Bless you
Steve
If religion is anything it should attempt to explain ‘why we are here’, ‘how did we come about’, ‘what we should be doing’ and ‘where we are going?’ Surprisingly, most religions leave out the Why, What and the How altogether. This leads to many thinking individuals having no faith at all or distorted, hazy, at best half formulated answers that satisfy only the most shallow investigation.
Based on what most say about God, you would have to conclude that Its God’s Fault. –all or it – every good deed, every bad – all acts of war, each lie, each kiss – absolutely everything is God’s fault IF ….
…IF God made the very essence of our beings, if our physical beings (and for those who believe in a spiritual self, if that “self”, the life force, spark of intelligence that makes you you) was created wholly by God, then by God, He is responsible for the outcome. But what if that’s not the case…?
With only casual thought, many – even most, glibly reply, “No, no, no, God gave man his agency, his free will, his ability to choose…so is not God’s fault.  Hmmm let’s see – does that make any sense? If I make a machine that can choose, what would be the mechanism for that? – If I make the thing perfect then what causes the perfect thing to execute one way today and another way tomorrow? You would need something like a random number generator. If the device, so endowed, chooses “right” one day and “left” the next, shall fault be found with the device for doing what it was created to do?, Ought not the maker be asked what was his intent, that He should have discontent in His creation - considering that it behaves precisely as designed! How could it do otherwise?
When claiming that the perfect God made the perfect man – all aspects thereof - as a perfect being - it is not consistent to then claim that it is also flawed – It’s a logical contradiction.
There is insight into this topic by examining the character of “god” as a self-existing, self-motivating being. If I were to try to define what to be ‘a god’ was, I suppose I should start with what God himself said about the matter in this classic passage when God is speaking to another God (or just talking to Himself as some theologians have Him doing a lot) and said, speaking of Adam and Eve “They have become as one of us, knowing good from evil.” This came about by the expression or in other words, the exercise of agency or free will. So we learn that a keen attribute of a class of God-beings to be able to act and to be aware of your circumstances; a sentient being.
Unlike inanimate objects, plants and even animals, each of these must be acted upon. They react and their programmed instincts play out, but God is self-motivating, self-aware, able to act and not just be acted upon.
Notice how God places man as “one of us…”  Many a “Bible believing” sect has all but rejected strict plain interpretation of that and minimize that otherwise profound import. If you don’t try to make an allegory out of such striking statements, one can find in the Bible some very revelatory truths connecting God with mankind; not as His collection of talking gadgets, but as His children and all that implies.
But by saying “implies” one need not infer that I am teasing some obscure meaning from the plain spoken Biblical text. I’m saying that it’s hard to not see what the scriptures plainly say.
In several Biblical passages, a powerful being, variously called Lucifer, Satan, Son of the Morning, rebels from God and is cast out of the presence of the God called Father. He believed he would be greater that the Father God. “How would that be possible - to be greater than God the Father, the one said to be the “Beginning?” …How indeed could such a thought be even conceived… unless there is more to the nature of God’s Children than a mere metaphor.
We already discussed “they have become as one of us knowing good an evil” but I hasten to add that this sentient awareness was ½ the equation, the inherent ability to act independently was the other. Without awareness there really cannot be independent action, only reaction. This is KEY.  Some theologians ever anxious to denounce adding to the word of God do just that adding popular phases not found at all in the writ like “God granted to man free agency.” Remember our discussion on agency? Did God really “grant” them anything they did not inherently possess?
What then are we? What is our essence? Examining the nature of spirits, it is claimed that “God is Spirit”. Other Scriptures like Rom 8:16-18 speak of God’s Spirit speaking to Man’s Spirit and declaring that man is His children and that we are on some par with Christ Jesus himself. Jesus affirmed the same saying, “I go my father and your father, my God and your God.”
Satan was another sentient being also defined as a Spirit being. Story after story is told in the Biblical record of even multiple beings possessing a common physical being – even animals and that these spiritual beings could then control the physical. It would seem from all that was said that the Spirit is what animates the body. For example when Jesus died, - “He gave up the Spirit.” In another place it reads, “…the spirit returns to god who gave it.” Its just untenable to cling to the notion that we are talking about breath! The repeated context does not support that. This is animation and interaction at a high level.
After the crucifixion, the disciples seeing Jesus thought it was a spirit, implying obviously that a spirit is a being – another dimensional existence?  Perhaps?? What is then Spirit? What about seeing the spirit? One scripture reads that “You cannot see the face of God and live”. Well that implies that God has a face that under some circumstance could be seen. Recall the Israelites who were invited to meet God and they being convicted of their imperfections were afraid and blanched at the opportunity. In fact, at one point they saw God or parts of his being but God covered His face to keep the visitors from perishing. This all sound very real and in some dimension perhaps tangible.
So what does establishing the Spirit nature of Man’s essence have to do with agency? Again, what is ‘free agency’, if not the ability to Act for themselves and not be simply acted upon. We observed that that was a key and salient attribute of God – being an independent actor. So Spiritual beings have ‘agency’ as an inherent quality. That is the connection between God and man.
Indeed, it was Jesus himself that affirmed the ancient prophetic statements that “Ye are Gods! [and let the follow-up axiom sink in] and children of the most high!” Lest we wrestle obscurity and nonsense out of the plain and clear, this affirms why God is interested in us. God says that “We are Gods”. The definition is then ‘a self-motivated being; a being with power and the inherent spark of life and intelligence.’ This is one of the most profound statements in the Bible [though ignored and oft avoided] and it is uttered by none other than the acknowledged God himself “Ye are Gods! and children of the most high!” The context of that profundity is fully supportive. The Pharisees were criticizing Jesus because he claimed to be the Son of God and he retorted paraphrasing “Why do you think it so strange that I said I was the Son of God when your own Scriptures teach – Ye are Gods!”
I know some might turn that exchange into allegory, the favorite means to dismiss something important, but the critique being levied against Jesus was about his lineage; who He was and they thought it blasphemy to claim direct ancestry with God. To say Jesus sidestepped that fundamental accusation with a clever play on words is weak and out of character. What was in common character was for Jesus to place us in the same intimate relation to His father as He Himself and that was what He did again when answering the Pharisees. 
Can you see where we are going with this? God was obviously involved in forming Man’s physical body, but somehow God our Father was also involved in forming our Spirit – I am going to suggest that like we have demonstrated, that the essence of living man is the Spirit that resides in Man, that that spirit hath elsewhere its beginning, that like our Father who had no beginning in essence, that the essence of man likewise has no beginning, and that solves the great riddle as to how man was supposed to have an eternal existence, yet had a ‘beginning’. That man was nothing and then became everything was always an inherent contradiction and as we see a contradiction inconsistent with the truth.
That truth, so cleanly expressed by Jesus, explains the actual brotherhood of man. God, then, is not a metaphorical father but a Father indeed of our spirits making us in reality brothers and sisters; perhaps in some dimensional existence –tangible beings.
"If you examine the import of the observation, "I think therefore I am" it is speaking to the idea that there is an intrinsic extrapolation of the self from the self. This might sound like Jabberwocky at 1st but consider that one can iterate the thought about thinking about the fact that one is thinking....Your body in fact becomes a sort of avatar! Consider if a person lost an appendage. Does the person no longer think he is the person? In other words your arm is not you. The concept of conscious awareness also entails the concept of abstraction; of you from your physical self. Religions that appreciate the concept of a soul or spiritual self, thus see the body as a true avatar and the mind as a processing engine and keyboard connecting the actual self from the physical interface. Consider a mechanical computer. It is levers and gears and conditional sliders and so forth. An electronic computer is nothing more nor less that lots more of the same. If you observed a room full of sliders and gears and levers would it be logical think that a sufficiently bigger and bigger room of the same would be self aware? No! Self awareness is of necessity the ability of that real self to not in very fact to be part of that physical self."
It is our self-existing intelligence that makes us independent actors and thus responsible for those acts. Agency was not created or “granted” to man or Lucifer or any other spiritual being, but is inherent in the substance and thus while God somehow gave that substance form and expression as Spirit entities, the expression is fundamental and fully explains one of the grand questions of who we are and why we are so important to God. We are clearly of great potential – God has foreseen it!
William Wordsworth 1770-1850  Ode - Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood
Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting:

The Soul that rises with us, our life's Star,
               Hath had elsewhere its setting,

               And cometh from afar:

               Not in entire forgetfulness,

               And not in utter nakedness,

But trailing clouds of glory do we come
              From God, who is our home:

Deductive Proof that there is more to Man than meets the eye


Deductive Proof that there is more to Man than meets the eye

Like a perpetual motion machine, some concepts are logically impossible. The following deductive reasoning demonstrates why the sentient ‘3CPO’ is impossible – not simply improbable or awaiting the next improvement in complexity.

Let me preface this assertion by pointing out that you may well be able to program a self-optimizing algorithm that could mimic human response like making the sounds of speech, but that machine has no consciousness or self-awareness no matter how convincing the act of aping our behavior. Why? Consider the Babbage calculator remarkably designed some 200 years back! (See photo of the author standing in front of a replica of this marvel.)
As the gears whirl and the shift levers click away is there any reason to anticipate that the gears or the collection of mechanisms can be “aware” of itself? It seems plain enough as you watch the gear motions that it’s just metal clanking away and the metal is just that with no inherent intelligent property to make such a self-judgment - each gear is just a metal gear. If you can accept that premise, then let’s add one more gear and turn the crank. Did the outcome change? Are the gears somehow aware of themselves due to the addition of one more? Note that electronics is just gears and states and levers- that have identical analogs to our mechanical setups illustrated by the Babbage machine and even analog representations in our human anatomy.



What if we added so many gears and gates and holding states that the machine now could answer your question perfectly - maybe even broadcast the sound sequence of “I think therefore I Am?” Even output the sounds of “Ouch” if you kicked its tilt sensor? Looking at the gears whirling and self-optimizing the calculation - are the gears ‘aware’ of their own motion? No, because once again it’s just metal gears and levers and the metal has no inherent property outside of being metal. If for N gears and levers and gates and holding states the gears do not in themselves have awareness or consciousness of self, a sentient property and N+1 does not, then for all complexity N+[ ] the machine remains just more gears, in other words, all darkness inside no matter what sounds or actions mimicking our behavior the machine produces.

If the Human brain and our usage thereof can be reduced to a series of wires, gates; in fine, a self-optimizing calculator with gain, gates and memory states which we have just demonstrated is unavoidably dark inside then the human too would be dark inside - reacting to the world but not able to “sense” anything even though it be festooned with sensors and broadcasting “ouch” as you kicked its tilt sensor!

But you say, I think and sense and feel and imagine and so much more- Yes and that only demonstrates that you must be more than gears because the deductive proof just outlined is logically sound.

Consider that you are watching yourself (out of body) reading this short essay. You are Iteratively extrapolating yourself from yourself. That ability is what separate man from machine. There is clearly something more to man than the body’s machine parts. The part that makes you you as demonstrated by that exercise is separate from the mortal carrier. Religions have attempted various explanation. Call it spirit or the breath of life, the spark of intelligence - it’s just not the dust as this deductive prove demonstrates.

The only way we can experience consciousness is to in some respect be separate from the body, exactly what religions the world over have been trying to put words to for millennia. Perhaps we can thus think of the body as a carrier and the brain as an interface with cache memory and sensor preprocessing functions.
The spiritual side thus plays an integral role in what we call consciousness; the substance that interprets and interacts through the physical body. Those who dedicate themselves and strive to find in the evolutionary dust all answers have found consciousness the conundrum. The fact of the matter is that a computer-machine running a simulation about building a machine is still just a machine of lifeless parts flipping states; there is no life from lifelessness.
Likewise, physicists are grappling with the impact of consciousness on the origin of matter itself as we have begun to prove that matter at a particle level actually responds to being observed! Consciousness did not evolve if it took consciousness to initiate the big bang! So is not the physical the begets or evolves into consciousness with sufficient complexity but consciousness that creates the reality.
New Experiments continue to stack up showing Consciousness Affects Matter. In over 600 experiments by university labs over several decades this effect has been thoroughly proven. Said, Dean Radin Ph.D at University of Arizona, “Consciousness is an active participant in reality”. (Ref https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRSBaq3vAeY)

Bottom line is that for you to be you and be aware - there must be something outside of the physical that makes that possible - call it spirit, intelligence, consciousness, spark of life...there is just plainly and logically something more than meets the eye about you.
Have you ever wondered, “OK, but what happened before the big bang? What changed?” I’ll let one of the most ancient religious text speak the last word, “The consciousness spoke and the worlds were created.”

A View to Understanding the Atonement of Jesus


On this Easter weekend my mind is full of gratitude for the Love Jesus offers me. That he rescued a soul so rebellious and proud as mine as the hymn goes. “How was it done?” the prophet Enos asked. That question posed long ago has occupied many conversations and even books. Allegorical approaches often take two approaches that lead to some critique and may even get in the way of those who otherwise might accept the glorious message of redemption and reconciliation.

Let me explain the problem and then offer another approach that may help the truth seeker. Before I do that please understand that if the various allegories, flawed or otherwise have brought you to seek and obtain a relationship with the Lord then how could I be but happy for you, but if those approaches leave you with questions that have become stumbling blocks then this next conversation might be very helpful. Those of non-Christian heritage may find this approach to understanding a very meaningful gateway.
Without much elaboration, these are the common approaches/phrases employed
  • Jesus died for my sins
  • Jesus paid the price for my sins
  • Jesus opened the gate and set me free
  • Justice was satisfied
  • Jesus makes up the difference
  • Jesus intercedes and the Father sees Jesus robes and not your filthy rags

To work, these approaches need to resolve some issue.
  • Outside of accepting the Savior, Jesus would have to take away our future free agency and alter our makeup.
  • Outside of ancient tribal warfare (blood for blood regardless of who’s), we have no acceptable concept where one person can be punished for another and call it justice.
  • There is no cosmic sin accountant called “Justice” to be satisfied; unless there really is a ‘volcano god’ that needs virgins sacrificed to keep it appeased!
  • Accounting for sin with a ledger (making up the difference) implies a table of punishments and miss-behaviors and what does punishment (stripes) mean? When you try to add specificity to this ledger approach it breaks down.

In a somewhat longer article, I wrote a while back a view on the Atoning Sacrifice of Jesus that centers on what some term Sanctification; the perfecting of the soul. I refer the reader to that somewhat longer treatment Forgiveness and the Power of the Atonement. See Link 
Boiling down the article it comes to this. YOU need to change to be compatible with heaven and no paying off or hiding or shielding or diversionary tactics or “whipping boy” vicarious punishments will do that. If Heaven is not going to become an instant hell for our entry we need to get the hell part out of us! If you got past that rather crude way of expressing it – good because good is what you need to be.
The question then is how to get there without just becoming a robot or marionette for God. Clearly what he wants is for us to be like Him and apparently as he commanded it (Be Ye therefore Perfect), we can get there…with the help of Jesus.
But what about the many places in scripture speaking to Justice and Payment and so forth?
The simple answer is that He did pay a price- a rather steep one to become acquainted not just with grief but with YOUR grief. The atonement was NOT him being punished for your crime but by experiencing your crime, pain grief and everyone else’s - that was plenty punishing – to the point of drawing blood.
To God, time does not exist and all events were experienced in that Garden experience. That is the miracle – that time and space and events collapsed in a singularity to be personally experienced by Jesus who thereby became savior for us all - placing him in the position of truly the kindred spirit with exactly the means and remedy - just for your unique spirit.
Justice being satisfied in that we are reformed in His image by our willing participation, His guidance and multiplying power. Heaven stays heaven lest it turn into hell – and that would simply not be just! Hence Justice is satisfied.
This makes sense. This approach is scriptural, satisfying, bridging for all faiths and deep inside just feels right. Let me know if this insight helps or if you have a perspective of your own to add to the conversation.
All My Best and may His Holy Spirit make you His.



Sunday, March 24, 2019

Why I Don’t Not Believe - for believers and skeptics


A couple years ago I was asked to teach New Testament and the following year, the Book of Mormon. Living in the San Francisco area, I had plenty of opportunity to dialog with those who do not believe. I even had opportunity to discuss matters of faith with those whose former faith had waned in the flux of pseudo-intellectual attacks from all quarters; former believers and never believers alike.
There are, after all, plenty of topics to challenge one’s faith regardless the holy writ one clings to. As a student of the Bible, I would have been asleep at the wheel to not be aware of controversies like constructing the earth in a few days, no rain until a world-wide flood, celestial impossibilities like the sun standing still, people coming back from the dead, oceans parting, over-packed arks, walking on water, talking donkeys and walking conniving serpents just to name a few more prominent anachronisms to the modern mind.
The Book of Mormon adds its own collection of improbabilities to the sciences; animals that weren’t thought to exist, civilizations undergoing frequent and massive cultural seesaws, rare metals and materials….
To those who make a life’s work out of undermining other’s faiths, there is plenty of fodder to work with… and yet I still believe. Why? And what do I mean that “I don’t not believe?” Simply this, science is an uncertain art that is constantly correcting and re-enlightening itself. History is even worse as the sources are few, biased and void of testability for veracity. So, I have come to conclude that to base one’s beliefs about God on the outcome of an intellectual sparing session would not be a solid foundation to springboard one’s life.
I could choose to ‘Not Believe’ the spiritual content and value obtained from the Book of Mormon or the Bible for lack of my ability (at present) to examine the alloy of stainless steel in the sword wielded by Laban or a plausible explanation for the solar stand still, but that might be a bad call should they unearth the steel treasure down the road a piece as my life comes to a close. I could choose to scoff at the talk of Jesus walking on water having failed in the attempt to reproduce the event in my own laboratory.
You see where I am going with this? I have watched a number of Ahahs reveal themselves in just my own short life; like pre-Columbian horse and Hebrew DNA being finally discovered as predicted by the Book of Mormon but in no case, did that shake let alone break my faith in bleaker years.
Why not? Because in the very beginning I chose wisely to test the very premise of Christianity and the restored gospel. My experiment on the word asked the most fundamental question right up front; as the children’s song says, “Heavenly Father, are you really there and do you listen to and answer every child’s prayer?”
So when I hear someone say, “I question if Joseph Smith was Prophet” because of historical hit pieces, either real but generally not, I think to ask – “Have you asked the only source that matters?” Have you never had encounters with the Divine that you are left to but your own devices to ferret out truth from the clutter of opposing or even hostile forces?
For my understanding, testimony is not belief and contrary to popular lingo, I don’t think you strengthen or weaken it; it can only be added to or forgotten due to long neglect. In my parlance, it is direct experience. Belief, however, can come from experience or an extrapolation from hope. Let me explain that seemingly reverse or perhaps circular order.
I had a profound experience with God when reading the writings in the Book of Mormon as a young man. I have written more extensively about this elsewhere. It was life altering and heart changing. I knew God existed because he changed me pretty fundamentally - instantly. From that encounter, I ‘believed’ the Book had to come from a divine source and by inference the man who produced it too.
I took that experience of a mighty change of heart and when called, answered the call to preach the good word to the people of Norway. When explaining the story of Joseph Smith’s first visionary experience, without belaboring this discussion with so much detail, I and all in the room shared another revelatory event where body and mind are lifted and enlightened - a singular moment of pure knowledge and epiphany. Like explaining what a spoonful of sugar must taste like for the first time, all I can say is you don’t forget those moments any more than any other event you might witness.
So, I added that event to my book of testimonies. An experience had become testimony and that in turn led to a belief that was subsequently replaced by a testimony. My stories of direct encounters, enlightenments, revelations, healings, and directions have grown and have not dimmed by time nor diminished by sophistries demanding instant answers.
Patience has been my friend; sometimes after years of trial of my faith, it revealed “ahah” moments that have been precious to me. After all, even agents of the most high God appreciate seeing comforting sign posts along the path to Zion.

Sunday, March 10, 2019

Temple Worship in the LDS community

Temple Worship in the LDS community is a tightly guarded conversation but for the most part this is not really warranted - more a cultural taboo than real or practical.

What follows is a redacted letter to some dear friends as a follow up to a conversation that touched on the temple. I was speaking to members but there is nothing new to the world or inappropriate for a frank but respectful conversation.

"As you both of you are in the business of preparing folks for meeting and engaging God, I thought I might share a few insights on our worship of the Lord through Temple experiences. I meant to send this to you guys a while back when we touched on the topic but I am slow! 

This link is to a letter in my essay collection written long ago but quite relevant. Temple Prep Letter to a friend

But I will share another funny vignette that does teach the need to be actually less secret about the sacred so those who engage for the 1st time are not quite so surprised by the ancient ritualistic nature of the Temple rites.

My own 1st experience was on this wise. I had but 6 months or so previous been born as a new creature. It was a pretty dramatic turn about for me. No, I wasn't robbing folks or such but my orientation switched entirely, overnight, from looking inward to looking upwards and outward. With a new heart, I was ready to serve God and the last step on that journey was to be endowed with the promises and covenants in the temple. 

I knew about nothing other than Dad, the priesthood holder and my Mom, had different undergarments than were the norm for most folks; Though my brother who went to Japan was frequently be asked by the locals where they could get those cool underwear - kind of like cyclist base layer ....anyway it was not so much about the style but how they are presented to the initiate in those days that this story focuses on. 

While the way the Temple presentation/story is told is modernized and less primitive in construction - I was totally cool with the washing and anointing part - very ancient, very primitive and visceral - defiantly a guy thing - felt like an aboriginal experience as they anointed (nothing distasteful or sensual - seriously!) but we are talking about being given an undergarment and what you wore before that was akin to a hospital gown for the same reasons. The Priest would anoint your head, shoulders, neck, arms, legs and tummy with just a touch of water or oil respectively. All tastefully done and all very ancient in experience.

Then all clothed we went to another room ready to receive the "endowment" where you promise to keep God's laws in detail and He in turns promises exaltation to you. I dive into those promises in that essay link On Temple Prep. But then I had a sudden question pop into my head - Trust me there was nothing whatsoever sexual or untoward about the experience; nadda. but it was intimate and no way would it be appropriate for a male priest to do that to a female and so my head was whirling. 

There are a few spots in the ceremony where you are invited to step away if you want. I was about to do just that with that question in my head, but , but you see I had had a transcendent experience with the Almighty who spoke though an experience ((...of my coming to Christ  or How the Scriptures brought me to Christ) with the Book of Mormon. I was made a new creature overnight and new He was real and this was real. I told myself -"keep your hand down and your butt in the chair. You must simply not understand something real important!" I tell you it was hard.  I am a thinker - God has blessed me as a problem solver with a rigidly logical mind and part of my facts suggested to my logical mind that I should figuratively 'run'!

To me this was an Abrahamic experience of total contradiction and total faith. My faith and and trust in God and the goodness of my family and all about be told me I must be shy something rather critical to this moment and so I sat and took in the experience and made my covenants with God. Entering what they call the celestial room - Truly a close proximate of what a heavenly room might be. I found my mother and father and drawing them aside I discretely inquired. "Mom, what about the washing/anointing part. Isn't that pretty inappropriate for a priesthood brother to do that to the gals?" She looked stunned for a moment then stifled what could have been a belly laugh welling up and said "Oh Son, women are ordained with priesthood power in the temple to perform those ordinance for the women!"

I was instantly relieved and also a bit stunned and then greatly chagrined. A few discontented people are always mouthing off about women having priesthood power and there they are! Odd this was never ever mentioned. Seemed like a pretty big thing to never so much as broach the topic.

Nowday's, the ancient feel is largely replaced with symbolic anointing and the 'cross your heart and hope to die' sort of language of the 1800s  - all gone, but the story is same, just the telling a bit more refined for our modern sensibilities. Any time I have spoken to a newbee I've remembered that there are really precious few things that are actually covenanted to not be uttered outside the walls. The rest may be spoken in respectful circumstances. Too much of the hush hush smacks of the Pharisaical encumbrances to never uttering God's name and so forth. Sacred does not have to mean secret. 

This pearl was meant to be shared and rejoiced in when found."