Today I studied the scriptures in order, rather than hopping about from book to book, chapter to chapter. I read the first four chapters of the Book of Mormon, and I felt like my problems paralleled Nephi's family's problems.
Why am I whining about my circumstances? Because I "know not the dealings of that God who created [me]." If I only knew what God were doing, I would not complain at all. Of course, understanding everything in His plan would preclude a test of faith. So I decided to act as though everything around me were somehow part of God's plan, and accept that fact on faith. Nothing in my environment changed; my attitude improved greatly, and I ceased to murmur.
Why does God ask us to give up our obvious options, the ones right in front of us? My uncle told me that chess masters will basically take the obvious move as a rule of thumb. Lehi was wealthy, living in Jerusalem, probably in a fairly comfortable and even lavish home. Laman and Lemuel wanted to stay behind and enjoy all of that, and murmured when it was ripped away from them. I have options in front of me that the Lord is prompting me to sacrifice. Lehi gave up his plush estate in Jerusalem, and the Lord rewarded his sacrifice by giving him two whole continents. That is quite an impressive deal, but letting go of what you can see in favor of what you cannot is hard. It takes great faith.
The word "promised" in promised lands struck me today as never before. Trading your tangible, familiar, comfortable possessions in Jerusalem for a promise? It takes faith in the one making the promise, because promises are merely words otherwise. Until the promise arrives, we operate on faith. Faith in the promise fills us with hope til it arrives. We even use that faith, like Lehi and Nephi, to move toward the promise. But oh, the lag between letting go and receiving the promise.
Jacob blessed Joseph that he would become like "a fruitful bough over a well." I wonder if the well represents the ocean, and the fruitful bough represents the seed of Joseph, like Lehi's family, arriving in the promised land and multiplying to fill the land. Brigham Young said that Joseph Smith was as pure of an Ephraimite as he could be, and the Book of Mormon says that he was a direct descendant of Joseph in Egypt. When Joseph Smith was killed, he fell out of the window at Carthage jail, and crawled to prop himself against the well beneath the window. I have wondered if there is a connection between Jacob's blessing and that incident; it is most likely not connected to the prophecy, merely magnified in my mind by my familiarity with the events surrounding the martyrdom of the Prophet.
Lehi was fulfilling prophecy when he left Jerusalem. Israel was scattered into the earth as part of the Lord's plan; Lehi was righteous, so he was given the opportunity to be an active participant and beneficiary of the inevitable scattering, rather than a hapless victim.
Nephi may have inaugurated the destruction of Jerusalem when he crept into the city by night, killed the captain of the guard, and stole a priceless historical record, and carried away a prisoner.
Many people have commented about Nephi's inclusion of Isaiah in the Book of Mormon, joking about the boring chore of plodding through it. Isaiah says that he and his sons are signs for the people; "Isaiah" means "Jehovah saves;" "Shear-jashub" means "a remnant will return;" "Maher-shalal-hashbaz" means "destruction is imminent." Isaiah's name, and his sons' names, are major themes of the book of Isaiah. The emphasis on the gathering of scattered Israel in the last days probably made Isaiah of particular interest to Nephi, who grew up in Jerusalem. The destruction of his home, and leaving it permanently, and the estrangement of Israel from their Lord, were all problems. Isaiah presents the Lord's solutions about the gathering, prophesying of the day when a "remnant" of Israel will "return."
Nephi becomes the political leader and spiritual leader of his people; a king and a priest. His closing words in the Book of Mormon are still filled with pathos and longing: "But I, Nephi, have written what I have written, and I esteem it as of great worth, and especially unto my people. For I pray continually for them by day, and mine eyes water my pillow by night, because of them; and I cry unto my God in faith, and I know that he will hear my cry" (2Ne. 33:3). Even after receiving the promise, after having his personal needs met, he suddenly yearns for the happiness of his people, whose ultimate destruction he had already witnessed in vision. "Nauvoo" means "beautiful place" in Hebrew; one scholar speculated that the name "Nephi" is a cognate, and actual means "beautiful" or "fair." Mormon's cry, "O ye fair ones!" may actually be a play on words; they were fair people, AND "Nephite" means "fair."
It is worth remembering that there is no discernible finish line in mortality. Once you get one item on your wishlist, a new need presents itself, and all too quickly our gratitude can evaporate. Enjoying the journey, no matter what is on the wishlist, and staying grateful, must be a part of the trick to staying happy.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Friday, June 29, 2012
Maps
It is difficult to create maps based on verbal descriptions of terrain.
Readers of the Book of Mormon have attempted to fit descriptions of the
land to various places, and the debate over possible locations continues
among scholarly members of the Church.
The Doctrine and Covenants, combined with the Pearl of Great Price, expand our knowledge of our eternal existence. They speak of the complexity of the afterlife, as well as re-alerting the world about its premortal existence. In our attempt to grasp these concepts, we have drawn maps, representations of what was and will be, based on interpretation of these restoration scriptures. If you are a member of the Church, then you've seen the diagram on innumerable chalkboards in various Sunday school classes. These flowcharts present circles representing our premortal, mortal, postmortal, and resurrected states.
Just as maps based off from verbal descriptions can be inaccurate, I wonder if the venerated diagram we proudly present has misleading aspects to it.
I recently attended another ward (my sister was leaving on her mission, and I attended the sacrament meeting where she spoke). After the sacrament meeting, I attended Sunday school with my sisters. The teacher drew the diagram representing the plan of salvation (rather, representing the geographical results of the actual plan of salvation through Christ) on the board. He then began a standard practice among teachers, which is to fish for an answer by asking questions to make the class think.
Teacher: What is the purpose of mortality?
My response: To get back to the presence of our Heavenly Father.
Teacher: But we were already in His presence in heaven...Why did we need to leave it?
Someone Else: So we could gain bodies, families, and earthly experiences.
Teacher: And why did we need those things?
My response: So we could get back to the presence of our Heavenly Father.
I confess there was some flippancy in my remark, but I was quite serious. The teacher was aggravated at our inability to come up with the answer he was fishing for: To become like God. He was irked, and pointed out that, as the diagram on the board plainly indicated, those in the lower levels of the celestial world would be able to dwell in the presence of God, yet they would be unlike Him in that they could not have children. He apparently felt vindicated and justified in his assertion, but something set wrong with me, though I could not pinpoint any particular scripture to explain my feelings. So I kept my comments to myself while the teacher prated about working to become like God, and bench-pressing planets, trifles for humans, yes?
I am being sarcastic; God exalts us, we just show up and do what we're told, follow the Spirit, and learn to love and be patient with self and others. We can change our behavior; only God can change our natures.
I digress.
I went to the scriptures looking for something to quiet my mind on the subject, because what the teacher had said seemed to jive with my understanding of the diagram, yet not with the actual scriptures. I knew that the inhabitants of the telestial kingdom were geographically separate from the celestial: "And they shall be servants of the Most High; but where God and Christ dwell they cannot come, worlds without end" (D&C 76:112).
D&C 131:1-4 seems not to preclude those who are celestialized, yet single, dwelling with God: "In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees; And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; And if he does not, he cannot obtain it. He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an increase."
But my search gave me pause—with new eyes attuned to statements indicative of the physical locations of resurrected beings in various glories, I found something that seems to refute the assumption that those who are not completely exalted, begetting their own children in the eternities, will be "hanging out" with God. First, D&C 132:17 describes exaltation as being married: "For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever." These "angels" act as ministers for those who are exalted (v. 16). Again: "...exaltation and glory...which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever..." (v. 19).
There is our definition of exaltation, and exposition of what awaits the unexalted.
Exaltation, as described in section 132, is about more than what we may become; it describes where we may, or may not go:
"For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory" (v. 4).
"I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord" (v. 12).
"And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that covenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; when they are out of the world it cannot be received there, because the angels and the gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot, therefore, inherit my glory; for my house is a house of order, saith the Lord God" (v. 18).
"And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise...they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever" (v.19).
"But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also" (v. 23).
"Where I am, ye shall be also." Only those who are exalted receive this promise, and only those who are married for eternity are exalted.
The map we have drawn for ourselves is misleading, I believe.
I also had a conversation about the next life with a member of the Church who is convinced that those who end up in other glories besides exaltation will be satisfied with what they receive.
Alma 1:4 describes the universalist doctrine taught by Nehor: "And he also testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, and that they need not fear nor tremble, but that they might lift up their heads and rejoice; for the Lord had created all men, and had also redeemed all men; and, in the end, all men should have eternal life."
2Ne. 28:8-9: "And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God. Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish doctrines, and shall be puffed up in their hearts, and shall seek deep to hide their counsels from the Lord; and their works shall be in the dark."
The member expressed the idea that because God is merciful, He would not leave us miserable. It is true, all but sons of perdition end up in a "saved state," not in agony, but are they happy with their less-than-exalted degree of glory? By definition, they are still damned—damnation is stopped progress, the absence of increase. "Broad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the deaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they receive me not, neither do they abide in my law" (D&C 132:25). It seems here that the Lord is defining anything but exaltation as some form of death. Spiritual death is separation from God.
Alma addresses Corianton's concern about justice: "And now, my son, I perceive there is somewhat more which doth worry your mind, which ye cannot understand—which is concerning the justice of God in the punishment of the sinner; for ye do try to suppose that it is injustice that the sinner should be consigned to a state of misery" (Alma 42:1). Who could be happy spending the rest of eternity knowing they had fallen short of their full potential? The actual definition of "damned" has less to do with pitchforks and unquenchable brimstone, externally inflicted miseries, and more to do with being stopped, halted, impeded in our eternal progression, internal misery. If you end up anywhere but the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, you are, by definition, damned. Whatever is to be had in the other degrees of glory, it is not a fulness of joy, because those who inhabit them are not like God, and because God is not there.
"Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore" (Psalm 16:11).
The Doctrine and Covenants, combined with the Pearl of Great Price, expand our knowledge of our eternal existence. They speak of the complexity of the afterlife, as well as re-alerting the world about its premortal existence. In our attempt to grasp these concepts, we have drawn maps, representations of what was and will be, based on interpretation of these restoration scriptures. If you are a member of the Church, then you've seen the diagram on innumerable chalkboards in various Sunday school classes. These flowcharts present circles representing our premortal, mortal, postmortal, and resurrected states.
Just as maps based off from verbal descriptions can be inaccurate, I wonder if the venerated diagram we proudly present has misleading aspects to it.
I recently attended another ward (my sister was leaving on her mission, and I attended the sacrament meeting where she spoke). After the sacrament meeting, I attended Sunday school with my sisters. The teacher drew the diagram representing the plan of salvation (rather, representing the geographical results of the actual plan of salvation through Christ) on the board. He then began a standard practice among teachers, which is to fish for an answer by asking questions to make the class think.
Teacher: What is the purpose of mortality?
My response: To get back to the presence of our Heavenly Father.
Teacher: But we were already in His presence in heaven...Why did we need to leave it?
Someone Else: So we could gain bodies, families, and earthly experiences.
Teacher: And why did we need those things?
My response: So we could get back to the presence of our Heavenly Father.
I confess there was some flippancy in my remark, but I was quite serious. The teacher was aggravated at our inability to come up with the answer he was fishing for: To become like God. He was irked, and pointed out that, as the diagram on the board plainly indicated, those in the lower levels of the celestial world would be able to dwell in the presence of God, yet they would be unlike Him in that they could not have children. He apparently felt vindicated and justified in his assertion, but something set wrong with me, though I could not pinpoint any particular scripture to explain my feelings. So I kept my comments to myself while the teacher prated about working to become like God, and bench-pressing planets, trifles for humans, yes?
I am being sarcastic; God exalts us, we just show up and do what we're told, follow the Spirit, and learn to love and be patient with self and others. We can change our behavior; only God can change our natures.
I digress.
I went to the scriptures looking for something to quiet my mind on the subject, because what the teacher had said seemed to jive with my understanding of the diagram, yet not with the actual scriptures. I knew that the inhabitants of the telestial kingdom were geographically separate from the celestial: "And they shall be servants of the Most High; but where God and Christ dwell they cannot come, worlds without end" (D&C 76:112).
D&C 131:1-4 seems not to preclude those who are celestialized, yet single, dwelling with God: "In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees; And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this order of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage]; And if he does not, he cannot obtain it. He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an increase."
But my search gave me pause—with new eyes attuned to statements indicative of the physical locations of resurrected beings in various glories, I found something that seems to refute the assumption that those who are not completely exalted, begetting their own children in the eternities, will be "hanging out" with God. First, D&C 132:17 describes exaltation as being married: "For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever." These "angels" act as ministers for those who are exalted (v. 16). Again: "...exaltation and glory...which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever..." (v. 19).
There is our definition of exaltation, and exposition of what awaits the unexalted.
Exaltation, as described in section 132, is about more than what we may become; it describes where we may, or may not go:
"For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory" (v. 4).
"I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord" (v. 12).
"And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that covenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; when they are out of the world it cannot be received there, because the angels and the gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot, therefore, inherit my glory; for my house is a house of order, saith the Lord God" (v. 18).
"And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise...they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever" (v.19).
"But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also" (v. 23).
"Where I am, ye shall be also." Only those who are exalted receive this promise, and only those who are married for eternity are exalted.
The map we have drawn for ourselves is misleading, I believe.
I also had a conversation about the next life with a member of the Church who is convinced that those who end up in other glories besides exaltation will be satisfied with what they receive.
Alma 1:4 describes the universalist doctrine taught by Nehor: "And he also testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, and that they need not fear nor tremble, but that they might lift up their heads and rejoice; for the Lord had created all men, and had also redeemed all men; and, in the end, all men should have eternal life."
2Ne. 28:8-9: "And there shall also be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God. Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish doctrines, and shall be puffed up in their hearts, and shall seek deep to hide their counsels from the Lord; and their works shall be in the dark."
The member expressed the idea that because God is merciful, He would not leave us miserable. It is true, all but sons of perdition end up in a "saved state," not in agony, but are they happy with their less-than-exalted degree of glory? By definition, they are still damned—damnation is stopped progress, the absence of increase. "Broad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the deaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they receive me not, neither do they abide in my law" (D&C 132:25). It seems here that the Lord is defining anything but exaltation as some form of death. Spiritual death is separation from God.
Alma addresses Corianton's concern about justice: "And now, my son, I perceive there is somewhat more which doth worry your mind, which ye cannot understand—which is concerning the justice of God in the punishment of the sinner; for ye do try to suppose that it is injustice that the sinner should be consigned to a state of misery" (Alma 42:1). Who could be happy spending the rest of eternity knowing they had fallen short of their full potential? The actual definition of "damned" has less to do with pitchforks and unquenchable brimstone, externally inflicted miseries, and more to do with being stopped, halted, impeded in our eternal progression, internal misery. If you end up anywhere but the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, you are, by definition, damned. Whatever is to be had in the other degrees of glory, it is not a fulness of joy, because those who inhabit them are not like God, and because God is not there.
"Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore" (Psalm 16:11).
Thursday, June 28, 2012
A Word of Wisdom
I am currently following a diet that requires the elimination of any exogenous sources of glucose or fructose in my blood. This means no grains, no liquid milk, nothing that tastes sweet, and no starchy vegetables. I am able to eat meat, eggs, spices, vegetables, nuts, salt, and miscellaneous flavorings.
I told a friend last year about this diet, what success I had achieved, and her response was, "What about the Word of Wisdom? Aren't we supposed to eat less meat and more grains?" I eventually quit the diet last year because I conceded that she was right, and because of galling, gnawing, aggravating hunger. I stuck with a high-carb, low fat diet until recent health issues, such as weight and blood sugar levels, prompted me to go back on the no-carb diet, this time combined with high amounts of saturated fat. My results on this diet have been astonishing. So good, in fact, that I actually went back to D&C 89 to see if I had missed anything. Doesn't the Word of Wisdom tell us to reduce meat and eat fruits, vegetables, and grains? Let's have a look.
Conspiring Men
"A Word of Wisdom, for the benefit of...the church, and also the saints in Zion...sent...by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days...Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation..." (v. 1-4).
This is a warning to us today, even though it was given over a century ago. We are warned about "evil designs" "in the hearts of conspiring men" in our day. One of the problems I had when doing a low-carb, low-fat diet was hunger. I was constantly craving. If I stuck to my diet faithfully, I would have dreams about eating chocolate frosting. (Nightmares, given their context.) I was eating fruits, grains, some meat, oils, and very little saturated fat. And I felt like I was starving. I was the best customer in the world, buying fruits on a regular basis, since I had decided to eliminate artificially sweetened foods from my diet. My mind was foggy after eating; my moods were unstable, fluctuating from mild mania to deep troughs of depression. My weight, seemingly moderate to others, was taking its toll on my knees, and my blood pressure. I would either undereat, and starve, or overeat, and starve anyway. I had more food in my guts and in my fat stores than I needed; why was I hungry all the time?
Sugar causes hunger. Leptin stops hunger pangs; insulin blocks that leptin signal from reaching the brain. Sugar spikes insulin requirements. So sugar makes more insulin, and chronically high insulin levels block satiety signals of leptin from reaching the brain. Insulin also prevents fat from releasing its energy stores into the blood. High insulin levels cause fat stores to increase. Eliminating any source of any kind of sugar, sweet or not, combined with high animal fat, has eliminated my genuine hunger due to caloric energy deficits, and reduced my roaring carb cravings to manageable pygmies.
According to recent research, it may be impossible to become addicted to anything, let alone food, without the presence of insulin in the brain: "[Dopamine] and insulin systems do not operate in isolation from each other, but instead, work together to orchestrate both the motivation to engage in consummatory behavior and to calibrate the associated level of reward. Insulin signaling has been found to regulate [dopamine] neurotransmission and to affect the ability of drugs that target the [dopamine] system to exert their neurochemical and behavioral effects. Given that many abused drugs target the [dopamine] system, the elucidation of how dopaminergic, as well as other brain reward systems, are regulated by insulin will create opportunities to develop therapies for drug and potentially food addiction. Moreover, a more complete understanding of the relationship between [dopamine] neurotransmission and insulin may help to uncover etiological bases for "food addiction" and the growing epidemic of obesity."
Are food manufacturers aware of this relationship between cravings, insulin, and sugar? I assume that they are, especially since the majority of packaged foods produced by corporate food giants contain some form of sugar. Even foods generally not considered sweet, like salsas, salad dressings, and bread, are artificially loaded with sugar. The result? Those who eat them get hungry, and eat more. The people who sell the products get rich, while the people who eat them get obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart problems, and a host of other ills associated with the American populace. This is a different spin on the same business model Satan taught Cain: "...I may murder and get gain" (Moses 5:31). Instead of shooting people, they poison them with artificial foods, turning their trusting customers into addicts. All this is hidden with bogus information about the salubrious nature of the foods in question.
Instead of illicit drugs, food itself has been turned into an addictive drug. The great irony in all this is that people can be simultaneously overweight AND hungry. Even naturally lean people are hungry on this kind of carb-rich food, too.
In the Season Thereof
Isn't fruit good for us? Let's consult the scriptures:
"And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome herbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man—Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with prudence and thanksgiving" (v 10-11).
Why "in the season thereof?" Why not year round? Our bodies are designed to be a part of nature. In summer and autumn, fruit with its high sugar content gives us a chance to store fat for the winter. Our high insulin state keeps us eating it as long as it is available. Then, presumably, we lose access to sugar in the winter (feel free to chuckle at that contradiction) when we then burn off the excess stored fat. That's nature.
In modern America, however, we freely eat apples, berries, just about any fruit, all year round. True, these natural candies are loaded with vitamins, minerals, anti-oxidants, fiber, pure water, and other nutrients whose prime purpose is to counteract and compensate for the negative effects of sugar on the body. Not only do we disregard the instruction to eat fruits "in the season thereof;" we also disregard the nutrients God packaged with the sugar, and forgo almost any potential health benefit by concentrating sugar into unnatural densities. Every part of our bodies, from head to toe, suffers as a result of this behavior. Our bodies are stuck in a permanent summer sugar craze, adding adipose tissue to prepare for a winter famine that never visits the US of A. We celebrate Thanksgiving by discarding prudence.
A Staff for Loafers?
What about grain? "All grain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life..." (v 14). I don't need a staff to walk yet, or a cane, or a crutch, so I don't use one. Manual labor and hard farm work of the kind that early saints did in the 1800s required extra fuel. Today the Amish do such labor, and there are no obese Amish. One study on them confirmed that 3-4 hours a day of physical exertion activates an anti-obesity gene. But what about desk jockeys, earning a living by the sweat of their brain through concentration, rather than through manual physical exertion? Grain is glucose interrupted by fiber and amino acids, and in those who do no manual labor, it will cause fat deposition (unless one's metabolism is so high that one cannot gain weight, even when trying to). Asians eat rice by the bucket, but they are slim because they walk everywhere and work in rice patties daily. Such manual laborers, like rural Asian rice farmers and the Amish, need a staff to lean on, extra fuel to support extra exertion. (Athletes who do intense training also fall into this category.)
Speaking of exertion, what is the purported solution to America's health crisis? "Exercise more, eat less." This slogan is misleading, since intense exercise induces hunger more sharply than anything else I know of. Recent campaigns sponsored by well-meaning individuals to get American youngsters off the couch and moving will, I predict, end up in failure for everyone but the producers of carb-rich food. Insulin keeps fat stores from being tapped; that's why diabetics carry candy with them—because excess insulin won't allow them to use any fuel except what comes from their intestines. The kids in the exercise programs will work themselves into starvation, eat more sugar, retain their fat because the insulin never quite shuts off, possibly ruin their knees, and make a lot of money for doctors and high-carb food purveyors.
Sparingly
Now the tricky part—meat. I have changed my main fuel source from carbs to animal fat. "Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly; And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine. And these hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger" (v. 12, 13, 15). How do you define "sparingly?" Dr. Paul Y. Hosskison explained that, during the time of Joseph Smith, massive meat consumption at each meal was not uncommon. Decades earlier, one visitor from England to pre-revolution America noted that he could not dine with the colonists without developing indigestion due to the excess meat served at every meal.
My consumption has risen as a percentage of my calories, but my total meat consumption has dropped due to low insulin levels. My total consumption of any kind of food has dropped because I no longer experiencing between-meal hunger; I eat about one and a half meals per day, and I have plenty of energy. D&C 59:20: "And it pleaseth God that he hath given all these things unto man (beasts as well as herbs); for unto this end were they made to be used, with judgment (like surveying the results of a particular diet so far), not to excess (I crave/eat less), neither by extortion (i.e., selling foods that cause hunger and health problems to get wealthy)."
Skill, Judgement, Prudence, and Wisdom
These words (each scriptural) indicate the use of one's own wits in making personal health decisions. My friend who was certain that my diet was incompatible with the Word of Wisdom was comparing my actions with her assumptions based on a cursory glance at D&C 89, a socially transmitted construct largely bereft of skill, judgement, prudence, or wisdom. Much of our current dietary health information is distributed by those who sell food. "Of course our products are healthy! Can't you see the pictures of grain and little red hearts on the packages?" We have collectively swallowed these lies, along with the destructive food.
Since I began my no-carb, high-fat diet, I am reaping some of the blessings enumerated at the end of D&C 89. My teeth (bones) no longer ache from sweet food. My mind works consistently, without any brainfog, either before, during, or after meals; my abdomen has shrunk so that I can see my toes now without leaning forward; my mood swings have been replaced with emotional stability; my energy levels are not skyrocketing, but they are never lagging either (as I write this, I am operating on about six hours of sleep without feeling tired, yet I also sleep fitfully); I have lost about fifteen pounds in about two weeks. I am not saying that I have the only correct interpretation of the Word of Wisdom; I am saying that the way I feel now is more consistent with the promised results of the Word of Wisdom than when I ate foods that put glucose or fructose into my blood, or avoided saturated fats and cholesterol.
I may end up with egg on my face later, but so far I am enjoying undeniable benefits. "Health," "treasures of knowledge," absence of weariness, etc., have replaced weight issues, blood sugar issues, addiction-style cravings, and hazy cognition. I hope these trends continue. If they do, I will continue to eschew sweets and bread. Perhaps I will lose so much weight that these foods will be necessary to bring me back up to a healthy weight. But my experiences teach me that's a fantasy I should live without.
********************************************************
Update: 14 July 2012
After a month of fairly stringent avoidance of sucrose, fructose, glucose, and lactose, I can report that most of the health benefits of living this way listed above still apply. However, I want to amend what I said about meat slightly. Sparingly is not tricky; moderation is easy to gauge, since God blessed me with a sensitive stomach, not to mention a lifetime of experience of how much is too much. Meat is easy to go overboard with, especially when limiting intake of carbs. I was doing that, and trying to justify it, with the above article. Insulin levels have dropped fantastically for me, resulting in healthy weight loss and marvelous blood pressure. However, I find that if I overeat meat, it still makes me sick to my stomach, and still keeps my abdomen flabby (egg on my waist AND on my face). Vegetables without appreciable sugar content are available for fairly cheap, and I find that filling up on fiber and less meat is as effective at killing my hunger as meat and dairy fat alone.
Also, a general apology for any hint of self-righteousness floating around in my articles. I am pugnacious about the gospel (a sad irony, since "disputations" are forbidden by Jesus the instant he greets the Nephites). Rather than "wrest" the scriptures to confirm a fad diet, I want to report on what actually works for me, and what does not. Humility is always the way to go.
I am pleased to report that sugar cravings are still manageable after more than a month without it. Now I need to fine-tune fat intake, meat intake, and veg intake. I joke with friends that my body lies all the time. It tells me that I will be happy if I turn off the alarm and go back to sleep; that I will be happy if I eat a package of junk food; etc. But now my body gives a less exaggerated report of what my caloric needs are. And it is pleasant when enough feels like enough.
I told a friend last year about this diet, what success I had achieved, and her response was, "What about the Word of Wisdom? Aren't we supposed to eat less meat and more grains?" I eventually quit the diet last year because I conceded that she was right, and because of galling, gnawing, aggravating hunger. I stuck with a high-carb, low fat diet until recent health issues, such as weight and blood sugar levels, prompted me to go back on the no-carb diet, this time combined with high amounts of saturated fat. My results on this diet have been astonishing. So good, in fact, that I actually went back to D&C 89 to see if I had missed anything. Doesn't the Word of Wisdom tell us to reduce meat and eat fruits, vegetables, and grains? Let's have a look.
Conspiring Men
"A Word of Wisdom, for the benefit of...the church, and also the saints in Zion...sent...by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days...Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation..." (v. 1-4).
This is a warning to us today, even though it was given over a century ago. We are warned about "evil designs" "in the hearts of conspiring men" in our day. One of the problems I had when doing a low-carb, low-fat diet was hunger. I was constantly craving. If I stuck to my diet faithfully, I would have dreams about eating chocolate frosting. (Nightmares, given their context.) I was eating fruits, grains, some meat, oils, and very little saturated fat. And I felt like I was starving. I was the best customer in the world, buying fruits on a regular basis, since I had decided to eliminate artificially sweetened foods from my diet. My mind was foggy after eating; my moods were unstable, fluctuating from mild mania to deep troughs of depression. My weight, seemingly moderate to others, was taking its toll on my knees, and my blood pressure. I would either undereat, and starve, or overeat, and starve anyway. I had more food in my guts and in my fat stores than I needed; why was I hungry all the time?
Sugar causes hunger. Leptin stops hunger pangs; insulin blocks that leptin signal from reaching the brain. Sugar spikes insulin requirements. So sugar makes more insulin, and chronically high insulin levels block satiety signals of leptin from reaching the brain. Insulin also prevents fat from releasing its energy stores into the blood. High insulin levels cause fat stores to increase. Eliminating any source of any kind of sugar, sweet or not, combined with high animal fat, has eliminated my genuine hunger due to caloric energy deficits, and reduced my roaring carb cravings to manageable pygmies.
According to recent research, it may be impossible to become addicted to anything, let alone food, without the presence of insulin in the brain: "[Dopamine] and insulin systems do not operate in isolation from each other, but instead, work together to orchestrate both the motivation to engage in consummatory behavior and to calibrate the associated level of reward. Insulin signaling has been found to regulate [dopamine] neurotransmission and to affect the ability of drugs that target the [dopamine] system to exert their neurochemical and behavioral effects. Given that many abused drugs target the [dopamine] system, the elucidation of how dopaminergic, as well as other brain reward systems, are regulated by insulin will create opportunities to develop therapies for drug and potentially food addiction. Moreover, a more complete understanding of the relationship between [dopamine] neurotransmission and insulin may help to uncover etiological bases for "food addiction" and the growing epidemic of obesity."
Are food manufacturers aware of this relationship between cravings, insulin, and sugar? I assume that they are, especially since the majority of packaged foods produced by corporate food giants contain some form of sugar. Even foods generally not considered sweet, like salsas, salad dressings, and bread, are artificially loaded with sugar. The result? Those who eat them get hungry, and eat more. The people who sell the products get rich, while the people who eat them get obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart problems, and a host of other ills associated with the American populace. This is a different spin on the same business model Satan taught Cain: "...I may murder and get gain" (Moses 5:31). Instead of shooting people, they poison them with artificial foods, turning their trusting customers into addicts. All this is hidden with bogus information about the salubrious nature of the foods in question.
Instead of illicit drugs, food itself has been turned into an addictive drug. The great irony in all this is that people can be simultaneously overweight AND hungry. Even naturally lean people are hungry on this kind of carb-rich food, too.
In the Season Thereof
Isn't fruit good for us? Let's consult the scriptures:
"And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome herbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man—Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with prudence and thanksgiving" (v 10-11).
Why "in the season thereof?" Why not year round? Our bodies are designed to be a part of nature. In summer and autumn, fruit with its high sugar content gives us a chance to store fat for the winter. Our high insulin state keeps us eating it as long as it is available. Then, presumably, we lose access to sugar in the winter (feel free to chuckle at that contradiction) when we then burn off the excess stored fat. That's nature.
In modern America, however, we freely eat apples, berries, just about any fruit, all year round. True, these natural candies are loaded with vitamins, minerals, anti-oxidants, fiber, pure water, and other nutrients whose prime purpose is to counteract and compensate for the negative effects of sugar on the body. Not only do we disregard the instruction to eat fruits "in the season thereof;" we also disregard the nutrients God packaged with the sugar, and forgo almost any potential health benefit by concentrating sugar into unnatural densities. Every part of our bodies, from head to toe, suffers as a result of this behavior. Our bodies are stuck in a permanent summer sugar craze, adding adipose tissue to prepare for a winter famine that never visits the US of A. We celebrate Thanksgiving by discarding prudence.
A Staff for Loafers?
What about grain? "All grain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life..." (v 14). I don't need a staff to walk yet, or a cane, or a crutch, so I don't use one. Manual labor and hard farm work of the kind that early saints did in the 1800s required extra fuel. Today the Amish do such labor, and there are no obese Amish. One study on them confirmed that 3-4 hours a day of physical exertion activates an anti-obesity gene. But what about desk jockeys, earning a living by the sweat of their brain through concentration, rather than through manual physical exertion? Grain is glucose interrupted by fiber and amino acids, and in those who do no manual labor, it will cause fat deposition (unless one's metabolism is so high that one cannot gain weight, even when trying to). Asians eat rice by the bucket, but they are slim because they walk everywhere and work in rice patties daily. Such manual laborers, like rural Asian rice farmers and the Amish, need a staff to lean on, extra fuel to support extra exertion. (Athletes who do intense training also fall into this category.)
Speaking of exertion, what is the purported solution to America's health crisis? "Exercise more, eat less." This slogan is misleading, since intense exercise induces hunger more sharply than anything else I know of. Recent campaigns sponsored by well-meaning individuals to get American youngsters off the couch and moving will, I predict, end up in failure for everyone but the producers of carb-rich food. Insulin keeps fat stores from being tapped; that's why diabetics carry candy with them—because excess insulin won't allow them to use any fuel except what comes from their intestines. The kids in the exercise programs will work themselves into starvation, eat more sugar, retain their fat because the insulin never quite shuts off, possibly ruin their knees, and make a lot of money for doctors and high-carb food purveyors.
Sparingly
Now the tricky part—meat. I have changed my main fuel source from carbs to animal fat. "Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly; And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine. And these hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger" (v. 12, 13, 15). How do you define "sparingly?" Dr. Paul Y. Hosskison explained that, during the time of Joseph Smith, massive meat consumption at each meal was not uncommon. Decades earlier, one visitor from England to pre-revolution America noted that he could not dine with the colonists without developing indigestion due to the excess meat served at every meal.
My consumption has risen as a percentage of my calories, but my total meat consumption has dropped due to low insulin levels. My total consumption of any kind of food has dropped because I no longer experiencing between-meal hunger; I eat about one and a half meals per day, and I have plenty of energy. D&C 59:20: "And it pleaseth God that he hath given all these things unto man (beasts as well as herbs); for unto this end were they made to be used, with judgment (like surveying the results of a particular diet so far), not to excess (I crave/eat less), neither by extortion (i.e., selling foods that cause hunger and health problems to get wealthy)."
Skill, Judgement, Prudence, and Wisdom
These words (each scriptural) indicate the use of one's own wits in making personal health decisions. My friend who was certain that my diet was incompatible with the Word of Wisdom was comparing my actions with her assumptions based on a cursory glance at D&C 89, a socially transmitted construct largely bereft of skill, judgement, prudence, or wisdom. Much of our current dietary health information is distributed by those who sell food. "Of course our products are healthy! Can't you see the pictures of grain and little red hearts on the packages?" We have collectively swallowed these lies, along with the destructive food.
Since I began my no-carb, high-fat diet, I am reaping some of the blessings enumerated at the end of D&C 89. My teeth (bones) no longer ache from sweet food. My mind works consistently, without any brainfog, either before, during, or after meals; my abdomen has shrunk so that I can see my toes now without leaning forward; my mood swings have been replaced with emotional stability; my energy levels are not skyrocketing, but they are never lagging either (as I write this, I am operating on about six hours of sleep without feeling tired, yet I also sleep fitfully); I have lost about fifteen pounds in about two weeks. I am not saying that I have the only correct interpretation of the Word of Wisdom; I am saying that the way I feel now is more consistent with the promised results of the Word of Wisdom than when I ate foods that put glucose or fructose into my blood, or avoided saturated fats and cholesterol.
I may end up with egg on my face later, but so far I am enjoying undeniable benefits. "Health," "treasures of knowledge," absence of weariness, etc., have replaced weight issues, blood sugar issues, addiction-style cravings, and hazy cognition. I hope these trends continue. If they do, I will continue to eschew sweets and bread. Perhaps I will lose so much weight that these foods will be necessary to bring me back up to a healthy weight. But my experiences teach me that's a fantasy I should live without.
********************************************************
Update: 14 July 2012
After a month of fairly stringent avoidance of sucrose, fructose, glucose, and lactose, I can report that most of the health benefits of living this way listed above still apply. However, I want to amend what I said about meat slightly. Sparingly is not tricky; moderation is easy to gauge, since God blessed me with a sensitive stomach, not to mention a lifetime of experience of how much is too much. Meat is easy to go overboard with, especially when limiting intake of carbs. I was doing that, and trying to justify it, with the above article. Insulin levels have dropped fantastically for me, resulting in healthy weight loss and marvelous blood pressure. However, I find that if I overeat meat, it still makes me sick to my stomach, and still keeps my abdomen flabby (egg on my waist AND on my face). Vegetables without appreciable sugar content are available for fairly cheap, and I find that filling up on fiber and less meat is as effective at killing my hunger as meat and dairy fat alone.
Also, a general apology for any hint of self-righteousness floating around in my articles. I am pugnacious about the gospel (a sad irony, since "disputations" are forbidden by Jesus the instant he greets the Nephites). Rather than "wrest" the scriptures to confirm a fad diet, I want to report on what actually works for me, and what does not. Humility is always the way to go.
I am pleased to report that sugar cravings are still manageable after more than a month without it. Now I need to fine-tune fat intake, meat intake, and veg intake. I joke with friends that my body lies all the time. It tells me that I will be happy if I turn off the alarm and go back to sleep; that I will be happy if I eat a package of junk food; etc. But now my body gives a less exaggerated report of what my caloric needs are. And it is pleasant when enough feels like enough.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
I Had Not Power
Today marks 164 years since Joseph and Hyrum were martyred. The air was muggy and humid, and the roads were turned into mud because of torrential summer rains. A tent capable of shading 5000 saints was in the works when Joseph died. It would have been erected in front of the Nauvoo Temple. Instead, the yards of Russian duck canvas intended for this proposed tent were used to cover the wagons that carried the saints across the plains.
I envy the early saints their access to Joseph. You could ask him anything, and he could then hand over to you an answer, even a written statement, beginning "Thus saith the Lord." There were many such revelations recorded; the cream, the ones with broad application to the Church and the world, made it into the Doctrine and Covenants. As the number of written revelations tapered off, the number of sermons to the saints in Nauvoo rose. Joseph revealed Temple ordinances, premortal existence, the potential for eternal marriage and eternal families, and ultimate exaltation, all in the brief seven year stay in Nauvoo. He mentioned feeling low in spirits to Dan Jones the night before he was martyred: "I would to God that I could preach to the Saints in Nauvoo once more." "Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together" (D&C 50:22).
"For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth" (Heb. 9:17). Why is it that the testimony of the testator is not "of force" until after his death?
I suspect it is because in this life, things are temporary. People can, and have, changed their minds, fallen from the truth, apostatized. This life is like walking a tight rope while Satan throws rotten tomatoes at you. Anyone can fall, especially when pride creeps in. Joseph and Hyrum were consistent in their witness and adherence to what they had learned from God, faithful to death. As Elder Holland recently pointed out, Joseph and Hyrum were still reading the Book of Mormon to comfort themselves in Carthage jail. They were teaching the prison guards about the Book of Mormon shortly before they were killed. The guards became unwilling to cooperate with persecutors of the Prophet and Hyrum.
Once you have died, there is no way to go back and erase your words, retract your statements, or update your stance in the presence of others. That is one edge of the two-edged sword that this sphere of mortal life presents us: That which is bad can be erased and lost, while that which is good can be resurrected and restored to eternal fulness later on, if covenants are kept. The impermanence we bemoan saves us from being permanently chained to our sins. Lehi noted that Adam and Eve were kept from the Tree of Life to prevent such a tragedy.
There was no retraction, no recanting on their part. Joseph and Hyrum accept death over recalling what they had taught, and so became martyrs. The parallels to the life of Jesus are comforting at this distance. Jesus was liberal in His theology, smashing old orthodoxy in a way that aroused violent sympathies in the teachers and learned men of His day; Joseph did too. Jesus' followers recorded His words, which later became scripture; almost everything we have from Joseph was written by scribes. The Temple was of utmost concern to Jesus; Joseph presided over the construction of two Temples, and revealed the actual significance of such structures to the Church.
I do not have the privilege of asking Joseph about life's mysteries, or what lies beyond death in the eternities, but I feel like he has left behind a decent map and compass for the rest of us in the wilderness of eternal ideas. Everything I read from Joseph seems to indicate that he has been where I have been in my spiritual progress, and beyond. You cannot come back from a place where you have not been; Joseph is familiar with the next step, whatever it may be, in my spiritual progress. He has come back from the Mountain, through the Forest, and across the River, like the early trappers who explored the Rockies, filled with guidance for those who will come afterward to those same places. "What is the purpose of life, of the earth? Why was it created? Where do we go when we die?" These and other monumental questions Joseph answered, and answered them satisfactorily. Other religions were bereft of sufficient answers to such fundamental lines of inquiry; Joseph could answer them.
Jesus suffered, died, and was resurrected—how do we benefit from His sacrifice? Joseph's answer was lost in the centuries of apostasy: Faith in Christ, repentance, baptism, and receiving the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, were each identified as the steps, the collective way, in which we benefit from His atonement. Not only did Joseph receive these instructions, he also received authority and keys necessary to implement the ordinances. A true and living Church, with living ministers chosen by God and ordained under proper authority.
Why the emphasis on Joseph Smith? Because he emphasized Christ, and reintroduced anyone who would listen to the true and living God. His mission was to testify of Christ, and to restore what the centuries and creeds and apostasy and murderers had combined to squelch: the fulness of Christ's message. Instead of the constant mantra that "the heavens are closed," Joseph taught that anyone can communicate with God, if they are willing to pay the price. Joseph and Hyrum paid that price. Hopefully, we will have he nerve to follow suit, whether in giving up life for God, or living for God.
I envy the early saints their access to Joseph. You could ask him anything, and he could then hand over to you an answer, even a written statement, beginning "Thus saith the Lord." There were many such revelations recorded; the cream, the ones with broad application to the Church and the world, made it into the Doctrine and Covenants. As the number of written revelations tapered off, the number of sermons to the saints in Nauvoo rose. Joseph revealed Temple ordinances, premortal existence, the potential for eternal marriage and eternal families, and ultimate exaltation, all in the brief seven year stay in Nauvoo. He mentioned feeling low in spirits to Dan Jones the night before he was martyred: "I would to God that I could preach to the Saints in Nauvoo once more." "Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together" (D&C 50:22).
"For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth" (Heb. 9:17). Why is it that the testimony of the testator is not "of force" until after his death?
I suspect it is because in this life, things are temporary. People can, and have, changed their minds, fallen from the truth, apostatized. This life is like walking a tight rope while Satan throws rotten tomatoes at you. Anyone can fall, especially when pride creeps in. Joseph and Hyrum were consistent in their witness and adherence to what they had learned from God, faithful to death. As Elder Holland recently pointed out, Joseph and Hyrum were still reading the Book of Mormon to comfort themselves in Carthage jail. They were teaching the prison guards about the Book of Mormon shortly before they were killed. The guards became unwilling to cooperate with persecutors of the Prophet and Hyrum.
Once you have died, there is no way to go back and erase your words, retract your statements, or update your stance in the presence of others. That is one edge of the two-edged sword that this sphere of mortal life presents us: That which is bad can be erased and lost, while that which is good can be resurrected and restored to eternal fulness later on, if covenants are kept. The impermanence we bemoan saves us from being permanently chained to our sins. Lehi noted that Adam and Eve were kept from the Tree of Life to prevent such a tragedy.
There was no retraction, no recanting on their part. Joseph and Hyrum accept death over recalling what they had taught, and so became martyrs. The parallels to the life of Jesus are comforting at this distance. Jesus was liberal in His theology, smashing old orthodoxy in a way that aroused violent sympathies in the teachers and learned men of His day; Joseph did too. Jesus' followers recorded His words, which later became scripture; almost everything we have from Joseph was written by scribes. The Temple was of utmost concern to Jesus; Joseph presided over the construction of two Temples, and revealed the actual significance of such structures to the Church.
I do not have the privilege of asking Joseph about life's mysteries, or what lies beyond death in the eternities, but I feel like he has left behind a decent map and compass for the rest of us in the wilderness of eternal ideas. Everything I read from Joseph seems to indicate that he has been where I have been in my spiritual progress, and beyond. You cannot come back from a place where you have not been; Joseph is familiar with the next step, whatever it may be, in my spiritual progress. He has come back from the Mountain, through the Forest, and across the River, like the early trappers who explored the Rockies, filled with guidance for those who will come afterward to those same places. "What is the purpose of life, of the earth? Why was it created? Where do we go when we die?" These and other monumental questions Joseph answered, and answered them satisfactorily. Other religions were bereft of sufficient answers to such fundamental lines of inquiry; Joseph could answer them.
Jesus suffered, died, and was resurrected—how do we benefit from His sacrifice? Joseph's answer was lost in the centuries of apostasy: Faith in Christ, repentance, baptism, and receiving the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, were each identified as the steps, the collective way, in which we benefit from His atonement. Not only did Joseph receive these instructions, he also received authority and keys necessary to implement the ordinances. A true and living Church, with living ministers chosen by God and ordained under proper authority.
Why the emphasis on Joseph Smith? Because he emphasized Christ, and reintroduced anyone who would listen to the true and living God. His mission was to testify of Christ, and to restore what the centuries and creeds and apostasy and murderers had combined to squelch: the fulness of Christ's message. Instead of the constant mantra that "the heavens are closed," Joseph taught that anyone can communicate with God, if they are willing to pay the price. Joseph and Hyrum paid that price. Hopefully, we will have he nerve to follow suit, whether in giving up life for God, or living for God.
Thursday, June 21, 2012
Exuberance and Joy (Good Speakers at Church)
What does a good sacrament meeting talk look like, or sound like? I believe a congregation might be able to pray a poor speaker into a better one, and a mediocre one into a good one.
Imagine watching someone carrying a fragile, priceless vase or other significant artifact across a room littered with obstacles and extension cords. If you can imagine the feeling of concern you would have over the vase if the person carrying it began to chuckle, stagger, trip, carry the vase casually with one hand, or fail in anyway to safeguard the priceless item, then you can imagine the way I sweat when anyone approaches the podium on Sunday with the stated purpose of sharing the gospel. They all close their talks "in the name of Jesus Christ," but I sometimes wonder what Jesus would have said to us.
There are about 2500 pages in the LDS scriptures, and yet most speakers open them infrequently. Hugh Nibley has asserted that if Jesus or an angel were to appear, they would simply quote from the scriptures to us. It is disappointing when speakers end a travelogue, romance, tragedy, or personal album promotion in the name of Christ. Lest I become to critical, I will get to the main reason I wrote this blog: The joy of hearing good speakers in church.
D&C 50:17-22: "Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way? And if it be by some other way it is not of God. And again, he that receiveth the word of truth, doth he receive it by the Spirit of truth or some other way? If it be some other way it is not of God. Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know, that he that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth? Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together."
This is the bar we are called to clear when we get up in front of the members of the congregation on Sunday. It is also the bar we as listeners are called to clear—both must have the Spirit. We cannot help putting our minds on parade when we stand up and speak for ten minutes. "...out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh" (Matt. 12:34). If our hearts are set on the things of this world, or the things of eternity, it will show through when we speak.
There are things we can do to improve the messages we deliver on Sunday. Here are my suggestions:
1. Obtain a witness of what the Lord wants us to speak about. Rather than assemble an op-ed piece, or think of the things most important to US, we have the privilege as members of the Church to kneel down in prayer and learn for ourselves what God wants the congregation to hear. It has been my experience over the last decade that the Lord cares deeply about each member of the congregation, and so will give me firm, direct promptings about what to include AND exclude from my talk. I whimper as I throw away what I consider to be my wittiest remarks and best insights into the scriptures, but it feels right to do it. I believe it is not enough to simply regurgitate a dictionary definition of the subject we are asked to speak on, or to dazzle the audience with our personal charm, magnetism, wit, and charisma. The gift of the Holy Ghost is given to each member, and we can know for ourselves what we should say in any given setting, let alone something as meaningful to the Lord as "feed[ing] [His] lambs." Follow the Spirit when deciding what to add to, or take away from, your talk.
2. Show up. I remember falling asleep on the sofa one Sunday as I was preparing to speak. When my cousin awoke me, it was fifteen minutes to the hour when the meeting began. I came through the door in the middle of the opening hymn, and walked up to my seat near the podium. It would have been better to arrive on time. Even worse is the knee-jerk Jonah-like reaction, in which you abandon your post and leave the bishopric to fend for themselves and improvise. A sister in the Young Women's organization of my home ward once asked me years ago if I would pose in front of her class as King Mosiah. I refused because I felt stage fright, but the guilt of the refusal still stings. If only I could go back and correct that action, or inaction, and agree to go along with it.
3. Say what the Lord prompts us to say. I have revised my talk while sitting on the stand before, adding or crossing out things, because of last-minute promptings. Sometimes the main point of the talk does not enter my mind until the "very hour" I am supposed to speak. This does not mean I am not prepared with a talk; rather, I am prepared to alter my talk to suit the promptings that come from the Lord. I have often had the experience of hearing great ideas come out of my mouth that I never heard before, and wish someone were writing them down for me, because I know the Lord is speaking through me. "And it came to pass that they would not suffer that he should enter into the city; therefore he went and got upon the wall thereof, and stretched forth his hand and cried with a loud voice, and prophesied unto the people whatsoever things the Lord put into his heart. And he said unto them: Behold, I, Samuel, a Lamanite, do speak the words of the Lord which he doth put into my heart..." (Hel. 13:4-5).
An adversarial college professor, critical of the Church, once asked which members of the class were "good Mormons." I failed to raise my hand because I got hung up on the word "good." Am I a good member of the Church? I frantically began reviewing my behavior, rather than raise my hand. One young man at the front of the class (BRAVO!) had the guts to raise his hand and absorb the mockery she dished out. I would give worlds to be able to go back and raise my hand with him.
4. Stop talking when the Spirit stops. Igor Stravinski lamented that some pieces of music end long before the musicians stop playing. I once sat on the stand holding a talk I gave next Sunday, because the speaker before me took all the time. He said nothing worth hearing, sadly. The bishopric told me I would speak first next Sunday, and that I should take all the time I wanted. I was miffed, and so prepared to deliver an even longer talk than the one I had planned. "I deserve" was the general feeling I had. But the next Sunday when I spoke, I felt prompted to stop speaking far earlier than I had planned. I had said enough, and enough was enough.
There are a few other points I might suggest. The above paragraph reminds me of a heuristic, a rule of thumb I devised for being able to tell when your talk is on target—when you overuse the word "I," as well as "me," "my," and "mine," it may be a sign that you are off target. Absence or minimal use of scripture may also be a red flag. It is also tempting to mistake intense emotionality for the Spirit. I remember a documentary about a tragic, horrible event, and how moving it was, but when I tried to distil a message, a therefore-what, instructions for better living, or even nuggets of new knowledge from the stories, I realized that I was coming away empty. It was empty calories for the spirit. Yes, it is moving that so-and-so had such-and-such traumatic experience, but the deep emotions evoked by the recounting of the story do not necessarily qualify it as a fitting subject for sacrament meeting.
I fear for myself, having written the barbed and blunt words above. The Lord smites hypocrites, and will not tolerate unkindness in His children, especially members of His Church. Being critical of others, rather than merciful and kind, is a dangerous state to be in. Recently, a speaker in Church gave a good talk, and she cleared all of the criteria listed above. She mentioned something wise her father had said, and I wondered if she gained her knowledge like Nephi, from "goodly parents." I was grateful for her edifying talk. Nephi was willing to kill Laban to get the scriptures to his posterity, and I repressed the urge to commit a lesser violent act myself a few weeks ago to make certain that investigator got an undiluted, uncontaminated dose of gospel knowledge, confirmed by the witness of the Holy Ghost. He deserved nothing less; the speaker had no right to deprive him of it while avoiding the generous ocean of scripture (2500 pages deep) collecting dust next to his hands on the lectern.
Of course, I lost the Spirit as I refused to be patient with this well-intentioned brother, the way the Lord is patient with me. And it was a learning experience for me, though not necessarily the kind I was expecting from sacrament meeting.
Imagine watching someone carrying a fragile, priceless vase or other significant artifact across a room littered with obstacles and extension cords. If you can imagine the feeling of concern you would have over the vase if the person carrying it began to chuckle, stagger, trip, carry the vase casually with one hand, or fail in anyway to safeguard the priceless item, then you can imagine the way I sweat when anyone approaches the podium on Sunday with the stated purpose of sharing the gospel. They all close their talks "in the name of Jesus Christ," but I sometimes wonder what Jesus would have said to us.
There are about 2500 pages in the LDS scriptures, and yet most speakers open them infrequently. Hugh Nibley has asserted that if Jesus or an angel were to appear, they would simply quote from the scriptures to us. It is disappointing when speakers end a travelogue, romance, tragedy, or personal album promotion in the name of Christ. Lest I become to critical, I will get to the main reason I wrote this blog: The joy of hearing good speakers in church.
D&C 50:17-22: "Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other way? And if it be by some other way it is not of God. And again, he that receiveth the word of truth, doth he receive it by the Spirit of truth or some other way? If it be some other way it is not of God. Therefore, why is it that ye cannot understand and know, that he that receiveth the word by the Spirit of truth receiveth it as it is preached by the Spirit of truth? Wherefore, he that preacheth and he that receiveth, understand one another, and both are edified and rejoice together."
This is the bar we are called to clear when we get up in front of the members of the congregation on Sunday. It is also the bar we as listeners are called to clear—both must have the Spirit. We cannot help putting our minds on parade when we stand up and speak for ten minutes. "...out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh" (Matt. 12:34). If our hearts are set on the things of this world, or the things of eternity, it will show through when we speak.
There are things we can do to improve the messages we deliver on Sunday. Here are my suggestions:
1. Obtain a witness of what the Lord wants us to speak about. Rather than assemble an op-ed piece, or think of the things most important to US, we have the privilege as members of the Church to kneel down in prayer and learn for ourselves what God wants the congregation to hear. It has been my experience over the last decade that the Lord cares deeply about each member of the congregation, and so will give me firm, direct promptings about what to include AND exclude from my talk. I whimper as I throw away what I consider to be my wittiest remarks and best insights into the scriptures, but it feels right to do it. I believe it is not enough to simply regurgitate a dictionary definition of the subject we are asked to speak on, or to dazzle the audience with our personal charm, magnetism, wit, and charisma. The gift of the Holy Ghost is given to each member, and we can know for ourselves what we should say in any given setting, let alone something as meaningful to the Lord as "feed[ing] [His] lambs." Follow the Spirit when deciding what to add to, or take away from, your talk.
2. Show up. I remember falling asleep on the sofa one Sunday as I was preparing to speak. When my cousin awoke me, it was fifteen minutes to the hour when the meeting began. I came through the door in the middle of the opening hymn, and walked up to my seat near the podium. It would have been better to arrive on time. Even worse is the knee-jerk Jonah-like reaction, in which you abandon your post and leave the bishopric to fend for themselves and improvise. A sister in the Young Women's organization of my home ward once asked me years ago if I would pose in front of her class as King Mosiah. I refused because I felt stage fright, but the guilt of the refusal still stings. If only I could go back and correct that action, or inaction, and agree to go along with it.
3. Say what the Lord prompts us to say. I have revised my talk while sitting on the stand before, adding or crossing out things, because of last-minute promptings. Sometimes the main point of the talk does not enter my mind until the "very hour" I am supposed to speak. This does not mean I am not prepared with a talk; rather, I am prepared to alter my talk to suit the promptings that come from the Lord. I have often had the experience of hearing great ideas come out of my mouth that I never heard before, and wish someone were writing them down for me, because I know the Lord is speaking through me. "And it came to pass that they would not suffer that he should enter into the city; therefore he went and got upon the wall thereof, and stretched forth his hand and cried with a loud voice, and prophesied unto the people whatsoever things the Lord put into his heart. And he said unto them: Behold, I, Samuel, a Lamanite, do speak the words of the Lord which he doth put into my heart..." (Hel. 13:4-5).
An adversarial college professor, critical of the Church, once asked which members of the class were "good Mormons." I failed to raise my hand because I got hung up on the word "good." Am I a good member of the Church? I frantically began reviewing my behavior, rather than raise my hand. One young man at the front of the class (BRAVO!) had the guts to raise his hand and absorb the mockery she dished out. I would give worlds to be able to go back and raise my hand with him.
4. Stop talking when the Spirit stops. Igor Stravinski lamented that some pieces of music end long before the musicians stop playing. I once sat on the stand holding a talk I gave next Sunday, because the speaker before me took all the time. He said nothing worth hearing, sadly. The bishopric told me I would speak first next Sunday, and that I should take all the time I wanted. I was miffed, and so prepared to deliver an even longer talk than the one I had planned. "I deserve" was the general feeling I had. But the next Sunday when I spoke, I felt prompted to stop speaking far earlier than I had planned. I had said enough, and enough was enough.
There are a few other points I might suggest. The above paragraph reminds me of a heuristic, a rule of thumb I devised for being able to tell when your talk is on target—when you overuse the word "I," as well as "me," "my," and "mine," it may be a sign that you are off target. Absence or minimal use of scripture may also be a red flag. It is also tempting to mistake intense emotionality for the Spirit. I remember a documentary about a tragic, horrible event, and how moving it was, but when I tried to distil a message, a therefore-what, instructions for better living, or even nuggets of new knowledge from the stories, I realized that I was coming away empty. It was empty calories for the spirit. Yes, it is moving that so-and-so had such-and-such traumatic experience, but the deep emotions evoked by the recounting of the story do not necessarily qualify it as a fitting subject for sacrament meeting.
I fear for myself, having written the barbed and blunt words above. The Lord smites hypocrites, and will not tolerate unkindness in His children, especially members of His Church. Being critical of others, rather than merciful and kind, is a dangerous state to be in. Recently, a speaker in Church gave a good talk, and she cleared all of the criteria listed above. She mentioned something wise her father had said, and I wondered if she gained her knowledge like Nephi, from "goodly parents." I was grateful for her edifying talk. Nephi was willing to kill Laban to get the scriptures to his posterity, and I repressed the urge to commit a lesser violent act myself a few weeks ago to make certain that investigator got an undiluted, uncontaminated dose of gospel knowledge, confirmed by the witness of the Holy Ghost. He deserved nothing less; the speaker had no right to deprive him of it while avoiding the generous ocean of scripture (2500 pages deep) collecting dust next to his hands on the lectern.
Of course, I lost the Spirit as I refused to be patient with this well-intentioned brother, the way the Lord is patient with me. And it was a learning experience for me, though not necessarily the kind I was expecting from sacrament meeting.
Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Not Alone
Emmanuel literally means "God with us." The implication is that Jesus is God on earth, in the flesh. This is correct, but I am coming to appreciate more and more the idea, the promise, found at the end of the sacrament prayer on the bread: "...that they [we, us] may always have his Spirit to be with them." The Savior's twelve chosen representatives in the Book of Mormon were praying to have the Holy Ghost, even though He was standing right in front of them.
Elder Holland has said, "...because Jesus walked such a long, lonely path utterly alone, we do not have to do so" (None Were with Him, April 2009 Gen. Conf.). Indeed, the essence of the agony He felt when He was in the Garden, and again on the cross, was not the physical pain He felt, but the unimaginable pain resulting from the withdrawal of the Spirit by Heavenly Father. "Therefore I command you to repent—repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not. For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I...Wherefore, I command you again to repent, lest I humble you...lest you suffer these punishments of which I have spoken, of which in the smallest, yea, even in the least degree you have tasted at the time I withdrew my Spirit" (D&C 19:15-20). Jesus explained that the pain was the result of losing the Spirit completely.
"Why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matt. 27:46).
On the other hand, D&C 11:13 says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, I will impart unto you of my Spirit, which shall enlighten your mind, which shall fill your soul with joy." What do we need to do to have this joy? The scriptures constitute an avalanche of advice, counsel, and directions for obtaining and keeping the Spirit with us always.
The sacramental prayers give us a good place to start: be willing to take Christ's name(s) upon us, always remember Him, and keep His commandments given to us.
Why is it that we can do these things, and feel less than happy? I do not believe it is because of the chore-like nature of the tasks, but because we have less of the Spirit than we could while doing them. Laman and Lemuel both did everything they were asked to, and murmured and complained all the way. Nephi, on the other hand, said the following: "The Lord...did visit me, and did soften my heart that I did believe all the words which had been spoken by my father; wherefore, I did not rebel against him like unto my brothers" (1Ne. 2:16). This is a change of heart, enacted by God on Nephi's behalf.
Humility was a prerequisite (see verse 19). Happiness comes from having the Spirit, and from having it more abundantly. It is possible to do everything asked of us, and yet be miserable because we lack a generous portion of the Spirit. Humility makes us inviting to the Spirit; complete humility gives the Spirit free reign over us, allowing a complete baptism "with fire and with the Holy Ghost" (3Ne. 9:20). Mosiah 4:11-12: "...remember, and always retain in remembrance, the greatness of God, and your own nothingness, and his goodness and long-suffering towards you, unworthy creatures, and humble yourselves even in the depths of humility, calling on the name of the Lord daily, and standing steadfastly in the faith of that which is to come, which was spoken by the mouth of the angel. And behold, I say unto you that if ye do this ye shall always rejoice, and be filled with the love of God, and always retain a remission of your sins; and ye shall grow in the knowledge of the glory of him that created you, or in the knowledge of that which is just and true."
Perhaps we receive varying portions of the Spirit because our humility reaches various depths.
Pain is inevitable, but is suffering unattended? I delivered newspapers as a boy, and I vividly remember collating stacks of papers and trudging out into the snowscape of my early morning neighborhood, armored with as many layers of clothing as I could carry. Of particular help were small, reusable hand warmers I put in my pocket. Boil them in water for thirty minutes, and carry them in your pocket. Clicking a small metal disk suspended in the fluid would cause them to release stored heat. While I was completely surrounded by cold air, the warmer in my pocket would simulate the sensation of being back home in bed, or at least for part of my chilled skin.
The Spirit can confer happiness on us in this same way, simulating the feeling of being in heaven to some extent, conferring that happiness regardless of circumstance.
Brigham Young spoke of enduring persecution in the early years of the Church: "You that have not passed through the trials, and persecutions..., but have only read of them...may think how awful they were to endure, and wonder that the Saints survived them at all. The thought of it makes your hearts sink within you..., and you are ready to exclaim, 'I could not have endured it.' I have been in the heat of it, and I never felt better in all my life; I never felt the peace and power of the Almighty more copiously poured upon me than in the keenest part of our trials. They appeared nothing to me" (JD 1:313). Missing this, not understanding this power, how to access it, how to keep it, not even knowing it is available, is among the great tragedies of the modern Church. We as a people hear it over and over again, and yet we want to strap on our water skis before we jump out of the boat and try walking on water. Salvation through day planner is alive and well in the hearts and minds of many. Willpower to gag down the chores and broccoli of Church duties and forsake the chocolate cake of unrighteousness is touted openly as the way to accomplish the work. It hurts to hear it, because it speaks to aloneness, an absence of the Spirit in good measure.
The stream is deepest in the middle; if we would have a greater portion of the Spirit, we must go where it leads, conform our lives to it. Then we will have it in a greater measure. So humility inside us, as well as obedience outside of us, qualify us to receive that happiness, a foretaste of heaven.
Elder Holland has said, "...because Jesus walked such a long, lonely path utterly alone, we do not have to do so" (None Were with Him, April 2009 Gen. Conf.). Indeed, the essence of the agony He felt when He was in the Garden, and again on the cross, was not the physical pain He felt, but the unimaginable pain resulting from the withdrawal of the Spirit by Heavenly Father. "Therefore I command you to repent—repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not. For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I...Wherefore, I command you again to repent, lest I humble you...lest you suffer these punishments of which I have spoken, of which in the smallest, yea, even in the least degree you have tasted at the time I withdrew my Spirit" (D&C 19:15-20). Jesus explained that the pain was the result of losing the Spirit completely.
"Why hast thou forsaken me?" (Matt. 27:46).
On the other hand, D&C 11:13 says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, I will impart unto you of my Spirit, which shall enlighten your mind, which shall fill your soul with joy." What do we need to do to have this joy? The scriptures constitute an avalanche of advice, counsel, and directions for obtaining and keeping the Spirit with us always.
The sacramental prayers give us a good place to start: be willing to take Christ's name(s) upon us, always remember Him, and keep His commandments given to us.
Why is it that we can do these things, and feel less than happy? I do not believe it is because of the chore-like nature of the tasks, but because we have less of the Spirit than we could while doing them. Laman and Lemuel both did everything they were asked to, and murmured and complained all the way. Nephi, on the other hand, said the following: "The Lord...did visit me, and did soften my heart that I did believe all the words which had been spoken by my father; wherefore, I did not rebel against him like unto my brothers" (1Ne. 2:16). This is a change of heart, enacted by God on Nephi's behalf.
Humility was a prerequisite (see verse 19). Happiness comes from having the Spirit, and from having it more abundantly. It is possible to do everything asked of us, and yet be miserable because we lack a generous portion of the Spirit. Humility makes us inviting to the Spirit; complete humility gives the Spirit free reign over us, allowing a complete baptism "with fire and with the Holy Ghost" (3Ne. 9:20). Mosiah 4:11-12: "...remember, and always retain in remembrance, the greatness of God, and your own nothingness, and his goodness and long-suffering towards you, unworthy creatures, and humble yourselves even in the depths of humility, calling on the name of the Lord daily, and standing steadfastly in the faith of that which is to come, which was spoken by the mouth of the angel. And behold, I say unto you that if ye do this ye shall always rejoice, and be filled with the love of God, and always retain a remission of your sins; and ye shall grow in the knowledge of the glory of him that created you, or in the knowledge of that which is just and true."
Perhaps we receive varying portions of the Spirit because our humility reaches various depths.
Pain is inevitable, but is suffering unattended? I delivered newspapers as a boy, and I vividly remember collating stacks of papers and trudging out into the snowscape of my early morning neighborhood, armored with as many layers of clothing as I could carry. Of particular help were small, reusable hand warmers I put in my pocket. Boil them in water for thirty minutes, and carry them in your pocket. Clicking a small metal disk suspended in the fluid would cause them to release stored heat. While I was completely surrounded by cold air, the warmer in my pocket would simulate the sensation of being back home in bed, or at least for part of my chilled skin.
The Spirit can confer happiness on us in this same way, simulating the feeling of being in heaven to some extent, conferring that happiness regardless of circumstance.
Brigham Young spoke of enduring persecution in the early years of the Church: "You that have not passed through the trials, and persecutions..., but have only read of them...may think how awful they were to endure, and wonder that the Saints survived them at all. The thought of it makes your hearts sink within you..., and you are ready to exclaim, 'I could not have endured it.' I have been in the heat of it, and I never felt better in all my life; I never felt the peace and power of the Almighty more copiously poured upon me than in the keenest part of our trials. They appeared nothing to me" (JD 1:313). Missing this, not understanding this power, how to access it, how to keep it, not even knowing it is available, is among the great tragedies of the modern Church. We as a people hear it over and over again, and yet we want to strap on our water skis before we jump out of the boat and try walking on water. Salvation through day planner is alive and well in the hearts and minds of many. Willpower to gag down the chores and broccoli of Church duties and forsake the chocolate cake of unrighteousness is touted openly as the way to accomplish the work. It hurts to hear it, because it speaks to aloneness, an absence of the Spirit in good measure.
The stream is deepest in the middle; if we would have a greater portion of the Spirit, we must go where it leads, conform our lives to it. Then we will have it in a greater measure. So humility inside us, as well as obedience outside of us, qualify us to receive that happiness, a foretaste of heaven.
Monday, June 18, 2012
A New Perspective of Atonement
It is possible to use a word so often that it ceases to have meaning. I heard a song once that used the word "shadow" so often that it degraded from an audible symbol for the space on the ground absent of light to a nonsense jumble of its constituent parts.
Atonement has a similar problem, I think. We misuse it, I think, or rather use it to refer to something other than what the original word intended. When we say "Atonement," what we typically refer to is the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Those three things are like pillars supporting a bridge, and the actual events described or implied by the words translated as Atonement indicate what happens when we individually cross that bridge.
"Reconciliation" is another word used as a translation for the same word for Atonement in the New Testament. All the words translated as Atonement imply a return to God, coming home, reunion, sitting down at the dinner table, the prodigal son and his loving father forgiving and forgetting the past and rejoining each other to perpetuate their interrupted relationship.
The word Atonement was contrived by William Tyndale as he was translating the Bible into English from its original languages. He could find no equivalent in our language, and so he took the phrase "at one," and tacked "ment" on the end to indicate an event or completion of becoming "at one." Paying a price for transgression is also referred to in popular parlance as "atonement," an economic phrase loaded with the assumption of guilt, rather than just a debt of money. And so it is appropriate to refer to the suffering, death, and resurrection of Christ as an Atonement. But there is more to it than that.
In the fuller sense of the original word, Atonement is what we are able to do, or what is able to be granted to us, as a result of what Jesus did. Think of the fruits of His life, the things we may enjoy one day, and even here and now:
Two people holding a grudge against each other reconcile, extending forgiveness, brought together, at one;
A man and a woman, two disparate entities with separate ways of thinking, being, and wanting, brought together for eternity, at one;
Mercy and justice are brought together so that the demands of both are satisfied, harmonized as Eliza R. Snow put it, at one;
The spirit and body are reunited in the resurrection, permanently at one;
We are brought back into the presence of God our Father, reunited after sad separation, never to part again, at one;
Families, even broken and scattered ones, can be healed, members forgive and are forgiven, and sealed together in permanent relationships, parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren, at one.
All these things are At-One-ment, in the fuller sense of the word, closer to its original meaning. All these things are permanent, too. The teeth of entropy and chains of death are broken by Him. Our way of speaking glosses over this too often, trivializing the momentous blessings made available, reducing them to a get-out-of-jail-free card. We are recipients of so much more than that, and I cannot help feeling like restating what I said before: we are figuratively trapped at the bottom of an inescapable pit, and all we have to offer in the end are pleas for assistance and a sincere, loving "thank you" to our Rescuer.
Atonement has a similar problem, I think. We misuse it, I think, or rather use it to refer to something other than what the original word intended. When we say "Atonement," what we typically refer to is the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Those three things are like pillars supporting a bridge, and the actual events described or implied by the words translated as Atonement indicate what happens when we individually cross that bridge.
"Reconciliation" is another word used as a translation for the same word for Atonement in the New Testament. All the words translated as Atonement imply a return to God, coming home, reunion, sitting down at the dinner table, the prodigal son and his loving father forgiving and forgetting the past and rejoining each other to perpetuate their interrupted relationship.
The word Atonement was contrived by William Tyndale as he was translating the Bible into English from its original languages. He could find no equivalent in our language, and so he took the phrase "at one," and tacked "ment" on the end to indicate an event or completion of becoming "at one." Paying a price for transgression is also referred to in popular parlance as "atonement," an economic phrase loaded with the assumption of guilt, rather than just a debt of money. And so it is appropriate to refer to the suffering, death, and resurrection of Christ as an Atonement. But there is more to it than that.
In the fuller sense of the original word, Atonement is what we are able to do, or what is able to be granted to us, as a result of what Jesus did. Think of the fruits of His life, the things we may enjoy one day, and even here and now:
Two people holding a grudge against each other reconcile, extending forgiveness, brought together, at one;
A man and a woman, two disparate entities with separate ways of thinking, being, and wanting, brought together for eternity, at one;
Mercy and justice are brought together so that the demands of both are satisfied, harmonized as Eliza R. Snow put it, at one;
The spirit and body are reunited in the resurrection, permanently at one;
We are brought back into the presence of God our Father, reunited after sad separation, never to part again, at one;
Families, even broken and scattered ones, can be healed, members forgive and are forgiven, and sealed together in permanent relationships, parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren, at one.
All these things are At-One-ment, in the fuller sense of the word, closer to its original meaning. All these things are permanent, too. The teeth of entropy and chains of death are broken by Him. Our way of speaking glosses over this too often, trivializing the momentous blessings made available, reducing them to a get-out-of-jail-free card. We are recipients of so much more than that, and I cannot help feeling like restating what I said before: we are figuratively trapped at the bottom of an inescapable pit, and all we have to offer in the end are pleas for assistance and a sincere, loving "thank you" to our Rescuer.
Friday, June 15, 2012
Shades of Grace
In our struggle to keep our behavior in line with the commandments God has given us, grace is essential. At least, it is essential for me. I lack the strength to white-knuckle, cold-turkey, willpower my way through the various temptations assaulting me throughout the day. Perhaps there are those whose natures predispose them to be tempted by things that are socially acceptable. Or perhaps they are only attacked on a narrow front, like Leonidas and his legendary Spartans. The limited chink in the country's cliffs made defending the land from the invading Persians easy. Only a handful withstood an army. I, on the other hand, find myself assaulted by so many enemies on so many fronts that I could not function without reinforcements from the Lord. Rather than sending soldiers to help, He sends grace. I have discovered that there are different kinds, or levels, of grace.
Finding Strength Beyond My Own
The more obvious kind of grace is strength. It is miraculous—I can tell you what it feels like, but the actual mechanism is still a mystery to me. In any case, strength from the Lord allows us to resist temptations. We have our own willpower, but it is usually insufficient. We have bodily appetite pulling us down, and spiritual desires pulling us up. The Lord can lift with us, like a spotter in a weight room, taking up the extra weight we cannot successfully move. This might seem like the pinnacle of divine intervention, but it is only the beginning.
Deliverance From Bondage
The next level of grace (I don't know how many levels there are, but my experience is that you must definitely receive the kind mentioned above BEFORE this next one—they are thus sequential for me), is sanctification, a mighty change of heart, spiritual rebirth, the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. I use those terms interchangeably.
I remember hearing a fireside speaker conflate feelings of renewed determination to do the right thing (instead of sinning) with the mighty change of heart. Sadly, I take this as evidence that 1. He is unaware of what the scriptures teach, and 2. He has never experienced this grace, this change of heart, himself. "Having no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually," describes something beyond the emotional outcome of a pep talk. The mighty change of heart is not something we practice or do to ourselves. Essentially, it comes when we get our agency out of the way so that the Lord can reach inside of us and remove the desire for sin. This is much more effective than leaving the desire for sin in us, and helping us struggle with it.
An Indispensable Miracle
Does this sound unrealistic? Here is the Lord's response to our amazed reaction:
"Marvel not that all mankind, yea, men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of God, becoming his sons and daughters; And thus they become new creatures; and unless they do this, they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God" (Mosiah 27:25-26). This is not an optional decorative frill. It is the minimum qualification for entrance into heaven. (We speak much of becoming "like God," but very little about how that will come to pass. Changing our behavior is acting like God would act, but not so much about being. Spiritual rebirth is the main avenue for such change. All other considerations are found in further schooling and in the resurrection, another form of the Lord's grace.)
Finding Strength Beyond My Own
The more obvious kind of grace is strength. It is miraculous—I can tell you what it feels like, but the actual mechanism is still a mystery to me. In any case, strength from the Lord allows us to resist temptations. We have our own willpower, but it is usually insufficient. We have bodily appetite pulling us down, and spiritual desires pulling us up. The Lord can lift with us, like a spotter in a weight room, taking up the extra weight we cannot successfully move. This might seem like the pinnacle of divine intervention, but it is only the beginning.
Deliverance From Bondage
The next level of grace (I don't know how many levels there are, but my experience is that you must definitely receive the kind mentioned above BEFORE this next one—they are thus sequential for me), is sanctification, a mighty change of heart, spiritual rebirth, the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost. I use those terms interchangeably.
I remember hearing a fireside speaker conflate feelings of renewed determination to do the right thing (instead of sinning) with the mighty change of heart. Sadly, I take this as evidence that 1. He is unaware of what the scriptures teach, and 2. He has never experienced this grace, this change of heart, himself. "Having no more disposition to do evil, but to do good continually," describes something beyond the emotional outcome of a pep talk. The mighty change of heart is not something we practice or do to ourselves. Essentially, it comes when we get our agency out of the way so that the Lord can reach inside of us and remove the desire for sin. This is much more effective than leaving the desire for sin in us, and helping us struggle with it.
An Indispensable Miracle
Does this sound unrealistic? Here is the Lord's response to our amazed reaction:
"Marvel not that all mankind, yea, men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of God, becoming his sons and daughters; And thus they become new creatures; and unless they do this, they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God" (Mosiah 27:25-26). This is not an optional decorative frill. It is the minimum qualification for entrance into heaven. (We speak much of becoming "like God," but very little about how that will come to pass. Changing our behavior is acting like God would act, but not so much about being. Spiritual rebirth is the main avenue for such change. All other considerations are found in further schooling and in the resurrection, another form of the Lord's grace.)
We are so accustomed to hearing that "Jesus was the only sinless person" that we have almost come to see it as our assignment to sin, to be sinners, to be imperfect, to struggle with the desire to sin. I give it as my opinion that if we could go our entire life without sinning, keeping our behavior perfectly in line with the commandments, we would still get turned away at the gates of the celestial kingdom. Why? Because our hearts have not been changed. Heaven is more than a place for people who do good (Laman and Lemuel eventually did everything they were commanded); it is a place for people who ARE good. As Elder Oakes stated, the final judgement will be less about what we did (a vast relief), and more about what we have become (reenter the nervousness).
Our actions may have been pure, but what about motives in our hearts? Were we meant to ride a wave of guilt into heaven? Do angels sit around snapping their wrists with rubber bands to ward off bad feelings and thoughts? No. If we want to live with them, we must also be like them.
Lord, How is It Done?
How do we experience this mighty change of heart? The scriptures are loaded with advice on what to do, and humility seems to be the missing ingredient for most of us. Ether 12:27 describes the first kind of grace I described above; 3Ne. 9:20 describes the mighty change of heart. The main difference between these verses is that one tells us to humble ourselves, while the other intensifies that injunction: we must "offer" "a sacrifice" of "a broken heart and a contrite spirit." One tells us to be humble to receive strength; the other tells us to be very, very humble, submitting our whole being to Christ, so that He can change our natures. For Christ to reach inside us and change our natures without our permission would violate the principle of agency. So humility is a prerequisite. Forget your checklist of flaws and weakness you need to "work on." Humbling ourselves, exercising faith in Christ, and coming to Him, are the work we need to do. He does the rest.
I think of this mighty change of heart as deliverance from the bondage of sin. It is such a subtle, seamless change that it can be missed (the Lamanites referenced by the Lord in 3Ne. 9:20 were born again and they "new it not") if we are not paying attention. When you are exposed to things that used to tempt you, and feel sorrow and revulsion and apathy instead of enticement, that is evidence that the change has occurred. As I said, it is not a minor change, a mood change, or a corollary to our paradigm of practicing the piano til we get good at it. Imagine waking up one morning craving broccoli and disliking chocolate cake. If that were to actually happen, you might visit a doctor to discover why you had experienced such a drastic change. This is not something you practice or work on; "immediately shall the great plan of redemption be brought about to you." This change happens at the rate we surrender our heart to God, and no faster or slower.
Thorn in the Flesh
Paul complained of a "thorn in the flesh" (2Cor. 12:7) and leaves us to guess what it was. Whatever disturbed this great missionary about his nature, he was distressed enough that he pled with the Lord three times to have it removed from him. I do not believe he prayed three times in one night—I believe he probably fasted and prayed on three separate occasions, separated by months or even years. Why did the Lord refuse to remove whatever cross this faithful saint was carrying?
I do not know the whole answer, but Paul thought it was there to keep him humble. The Lord's response to Paul echos Ether 12:27: "My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness." Paul continues: "Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me." The above scripture from Ether reminds us that it was the Lord who gave us the weakness in the first place. The Lord can determine whether to remove it, or leave it on our shoulders and give us strength sufficient to carry it instead.
Paul's experience is not a license to keep our pet sins. It teaches us that the Lord could remove any burden He wanted, and that some things really are part of His plan for individuals. But I believe such things are not universal, that we are not doomed to carry the cross of maladaptive desires for our entire lives. Let's not point to Paul's thorn, or anyone other persons' burdens, as evidence that the Lord intends for us to be tempted. He will, with the temptation, prepare a way for us to escape. Let's ask the Lord to find that way, whether it be physically running like Joseph in Egypt, or receiving strength to carry the cross like Paul, or running into the arms of the Lord and having that burden completely excised from our natures.
Waiting, or Being Waited For?
Some people surrender their hearts completely, sincerely, in an instant, and so receive the mighty change of heart in an instant. Lamoni was unconscious for three days after he prayed on behalf of his people; his father got to the point faster, was unconscious for only a few minutes after offering his all to God in prayer, and was converted as soon as he awoke. In either case, it was not the Lord dragging his feet while the mortal was patiently waiting; it was the other way around.
How can we know whether we have given our whole heart to God? This is scary territory, intimidating subject matter, but where else will we go? There is no other Savior, and no other conditions for salvation but His. Let's dive in then. A good place to study in the scriptures on this subject is the story of the rich young man. There are three accounts, one in each of the synoptic gospels. Matthew, Mark, and Luke give slightly different accounts. If you cull the dialogue from each account, you find that the young man was enthusiastically looking for a kind of rubber stamp approval from the Lord on his stellar behavior and life, a ticket into heaven. The Lord interviewed him as to his keeping the commandments. He was missing three of the ten—1, 2, and 10. He DID have another god besides the Lord; he WAS worshiping a graven image; and he WAS coveting; the culprit was his wealth. The Lord asked him to part with it, and the rich young ruler discovered that he loved his money more than the Lord. Truly, "...if men come unto [Christ] [He] will show unto them their weakness."
Heart Pedestals
The Lord showed him that there were prominences in the topography of his heart where possessions were higher than God. Is anything in our hearts higher than God? When we are put to the test, and asked to choose between God and anything else (but not both) how do we react? That reaction tells us to what extent our heart is Christ's. Scan the list of things we love, and ask which ones we would be hard-pressed to relinquish at the Lord's request. These things, no matter how draped in virtue, are potential false gods for us.
Speaking of ownership, it is worth noting here that all things we possess (but our hearts, our agency, our free will) actually already belong to God. Being willing to give them to Him is a token of the actual surrender of our hearts to Him. Ownership is merely a very convincing illusion as far as this world is concerned.
It takes a while for me to get used to the idea that everything I love is on the menu, and God could take it from me at a moment's notice, just ask me to surrender it. Most people do not offer a prayer and come out of a coma completely converted. Most are slow. What if we are hesitant foot-draggers? What then is the process of surrendering our stuff, our hearts, to God?
Catering to Cowards
D&C 88 teaches us that the earth itself, its trajectory through creation, fall, and eventual celestialization, it comparable to our trajectory through the plan of salvation. According to Truman G. Madsen, Joseph Smith taught that the earth would receive its paradisiacal glory by degrees, a little bit at a time. It will be a process, not an instantaneous change.
A dentist I knew used disposable bibs with cartoon images of a whimpering lion on them, beneath the caption: WE CATER TO COWARDS. We are almost all intimidated by complete surrender, and so the Lord does accommodate our cowardice, allowing us to move slowly in that direction. (He may jerk us awake with the occasional trial or difficulty; sooner and faster is best for us to choose. Writing about this kind of stuff is dangerous too; Elder Maxwell was writing a talk about patience once, and the car taking him to his destination threw three fan belts along the way. We each get called to live what we preach, and I wonder if this is part of the reason why the testimony is not in force until the death of the testator. Our words are valid when we have followed through on them, and there are no longer opportunities to recant.)
A Little Here, A Little There
The earth is being filled with temples. Slowly, piece by piece, small parcels of land are being dedicated to God as His private property. The land is being prepared for Jesus' second coming.
Just as the earth can have patches here and there dedicated to God, so I believe we can offer parts of our heart to God at a time. (God is actively hunting down and destroying my false Gods; to love anything more than Him is to paint a target on it.) Rather, we offer our whole heart to God at once, falling backwards into His arms, with the tacit, trusting understanding that He will ask no more (nor less) of us than we are able to offer. Peter noted that he and the other disciples were successful in parting with their worldly wealth and professions at the Lord's request. But they had not yet been asked to give up their lives, and Jesus rebuked Peter with the warning that they who make themselves first shall be last, and the last first. Peter had cleared one bar, money, but he had yet to successfully clear the bar of martyrdom. He chickened out the first time, but died bravely for his Savior in the end.
A Warning
If we ever withdraw our sacrifice, the rebirth we experienced begins to crumble as well. Rebirth and grace are withdrawn as we contend against the promptings of the Spirit and refuse to make the occasional new, individual sacrifices required of us by the Lord. Not only will we be exposed to the full brunt of temptations we once dealt with before our initial rebirth, but we will also be faced with new ones.
Jesus warns Nephi, "After ye have repented of your sins, and witnessed unto the Father that ye are willing to keep my commandments, by the baptism of water, and have received the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost, and can speak with a new tongue, yea, even with the tongue of angels, and after this should deny me, it would have been better for you that ye had not known me" (2Ne. 31:14). "When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none. Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first" (Matt. 12:43-45). Mormon observes, "And thus we can plainly discern, that after a people have been once enlightened by the Spirit of God, and have had great knowledge of things pertaining to righteousness, and then have fallen away into sin and transgression, they become more hardened, and thus their state becomes worse than though they had never known these things" (Alma 24:30).
The sacrifice of a broken heart and a contrite spirit is not a one-time or part-time deposit the Lord asks of us. It is a lifetime commitment, a condition that must remain permanent if we are to enjoy that mighty change in a permanent fashion. Those signs that warn "DO NOT BACK UP—SEVERE TIRE DAMAGE' evoke the kind of warnings that apply to spiritual rebirth, to any who receive it and then deny that God was the author of the change, or boast about it. It is a step up the mountain, and to fall from a greater height incurs greater damage. But there is no where else to go, so let's start making the ascent. Quick, humble responses in obeying the promptings of the Spirit will keep us firmly anchored to the mountain.
To Conclude
As we hand over portions of our hearts, they are slowly taken into Christ's hands and celestialized, infused with His nature as a replacement for ours. The language of our covenants is absolute, but His generosity, patience, and flexibility with us means that sacrifices He asks for are our personal 100%, not Peter's or Lamoni's or the rich young ruler's. When we want to see complete deliverance from sin, we need only offer our whole heart to God.
Friday, June 8, 2012
What Are We Now?
Personality tests are an abundant byproduct of various attempts to classify behavior and tendencies, and pin underlying reasons on them.
C. S. Lewis commented that as life forms approach perfection, they become dissimilar from each other. A fawn becomes a bull elk; kitty becomes a lion; a guppy becomes a shark; a puppy becomes a wolf. Each begins as an almost identical fetus, and ends as a unique masterpiece with gifts to thrive in its own natural element. Variety and beauty are intertwined in nature, and nature contains all manner of fish, fowl, bird, land animal, predator, herbivore, and everything else imaginable.
People are no exception to this. Though our DNA is almost identical, the billions of humans on the earth present a wide variety of appearances, traits, behaviors, thought patterns, languages, customs, etc. Each family is almost a microcosm of this, with each child eliciting different ways of thinking and being. When talents are developed, some become warriors, others peacemakers, or teachers, or farmers, or artisans and craftsmen, or poets. We seem to belong to the same category as animals, becoming what we were meant to be by diverging greatly along different developmental trajectories.
Now comes the confusion and bitterness—why is Sally so pretty, and I so homely? Why is Mark so smart, while I am so dull? Why is James so outgoing, while I am so backwardly shy? It seems that we, unlike animals, envy those who are different from ourselves. We are often discontent to fill the sphere or element in which our abilities predispose us to operate. Fish who want to fly, and birds who want to swim.
Furthermore, not only are we jealous of each others' abilities, we also have good reason to long for improvement and change: we are promised to have everything our Father in heaven has. We are not static beings. Every spirit God has sent into the world is susceptible of enlargement, Joseph Smith taught us.
Accurate Mirrors or Wacky Thermometers?
Personality tests, like medical tests, can present us with a grim picture of who we are. Answer a battery of redundant questions, and voila, we are suddenly in categories we might not be proud of. (One woman was disgruntled to learn about her child's temperament: "My daughter is not an introvert! She's a beautiful girl!") Do such tests help people learn about and cope with what is, or do they shape the people and obscure possibilities by limiting what they may try to accomplish? Both probably happen.
Personality tests tell us as much about their authors as they do about humanity. They reveal the core values of those who contrived them, as well as those of society at large. Take introversion, for example. There is hardly a personality test that does not incorporate this aspect of the human psyche. What causes introversion or extroversion? One theory presented to me by a college professor shed a great deal of light on the subject for me.
He suggested that everyone's brain needs to produce a certain number of brainwaves per second to function normally. Braincells fire signals to each other, causing a cascade of firing from one braincell to the next. Imagine dominoes knocking each other over, only to rise again and await the next wave of being knocked down. Action potential is the amount of energy needed to cause a braincell to fire and pass along a signal. The amount of action potential required varies from brain to brain. In some people, it requires a lot of stimulus to get braincells to fire, while others require very little. Imagine dominoes on a sticky floor. It requires an extra push to get all those dominoes to fall. That is an extrovert's brain—requiring a great deal of stimulus to maintain that normal level of brainwaves. (Imagine a car that needs a little pressure on the gas pedal to keep the engine from cutting out when stopped.) Introverts' braincells fire more easily, and so they maintain that ideal brainwaves per second with little stimulus. No raucous music or partying is necessary to keep them humming along. Extroverts require a lot of stimulus to feel well; introverts require significantly less. Imagine putting your foot on the gas pedal of a car in neutral. The violent roar of the engine is indicative of damage, not proper function; noise and parties and heavy stimuli do this to introverts on an emotional level. It is just too much for ideal function.
An extrovert is someone who gains energy from high-stimulus events and large, loud, social activities. An introvert is someone who is drained by such high-stimulus activities, and is energized by what happens in solitude or peaceful, contemplative moments. Being shy is different from being extroverted; shyness is fear of people, which anyone can have, whether introverted or extroverted. I am an introvert, yet I feel more comfortable in front of a large crowd giving a talk or presentation than I do when confronting a few strangers or trying to strike up small talk at a party. Why? Because giving a presentation is something that consistently causes me to experience joy. The ideas themselves are the important thing in that setting. By contrast, small talk is meta-communication, conveying regard for people by making faces at them or increasing the number of words one uses. It is not what you say, but the quantity of words and the non-verbal communications accompanying them that matter. I dislike this kind of communication because I am bad at it. So I prefer five hundred people to five. This is in harmony with my introversion, rather than a contradiction of it.
Seeing Red and Feeling Blue
One personality test that grabbed my attention a few years ago was the Color Code personality test. The author insists that there are four main core motivations driving everyone—Power (red), Joy (yellow), Intimacy or Closeness with others (blue), and Peace (white). (People can have more than one color, but usually have a dominant core motivation.) I do not know whether this is all true, but I know from personal experience that there ARE people for whom power is an end unto itself, rather than a means to an end, and that I usually rub these people the wrong way. I often do not get along with them well; it is as if we are using two different emotional currencies, and their coins are unacceptable at my bank, while mine are slugs to their cashiers. I find deep, meaningful, trusting relationships to be ends unto themselves. Those who find power to be an end unto itself (at least in my life) seem to struggle with deep relationships, because they require putting one's self in a vulnerable position. If someone knows you well enough to make you happy, they also know you well enough to make you miserable. Uniting a person who values such closeness with a person who values power is often a recipe for disaster, and I have lived through just such a disaster. I am grateful for this particular paradigm, with its kindergarten color classifications, not because it oversimplified the world, but because it gave me an explanation of why people in my life did what they did.
I remember a man, a doctor, getting up in front of the congregation on Sunday, and telling us how everyone really wants power. An intoxicated woman crashed her car, killing her child. The doctor told of the tragic ordeal, noted that if he had the power to save the child, tragedy would have been averted, and falsely pronounced that, "see, what we all really want is power." Actually, power in this instance would be a means, not an end unto itself, except for the doctor. What the mother wanted was her child brought back to life, whether she had the power to do it, or the doctor, or a shaman, or God, or anybody. But the doctor saw the world as he was, rather than as it is. My experience has been that people for whom power is an end unto itself have a deep-seated aversion to personality tests, and I can now understand why. They reveal a person's nature, which can leave us feeling vulnerable, and they put limits on us, also a loss of power.
A radio talk show host told how she imitated the screaming of a toddler in a grocery store line, and the toddler stopped crying. Her interpretation of events was that she had taken away the toddler's power. I posited other possibilities; maybe the kid was weirded out by the novelty of a wrinkly old woman making baby noises. Columbus died believing he had reached Asia, but that false belief did not keep him from being a world-class mariner. Still, having a more incisive understanding of why the method works could only improve application.
Rather than make the mistake of assuming that my treasure is also someone elses treasure, this paradigm, this way of classifying people, has helped me explain the otherwise baffling behavior of others on their own terms. A good theory is parsimonious—it explains a lot of phenomena with very little information. And personality tests have given me a window on others' motives that I could not have developed on my own. They have taught me to respect differences rather than look down my nose at them.
Moving Targets
We are not static beings. The first time I took the Meyers-Briggs test, my introversion was numerically ranked as 45, with 55 being the most introverted. Ten years later, I took the same test, and found that I was now at 25. Every other indicator on the test had moved to the the center, whereas before, I had been very polarized in all areas. I hope this is indicative of softening, progress towards holistic wholeness and balance. Personality tests provide a snapshot of an individual, rather than a permanent classification. Some traits hold on to us; others fade or even reverse with time.
I have met many people who have an aversion to personality tests. Somehow they feel such artificial limitations are harmful. As I indicated, they may be harmful self-fulfilling prophecies. On the other hand, none of these people have indicated to me that mirrors are harmful. Truth and pride are most certainly incompatible, and if one is infected with a large amount of pride, a look in the mirror will be painful. It does not have the ability to flatter or gloss over faults. In any case, I would rather know the truth about myself than try to hide from it. If there really is garbage, baggage, debris, and contaminants inside me, or a time bomb waiting to detonate in my psychic makeup, I want to be aware of it. I also want to be aware of whether vanilla or chocolate is more appealing to me, just because it is a part of what I am.
Because I know I am introverted, and that (GASP!) God designed me that way, I have several advantages: First, I am not riddled with guilt about being what I am. Others want to go and party or watch movies or jet ski, while I want to chat and read and research the deep things of the universe. Rather than trying to repent of this social sin, I recognize that I am a fish rather than a bird, and spend my time finding joy in swimming rather than flying. Second, I am able to make plans for myself based on this knowledge. A job as a teacher will appeal to me more than a job as a police man or a circus clown (though each contains elements of the others, come to think of it).
I suppose the whole introversion-as-a-malfunction irks me because it is a social bias, rather than a commandment. People at large know what a Sasquatch is, but very few believe they exist. Everyone knows what introverts are, but many people assume that they are merely broken extroverts. "If I were acting that way, I would feel poorly, therefore this bookworm picking daisies and staring at clouds must be feeling poorly." Ponder, study, search, read, meditate, listen to the still small voice, the whisper of the Holy Ghost. These are all scriptural injunctions. Who is predisposed to excel at these God-given mandates, introverts or extroverts? Do introverts need to repent of being in tune with angels, or discovering the details and laws of nature, or of inventing tools that benefit humanity at large, or postulating and conceiving potential new inventions? Jesus went into the wilderness for forty days to fast and be with His Father. Moses did the same on Mount Sinai. How we shy away from such behavior in America today.
It is strange that we benefit from cooperation, yet celebrate our independence and rugged individuality. This is the only North American social context in which introversion is considered desirable—when attempting to evince the lone-wolf mystique of the solo maverick. Our hero comes gliding over the horizon on a motorcycle as the ominous mood of the music is interrupted by the credits being flashed on the screen...his face exudes grim stoicism, a severe scowl obvious behind his opaque sun glasses. Hypocrisy stains this introverted stance; those who put on this show are trying to appear isolated ON STAGE, which is the least isolated of places. Real introverts relax and experience fulfillment when there are no cameras rolling, no eyes prying. And they stay there for a lot longer than it takes to roll the introductory credits.
Different, Good; Same as God, Better
We Latter-day Saints seek earnestly to be like God, but most of that transformation will probably occur after the resurrection. Parity will only come after lengthy instruction and growth. Here, in this brief probationary period on earth, there is not time to be everything. The Lord needs introverts and extroverts, flowers and fish, birds and pigs, all populated in the right proportions to each other, to achieve the right telestial ecology. He has uses for all of them, and while we strive to be something else through repentance, we should also appreciate and develop the talents we already have. I am convinced that God could make us into anything He wanted, like Solomon. God came to him in a dream, and asked him what he wanted. The Lord praised him for not asking to live longer, or to be rich, or to get revenge on his enemies (those obvious options use up the classical three wishes offered by jug-genies of legend. Add a river of chocolate and something about sex, and you pretty much have the natural man covered). Solomon asked for wisdom to benefit his people, and God endowed him with it in spades (1Kings 3:5-10).
My point here is that, in most cases, God has already made us into what He wants us to be. He has cast us in the mold He wanted. The only thing that remains for most of us is the mighty change of heart, accompanied by our assumption of important titles (the names of Christ), and roles (such as parenthood). Rather than applying modern American priorities for extroversion and other traits to God, and trying to repent of our introversion and other traits that are currently culturally unfashionable (like forgiveness and mercy), I hope we find what we were designed to do, and do it with our whole hearts.
C. S. Lewis commented that as life forms approach perfection, they become dissimilar from each other. A fawn becomes a bull elk; kitty becomes a lion; a guppy becomes a shark; a puppy becomes a wolf. Each begins as an almost identical fetus, and ends as a unique masterpiece with gifts to thrive in its own natural element. Variety and beauty are intertwined in nature, and nature contains all manner of fish, fowl, bird, land animal, predator, herbivore, and everything else imaginable.
People are no exception to this. Though our DNA is almost identical, the billions of humans on the earth present a wide variety of appearances, traits, behaviors, thought patterns, languages, customs, etc. Each family is almost a microcosm of this, with each child eliciting different ways of thinking and being. When talents are developed, some become warriors, others peacemakers, or teachers, or farmers, or artisans and craftsmen, or poets. We seem to belong to the same category as animals, becoming what we were meant to be by diverging greatly along different developmental trajectories.
Now comes the confusion and bitterness—why is Sally so pretty, and I so homely? Why is Mark so smart, while I am so dull? Why is James so outgoing, while I am so backwardly shy? It seems that we, unlike animals, envy those who are different from ourselves. We are often discontent to fill the sphere or element in which our abilities predispose us to operate. Fish who want to fly, and birds who want to swim.
Furthermore, not only are we jealous of each others' abilities, we also have good reason to long for improvement and change: we are promised to have everything our Father in heaven has. We are not static beings. Every spirit God has sent into the world is susceptible of enlargement, Joseph Smith taught us.
Accurate Mirrors or Wacky Thermometers?
Personality tests, like medical tests, can present us with a grim picture of who we are. Answer a battery of redundant questions, and voila, we are suddenly in categories we might not be proud of. (One woman was disgruntled to learn about her child's temperament: "My daughter is not an introvert! She's a beautiful girl!") Do such tests help people learn about and cope with what is, or do they shape the people and obscure possibilities by limiting what they may try to accomplish? Both probably happen.
Personality tests tell us as much about their authors as they do about humanity. They reveal the core values of those who contrived them, as well as those of society at large. Take introversion, for example. There is hardly a personality test that does not incorporate this aspect of the human psyche. What causes introversion or extroversion? One theory presented to me by a college professor shed a great deal of light on the subject for me.
He suggested that everyone's brain needs to produce a certain number of brainwaves per second to function normally. Braincells fire signals to each other, causing a cascade of firing from one braincell to the next. Imagine dominoes knocking each other over, only to rise again and await the next wave of being knocked down. Action potential is the amount of energy needed to cause a braincell to fire and pass along a signal. The amount of action potential required varies from brain to brain. In some people, it requires a lot of stimulus to get braincells to fire, while others require very little. Imagine dominoes on a sticky floor. It requires an extra push to get all those dominoes to fall. That is an extrovert's brain—requiring a great deal of stimulus to maintain that normal level of brainwaves. (Imagine a car that needs a little pressure on the gas pedal to keep the engine from cutting out when stopped.) Introverts' braincells fire more easily, and so they maintain that ideal brainwaves per second with little stimulus. No raucous music or partying is necessary to keep them humming along. Extroverts require a lot of stimulus to feel well; introverts require significantly less. Imagine putting your foot on the gas pedal of a car in neutral. The violent roar of the engine is indicative of damage, not proper function; noise and parties and heavy stimuli do this to introverts on an emotional level. It is just too much for ideal function.
An extrovert is someone who gains energy from high-stimulus events and large, loud, social activities. An introvert is someone who is drained by such high-stimulus activities, and is energized by what happens in solitude or peaceful, contemplative moments. Being shy is different from being extroverted; shyness is fear of people, which anyone can have, whether introverted or extroverted. I am an introvert, yet I feel more comfortable in front of a large crowd giving a talk or presentation than I do when confronting a few strangers or trying to strike up small talk at a party. Why? Because giving a presentation is something that consistently causes me to experience joy. The ideas themselves are the important thing in that setting. By contrast, small talk is meta-communication, conveying regard for people by making faces at them or increasing the number of words one uses. It is not what you say, but the quantity of words and the non-verbal communications accompanying them that matter. I dislike this kind of communication because I am bad at it. So I prefer five hundred people to five. This is in harmony with my introversion, rather than a contradiction of it.
Seeing Red and Feeling Blue
One personality test that grabbed my attention a few years ago was the Color Code personality test. The author insists that there are four main core motivations driving everyone—Power (red), Joy (yellow), Intimacy or Closeness with others (blue), and Peace (white). (People can have more than one color, but usually have a dominant core motivation.) I do not know whether this is all true, but I know from personal experience that there ARE people for whom power is an end unto itself, rather than a means to an end, and that I usually rub these people the wrong way. I often do not get along with them well; it is as if we are using two different emotional currencies, and their coins are unacceptable at my bank, while mine are slugs to their cashiers. I find deep, meaningful, trusting relationships to be ends unto themselves. Those who find power to be an end unto itself (at least in my life) seem to struggle with deep relationships, because they require putting one's self in a vulnerable position. If someone knows you well enough to make you happy, they also know you well enough to make you miserable. Uniting a person who values such closeness with a person who values power is often a recipe for disaster, and I have lived through just such a disaster. I am grateful for this particular paradigm, with its kindergarten color classifications, not because it oversimplified the world, but because it gave me an explanation of why people in my life did what they did.
I remember a man, a doctor, getting up in front of the congregation on Sunday, and telling us how everyone really wants power. An intoxicated woman crashed her car, killing her child. The doctor told of the tragic ordeal, noted that if he had the power to save the child, tragedy would have been averted, and falsely pronounced that, "see, what we all really want is power." Actually, power in this instance would be a means, not an end unto itself, except for the doctor. What the mother wanted was her child brought back to life, whether she had the power to do it, or the doctor, or a shaman, or God, or anybody. But the doctor saw the world as he was, rather than as it is. My experience has been that people for whom power is an end unto itself have a deep-seated aversion to personality tests, and I can now understand why. They reveal a person's nature, which can leave us feeling vulnerable, and they put limits on us, also a loss of power.
A radio talk show host told how she imitated the screaming of a toddler in a grocery store line, and the toddler stopped crying. Her interpretation of events was that she had taken away the toddler's power. I posited other possibilities; maybe the kid was weirded out by the novelty of a wrinkly old woman making baby noises. Columbus died believing he had reached Asia, but that false belief did not keep him from being a world-class mariner. Still, having a more incisive understanding of why the method works could only improve application.
Rather than make the mistake of assuming that my treasure is also someone elses treasure, this paradigm, this way of classifying people, has helped me explain the otherwise baffling behavior of others on their own terms. A good theory is parsimonious—it explains a lot of phenomena with very little information. And personality tests have given me a window on others' motives that I could not have developed on my own. They have taught me to respect differences rather than look down my nose at them.
Moving Targets
We are not static beings. The first time I took the Meyers-Briggs test, my introversion was numerically ranked as 45, with 55 being the most introverted. Ten years later, I took the same test, and found that I was now at 25. Every other indicator on the test had moved to the the center, whereas before, I had been very polarized in all areas. I hope this is indicative of softening, progress towards holistic wholeness and balance. Personality tests provide a snapshot of an individual, rather than a permanent classification. Some traits hold on to us; others fade or even reverse with time.
I have met many people who have an aversion to personality tests. Somehow they feel such artificial limitations are harmful. As I indicated, they may be harmful self-fulfilling prophecies. On the other hand, none of these people have indicated to me that mirrors are harmful. Truth and pride are most certainly incompatible, and if one is infected with a large amount of pride, a look in the mirror will be painful. It does not have the ability to flatter or gloss over faults. In any case, I would rather know the truth about myself than try to hide from it. If there really is garbage, baggage, debris, and contaminants inside me, or a time bomb waiting to detonate in my psychic makeup, I want to be aware of it. I also want to be aware of whether vanilla or chocolate is more appealing to me, just because it is a part of what I am.
Because I know I am introverted, and that (GASP!) God designed me that way, I have several advantages: First, I am not riddled with guilt about being what I am. Others want to go and party or watch movies or jet ski, while I want to chat and read and research the deep things of the universe. Rather than trying to repent of this social sin, I recognize that I am a fish rather than a bird, and spend my time finding joy in swimming rather than flying. Second, I am able to make plans for myself based on this knowledge. A job as a teacher will appeal to me more than a job as a police man or a circus clown (though each contains elements of the others, come to think of it).
I suppose the whole introversion-as-a-malfunction irks me because it is a social bias, rather than a commandment. People at large know what a Sasquatch is, but very few believe they exist. Everyone knows what introverts are, but many people assume that they are merely broken extroverts. "If I were acting that way, I would feel poorly, therefore this bookworm picking daisies and staring at clouds must be feeling poorly." Ponder, study, search, read, meditate, listen to the still small voice, the whisper of the Holy Ghost. These are all scriptural injunctions. Who is predisposed to excel at these God-given mandates, introverts or extroverts? Do introverts need to repent of being in tune with angels, or discovering the details and laws of nature, or of inventing tools that benefit humanity at large, or postulating and conceiving potential new inventions? Jesus went into the wilderness for forty days to fast and be with His Father. Moses did the same on Mount Sinai. How we shy away from such behavior in America today.
It is strange that we benefit from cooperation, yet celebrate our independence and rugged individuality. This is the only North American social context in which introversion is considered desirable—when attempting to evince the lone-wolf mystique of the solo maverick. Our hero comes gliding over the horizon on a motorcycle as the ominous mood of the music is interrupted by the credits being flashed on the screen...his face exudes grim stoicism, a severe scowl obvious behind his opaque sun glasses. Hypocrisy stains this introverted stance; those who put on this show are trying to appear isolated ON STAGE, which is the least isolated of places. Real introverts relax and experience fulfillment when there are no cameras rolling, no eyes prying. And they stay there for a lot longer than it takes to roll the introductory credits.
Different, Good; Same as God, Better
We Latter-day Saints seek earnestly to be like God, but most of that transformation will probably occur after the resurrection. Parity will only come after lengthy instruction and growth. Here, in this brief probationary period on earth, there is not time to be everything. The Lord needs introverts and extroverts, flowers and fish, birds and pigs, all populated in the right proportions to each other, to achieve the right telestial ecology. He has uses for all of them, and while we strive to be something else through repentance, we should also appreciate and develop the talents we already have. I am convinced that God could make us into anything He wanted, like Solomon. God came to him in a dream, and asked him what he wanted. The Lord praised him for not asking to live longer, or to be rich, or to get revenge on his enemies (those obvious options use up the classical three wishes offered by jug-genies of legend. Add a river of chocolate and something about sex, and you pretty much have the natural man covered). Solomon asked for wisdom to benefit his people, and God endowed him with it in spades (1Kings 3:5-10).
My point here is that, in most cases, God has already made us into what He wants us to be. He has cast us in the mold He wanted. The only thing that remains for most of us is the mighty change of heart, accompanied by our assumption of important titles (the names of Christ), and roles (such as parenthood). Rather than applying modern American priorities for extroversion and other traits to God, and trying to repent of our introversion and other traits that are currently culturally unfashionable (like forgiveness and mercy), I hope we find what we were designed to do, and do it with our whole hearts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)