Integration and Sytematization

In the gospel we learn that, “All truth can be circumscribed into one great whole.” The scriptures define truth as knowledge of things as they are, were, and will be. In other words, a proposition is only true if it corresponds to reality.

I believe that we should extract canonical principles from the gospel and compare them to the principles of all other disciplines. Systematizing gospel principles will bring clarity, while a process of integration will allow us to more easily find and resolve contradictions between thoughts and ideas.

This is one thing that I will attempt to do on my blog:

gavinjensen.com/blog

I will not write on Spiritual Sphere anymore. I hope that you will check out my latest posts on gavinjensen.com

The Zeroth Article of Faith

The first 4 articles of faith logically depend on the previous article. Faith, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost (Article 4) are brought about by the Atonement (Article 3) which was necessary because of our sinful nature and the fall of Adam (Article 2) which we must overcome to live again with Heavenly Father(Article 1).

If there were to be an even more basic article to precede article 1 what would it be? It would describe those things that are more basic than the God. What is more basic than the God? It is reality with its eternal laws. These eternal laws take primacy over God. God's power comes from his knowledge of these laws. The glory of God is intelligence (D&C 93:36). If intelligence is the ability to acquire and apply knowledge, then what does God have knowledge of? He has knowledge of reality.

God's commandments compose a map that allow us to navigate a reality that He understands perfectly. The apostle D. Todd Christofferson in the April 2010 conference said, "[God's] Commandments are the voice of reality." This same idea was echoed by Benjamin Franklin when he said, "Sin is not harmful because it is forbidden, but it is forbidden because it is harmful." The words "sin" and "wickedness" are defined as those choices that never bring happiness in reality. These constraints are not set arbitrarily by God. They are set by a reality which has primacy over God.

Why is this such a big deal to talk about? As far as I know, Mormon theology is the only religion that holds such a view of reality. If we did have a zeroth article of faith then it would be something like: "We believe in reality (that existence exists)," or, "We believe in eternal laws," or, "We believe that reality has primacy over consciousness." I think that most people automatically assume this but many are confused by the philosophies of men. The explicit articulation of this point provides a firm foundation to (1) understanding the gospel, (2) understanding reality, and (3) avoiding confusion.

Ontological Frameworks

Mormon theology holds a unique ontological framework. What is an ontological framework? Ontology is the philosophical study of the nature of being, existence or reality as such, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations. The ontological framework of Mormon theology asserts that reality exists and God is subject to that reality.

The ontological framework of traditional Christianity, Islam, and Judaism asserts that God created reality out of nothing. I once heard a rabbi say that everything that exists is simply a thought in the mind of God. They believe that consciousness has primacy over reality:

The ontological framework of eastern religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism is that God and reality are the same and that man is working to become one with God by reaching Nirvana, or nothingness.

There are many other variations of ontological frameworks. Atheism would be an ontological framework that simply denies God though they generally believe that reality still has primacy over consciousness. Understanding the ontological framework of a religion or belief system is to understand the most basic premise or starting point of that religion. From a logical or systematic viewpoint, the ontological framework is the most important belief to get right because as Aristotle said, “A small error in the beginning will lead to a huge one in the end.”

The Most Fundamental Premise of Mormon Theology

The most fundamental premise of traditional Christianity, Judaism, and Islam is that reality is contingent upon God. This means that consciousness (God) has primacy over reality. What does primacy mean? It means that something comes first. In this case God comes first and then reality comes second. God created reality "Ex Nihilo" meaning 'out of nothing'. According to this assumption, God can change the laws of the universe and the laws of morality. This view assumes that God has complete omnipotence to do whatever He wants.

The Greek Pagan religions assumed the opposite. They believed that God was contingent upon reality. In their system of belief, reality has primacy over consciousness (the gods). The gods could only do their work within reality. They could not change the laws of the universe. In other words, they were not omnipotent but subject to reality.

Eastern religions in general assume both premises. They believe that God is the universe and that we are all part of God. God has primacy and reality has primacy. They generally accept contradictory premises.

Where does Mormon Theology fit in?

Mormons agree with the Greeks! Reality has primacy over consciousness. God is contintingent upon reality. This is why traditional Christianity thinks that Mormons worship a different God. It is because we do! The Mormon conception of God is very different from traditional Christianity (which was influenced by Platonism).

According to Mormon theology, there is no such thing as immaterial matter (D&C 131:7-8). Therefore God is made of matter. He cannot create or destroy matter. He cannot create or destroy intelligence. He can learn of what reality is like and work within the constraints of natural laws (D&C 93: 29–34). This belief assumes the primacy of reality over God.

The glory of God is intelligence (D&C 93:36). According to traditional Christianity, the glory of God is His power. Now if God really has all power to do whatever He wants, then intelligence and knowledge is meaningless. God would not have to know anything since He could just will things to be however He wishes. He would not need knowledge about gravity for instance since He could just will it to cease existing. In Mormon theology God's power comes from His intelligence. He has all power that can be had—in other words He can do whatever can be done within the constraints of eternal laws because He perfectly understands the eternal laws.

If we assume that consciousness has primacy over reality, then it follows that intelligences do not follow eternal unchanging laws but are laws unto themselves. This is the goal of Satan. He seeks not to be governed by law, but seeketh to become a law unto himself. In other words, he wants to choose how to act and he wants to choose the consequences of his actions (D&C 88:34-39). Satan did not seek to take away our agency by forcing us to conform to reality. He sought to take away our agency by taking away the consequences of choices. Therefore the fundamental falsehood of the great apostasy is the belief that God is a law unto himself—in other words, that God's nature is the same as what Satan desires but can never have.

The scriptures say that the great and abominable church was founded by Satan (1 Ne 13:6). That church is comprised of traditional Christianity, Islam, Judaism. Each rests on the premise that God is a law unto himself. All other beliefs rest on this premise. If you change this foundation—the rock of reality—then you pervert all other beliefs of the gospel. What more cunning thing could Satan do to cause confusion than to turn the fundamental premises of the true church upside down?

God's Love is Conditional

God has a perfect love for everyone. This love is universal and infinite.

God's love even extends to Satan.

However, God does not love all of His children equally. God has higher levels of love for those who keep His commandments. Therefore, God's love is conditional.

God's blessings are also conditional with a few exceptions—such as immortality. Eternal life is the greatest reward reserved only for the obedient.

According to Russell M. Nelson,

Understanding that divine love and blessings are not truly “unconditional” can defend us against common fallacies such as these: “Since God’s love is unconditional, He will love me regardless …”; or “Since ‘God is love,’ He will love me unconditionally, regardless …”

These are important concepts that are greatly misunderstood in the church. One can even find plenty of quotes from other apostles and church leaders that seem to contradict these principles. The scriptures are quite clear on the matter:

• “If ye keep my commandments, [then] ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love.” (John 15:10)
• “If you keep not my commandments, [then] the love of the Father shall not continue with you.” (D&C 95:12)
• “If a man love me, [then] he will keep my words: and my Father will love him.” (John 14:23)
• “I love them that love me; and those that seek me … shall find me.” (Prov. 8:17)
• “God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.” (Acts 10:34–35)
• The Lord “loveth those who will have him to be their God.” (1 Ne. 17:40)
• “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.” (John 14:21)

Philosophy can strengthen our testimonies.

Contrary to the beliefs of some, philosophy is not antithetical to the gospel. Philosophy will expand our understanding of the truths found in the gospel which in turn will strengthen our testimonies. Below is a collection of quotes to support this view.

“This people have embraced the philosophy of eternal lives, and in view of this we should cease to be children and become philosophers, understand-ing our own existence, its purpose and ultimate design.”
—Brigham Young Journal of Discourses (JD), Vol. 9, pgs. 190-191

“I am a witness that ‘Mormonism’ is true upon philosophical principles. Every particle of sense I have, proves it to be sound natural reason.”
—Brigham Young JD 2:8

“I was led to reflect that there is no act, no principle, no power belonging to the Deity that is not purely philosophical.”
—Brigham Young JD 8:115

Philosophy, like thinking, is inherently good. It is only bad philosophy, or bad thinking that becomes a stumbling block to light and truth.

The Family Team

Families are composed of individuals who should work together towards an eternal goal. Each individual needs to do their part in reaching the goal, but at the same time there must be a unity in the family that allows the family to be treated as one entity.
In describing the relationship between husband and wife the Lord said: "...and they shall be one flesh." (Gen. 2:24). It doesn't seem to me that the Lord only intended husband and wife to be "one flesh", but also children. The family resembles the Godhead in the essence that it is one in unity and purpose, but separate individuals. It can also be similar to a sports team. Each player has a role, and each role must be carried out in order to keep the team progressing. The father presides as the patriarch, provider and protector while mother nurtures. Both father and mother share the responsibility of teaching the children correct principles, but that doesn't mean that the children can kick their feet up and relax. Elder Richard J. Maynes taught: "when children love and support their parents by learning and practicing the principles their parents teach, the result will be the establishment of a Christ-centered home." Children act as a support and sometimes even an example in the family to uphold the Lord's standards. These duties shouldn't shouldn't aggrandize, or belittle any member of the family, but should instill a sense of purpose, and motivation for all to reach the eternal goal. These duties never diminish, or disappear. Even though a son or daughter becomes a husband or wife doesn't mean they no longer have a tie to their mother or father. They have just increased their responsibility.
This constant unity and striving toward an eternal goal will add to the fulfillment of our lives. In the same address Elder Maynes stated: "Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ.” Christ taught, and we should obey; in fact it is in our best interest to do so.
Satan is contrary to happiness. Our eternal happiness is not one of Satan’s objectives. He knows that an essential key to making men and women miserable like himself is to deprive them of family relationships which have eternal potential.

Is God "in" or "out" of time?

There are 3 possible relationships between God and time:

(1) God has always existed outside of time.

(2) God first came into being in time and then moved outside of time.
This option gives rise to other possibilities such as (2a) God existed outside of time, while time was co-eternal with God, and then he chose to enter it or (2b) God enters and leaves time at will periodically.

(3) God exists in time.

(1) and (2) assume what I will call Divine Timelessness. This is the idea that it is possible for a being to be “in time” or “outside of time”. This assumes that being “in” or “out” of time are meaningful concepts. I will argue that these concepts are meaningless which means that option (3) is the only viable explanation for God.

Argument 1
In the book A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking explains that according to the general theory of relativity, space and time are dynamic quantities:

"When a body moves or a force acts, it affects the curvature of space and time - and in turn the structure of space-time affects the way in which bodies move and forces act. Space and time not only affect but also are affected by everything that happens in the universe. Just as we cannot talk about events in the universe without the notions of space and time, so in general relativity it became meaningless to talk about space and time outside the limits of the universe."

This means that space cannot be separated from time. If God is in the universe, then He must also be in space and in time. But some people argue that God is not only outside of time, but also outside of space. This proposition, if it were true, would render God causally inert. In other words, God would be unable to cause anything to happen in the universe. Why is this so? Let me first define time. Time is a measuring system used to identify the sequence of events. We could also say that time is the relative speed of a sequence of events. If God time did not apply to God, then a sequence of events would not apply to God. If God wanted to cause something to happen in the universe, He would have to then participate in the sequence of events and therefore He would by definition be subject to the measuring system of sequences of events that we call "time". If God could withdraw himself into some state in which time did not apply, then He would be completely alone and He could not cause anything to happen in time or space.


Argument 2
Often, the imperfections of our language lead to confusion. We use the words “inside of time” and “outside of time” just like we use the words “thoughts inside our minds.” If thoughts are inside a mind then we could cut open the head and pull the thought outside of the mind. This is not what we mean by the phrase "inside of the mind". We only use these words as a figure of speech to mean, “I am thinking.” The phrase "inside of the mind" is a grammatical remark. Grammatical remarks are sentences that simply have a correct grammatical structure. Confusion occurs when grammatical remarks pretend to be empirical remarks. Empirical remarks are propositions that correspond to reality. We easily recognize that the grammatical remark, "outside of color" is not an empirical remark because that phrase cannot refer to anything in the real world. But we often get confused with phrases such as "outside of time". I argue that this phrase is meaningless as an empirical remark. I have no idea what it could possibly mean.


Conclusion: Since Divine Timelessness is a meaningless concept, we are left with option (3). Therefore, God exists in time. He has a past, a present, and a future.

Addressing possible objections to conclusion:

• A possible response is, "It is a mystery." But this is simply another way of saying, "It doesn't make sense, but I believe it anyway." This explanation does not satisfy. It is more likely that we have simply become confused in our thinking through our language, than to assume that the impossible is possible within some magical universe.

• In the scriptures, it says, "All things are before him." This has been interpreted to mean that even the future is before him. If "all things" means that the past, present, and future are before him, then time must not apply to God. But I believe that this is an incorrect interpretation since I believe that that phrase is meaningless. The phrase “all things are before” is only meaningful if we interpret it to mean that all things are before Him in the present. The past, present, and future are not things that could possibly be “before” Him (meaning “in front of” Him) nor could it be “after” Him, or “adjacent” to Him. Again, the confusion begins when we mistake grammatical remarks for empirical remarks.

• Alma 40:8 say that “all is as one day with God, and time only is measured unto men.” This is perhaps the strongest ammunition that a believer in the LDS tradition has to justify a belief in Divine Timelessness. But does it really mean that time does not apply to God? When interpreting scripture, one must look at the context as well as all other verses to interpret correctly. If one were to interpret this scripture to mean that time does not need to apply to God, then it seems that one must ignore D&C 130:4-5 which says that God’s time is according to the planet which he resides. This verse clearly implies that time applies to God. Either these 2 verses contradict each other or Alma 40:8 does not actually support Divine Timelessness. If they contradict, then the verse in D&C 130 takes precedence since modern revelation is more trustworthy than ancient revelation (as Brigham Young suggested). It would not bother me at all if Alma 40:8 was one of those "mistakes of men." However, I do not believe that discrediting this verse is necessary. I simply believe that it cannot be interpreted to suggest Divine Timelessness. I do not think it would be difficult to create ad hoc explanations of this verse that would make it consistent with D&C 130.

Contend Against No Church

In Doctrine and Covenants 18:20, the Lord says to the missionaries, "Contend against no church save it be the church of the devil."
As Latter-day Saints, we don't actively fight against other churches even though other churches attack us. Other churches have made cartoons and documentaries that misrepresent and attack our beliefs. Other churches send professional protesters to protest outside of our Conference Center in Salt Lake City.

The true church does not need to attack any other church. Instead we support other churches in a spirit of brotherly love. During the tsunami in Indonesia in 2005, we gave out 1000s of copies of the Koran to villages that were hurt the most by the tsunami. Here in Utah, the LDS church donated $25000 for the building of the Krishna temple in Spanish Fork. Many LDS volunteers personally helped build the Hindu temple. We work with many leaders of other churches to help build communities.

The LDS church has many disagreements with other churches about the nature of God and other doctrines. So why would we help other religions?
The answer is partly contained in the previous post. We believe that God gives light and knowledge to all peoples, even other churches. Those people will be judged for how they respond to the knowledge that they have been given. Helping other churches brings more light and truth to people and prepares them to receive more by showing that the LDS church is a church of love and service.

All Truth Belongs to the Mormons

In the previous post, I said that we receive knowledge a little bit at a time. When we act on knowledge, we prepare ourselves to receive more knowledge. Knowledge has been described in the scriptures as light and truth. Light has a strong metaphor for seeing. We use the word "enlightened" to denote a high level of understanding.

The truths that are most important are the truths that help us fulfill God's purposes. His main objective is to enable us to become like Him. We do not need to have all truth to do accomplish this. Our limited minds could not comprehend all truth anyway. We only need certain truths (such as the knowledge of the Atonement) that will lead us to do certain things (repent and be baptized). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only church to have every one of these truths. God leads the church through prophets to keep the truths pure because man is easily confused by mixing these doctrines with the philosophies of man. (Ephesians 2:20) No other church has prophets authorized to speak on behalf of God. Though they may have leaders that are partly inspired by God. The fact that the LDS church contains all of these truths does not mean that it has every truth, nor does it mean that it is the only one with truth.

God gives light and truth to all nations, but he gives them as much as they are ready to receive. (Alma 29:8) A 1978 First Presidency message of the church states: "the great religious leaders of the world such as Mohammed, Confucius, and the Reformers, as well as philosophers including Socrates, Plato, and others, received a portion of God’s light. Moral truths were given to them by God to enlighten whole nations and to bring a higher level of understanding to individuals." Many religions and philosophies have parts of the truth. Any truth that they have belongs to us, the Mormons. We claim all truths found in any religion whether it is Hindu, Buddhist, or Islam.

The Process of Knowledge

Knowledge is a process. God is a powerful source of truth. We can gain knowledge when God reveals it to us. The process of receiving truth from a divine source is called revelation. Different types of revelation include: (1) testifying, (2) prophesying, (3) comforting, (4) uplifting, (5) informing, (6) restraining, (7) confirming, and (8) impelling. Recently my very close friend had a spiritual experience where she was comforted during a time of great despair. This spiritual experience was essentially a form of revelation—knowledge.

Sometimes we will receive unconditional revelation. Alma's spiritual experience in the Book of Mormon is an example of this. But most of the time we receive revelation upon certain conditions. One condition is the willingness to act upon the knowledge that we are given. Therefore, we increase knowledge through an integration of knowledge and behavior. The root of the word integration is the same for the word "integrity". Having integrity means speaking, thinking, and acting in harmony. This is essential to developing character. Character and knowledge have a reinforcing pattern. Acting on knowledge develops our character and strengthening our character leads to more knowledge by preparing us to receive revelation.

If we are not willing to incorporate new knowledge into our lives, new knowledge will only condemn us. We are accountable for the knowledge that we receive. Those with more knowledge are more strictly judged than those with less knowledge. Alma 32:19 says, "And now, how much more cursed is he that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than he that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression?"

God has given us faculties of logic and reason to expand our knowledge. Logic is the ability to generate conclusions based on premises or assumptions. For example:

(1) All Asians eat rice.
(2) Vanny is Asian.
(3) Therefore, Vanny eats rice.

(1) and (2) are premises; (3) is the conclusion. If the premises are true, reason confirms that the conclusion is true and we have increased our knowledge. But reason cannot validate its own premises and therefore it is only as good as its premises. If one starts with false premises reason is useless in the pursuit of expanding knowledge. Truth can be rendered reasonable, but it does not arise from reason alone.

Revelation from God provides premises from which we can discover more truth. We can receive this revelation personally or impersonally through witnesses. The first thing that investigators of the church are asked to do is to read the Book of Mormon and to ask God if it is a true book. If the Book of Mormon is true, then it must follow that Joseph Smith (who translated the book by the power of God) was a prophet. If Joseph Smith was a prophet, then The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints must logically be the only true church—meaning that it accurately represents the state of things as they really are. One must also conclude that IF the Book of Mormon is false, then Joseph Smith was one of the greatest liars and charlatans who ever lived. The church he started is a lie, which means that the members of the LDS church are grossly mistaken about their convictions.

God cannot contradict himself, therefore 2 religions that contradict each other cannot both be true. Various churches may share many great and important truths, but only one church can be directed by God Himself—everything else is a human counterfeit.

Those who honestly seek for knowledge will receive it. According to 2 Nephi 28:30 " thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have."

Individualism and the Gospel

Today in church the sunday school teacher shared a story about when he was investigating the gospel. Even though he was starting to change his life for the better, his family was completely opposed to his interest in the Gospel. His family was Catholic. As he described it, there was war in his family. His Aunts wrote him negative letters, his parents and siblings yelled at him for his interest. As he was thinking about being baptized, he wondered why there was so much contention surrounding his decision. He was frustrated and tossed his brand new scriptures on his bed. They happened to flip open to Matthew 10:34-37 which said.

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.
He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me."

From this verse, he realized that he had to make his own decision despite the consequences.

These verses emphasize individual salvation. We are not saved by our culture or community. We are saved individually by living the principles of Christ. As Jeffrey R. Holland said in the October 2010 confererence, "The personal value, the sacred splendor of every one of you, is the very reason there is a plan for salvation and exaltation. Contrary to the parlance of the day, this is about you."

Finding Good Books

The other day, my friend Matt Lind asked me how I choose books to read and/or purchase. Since then, I have thought more about this question. I post it here because of the oft-quoted scripture in section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants that reads, “… seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom. …” (D&C 88:118.) Here are my thoughts:

I first found out about my favorite author, Thomas Sowell, by reading his columns in the Deseret News. I liked some of his columns so much that I would cut them out and save them, though I never owned a book of his until there was a free book givaway online—it was "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One" which was a great read though I can't remember what I had to do to get the free book.

If I really love an author, I read whatever else that author has written. For example, since I started reading Thomas Sowell I have purchased over 15 of his books. I own some of his books in both audiobook format and traditional paper. I use this same effect for college courses and online videos. I do a lot of research about the professor before I take their class. If I have some extra time or if I need some filler credits, I will retake a course from a good teacher no matter what the subject.

As for videos, if I find great speaker, I scour the web searching for any other videos that feature that speaker. When I first saw Bjorn Lomborg's TED talk, I immediately looked for other videos about him. From that point, I purchased his book "Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming (Vintage)" which is one of the best book purchases I have made. Another TED speaker is Steven Pinker. I now have 3 of his books. His books are not only fun but provide good cerebral exercise even though I disagree with much of what he writes. Milton Friedman is another great speaker whose videos persuaded me open my wallet. I have since purchased 4 books by Milton Friedman among which is Capitalism and Freedom: Fortieth Anniversary Edition—a great read. On the website Uncommon Knowledge—where great authors and thinkers are interviewed—I found out about "Victor Davis Hanson" who mainly writes about war and war history.

Sometimes my professor or teacher will recommend or require books to read for the course. Dr. Kearl, my econ 110 teacher had us read "Armchair Economist: Economics & Everyday Life" by Steven Landsburg. I now have 3 of Landsburg's books, 2 of which (including Armchair) were awesome. One of my design teachers, Eric Gillett, recommended "The Brand Gap: Expanded Edition" by Marty Neumeier. I liked it so much that I bought "Zag: The Number One Strategy of High-Performance Brands" by the same author.

Blogs and websites are a great way to find good books and authors. I found Tyler Cowen's blog by simply looking for the best blogs on economics. I have been interested in books that he has recommended which I may read in the future, but I really loved his own book, "Create Your Own Economy: The Path to Prosperity in a Disordered World" which is one of the most original-feeling books that I have ever read. I first heard about it on his blog, but I wasn't convinced to purchase it until I heard him talk about it on a youtube video. I think I got it the day it came out.

Recommendations or gifts from friends are always great. I still remember my friend Andrew Cottle saying, "You have got to listen to this" when he lent me the audiobook "Atlas Shrugged". I had never heard of Atlas Shrugged until then. I am currently rereading it and blogging about it chapter by chapter on the Gentlemen's Renaissance Man's Book Club for Men blog. One of the founders of the GRMBCFM and close friend Scott Lind has recommended some great books—among them are "The Theory of the Leisure class" and "Writing with Style: Conversations on the Art of Writing (3rd Edition)."

Listening to live speakers gives me added energy and interest in books. When Arthur Brooks came to speak at BYU for a devotional, he talked about his book, "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism". It gave such fascinating facts and figures that I also bought "Gross National Happiness: Why Happiness Matters for America--and How We Can Get More of It." Both books are great references for writing.

Radio talk shows interview authors that interest me. I can't think of any books that I really loved, that I first heard about on a radio talk show. Though many times my interest in books has been strengthened after I hear about an author or book a second or third time on a radio talk show.

I find many good books simply cited or quoted in the books I read. I will eventually read "Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention" by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi since he was quoted in at least 6 of the books that I read this year.

Browsing Barnes and Nobles or Borders is always fun. I usually find books that relate to topics that I have been thinking about for a long time.

Part of finding books to read is simply finding the time to start books. The best advice that I have ever heard about reading books is by Tyler Cowen who said, “We should treat books a little more like we treat TV channels.” Many readers have the urge to finish whatever they start. This urge is non-productive. “People have this innate view — it comes from friendship and marriage — that commitment is good. Which I agree with,” he says. That view shouldn’t, he says, carry over to inanimate objects.” If we find that the book we are reading is uninteresting or has low relative value, we should immediately stop and read something else. What we have read is a sunk cost as they say in economics. We should begin reading with the question, "Is this the best available thing in the world that I could be reading right now?" It is okay to start a lot of books and not finish most of them.

Doing Well to silence the ignorant

I just read a profound verse. 1 Peter 2:15: "For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men".

There is much ignorance in the world. I myself am very ignorant even though I study daily. When I read the above verse, I thought of the ignorant arguments of modern-day atheists such as Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Dan Dennett, Steven Pinker and others. Even though these men are very learned, their arguments against religion are ignorant because they have never given religion a fair trial. They rightly attack many false beliefs that too many religious people hold, but they commit the fallacy of composition by supposing that all religious people hold the same erroneous views. Their suppositions about the world lead them to believe that faith and revelation are foolish things. They have influenced many people—sometimes for better, but mostly for worse.

There are many people who are persuaded by atheist arguments. Sometimes these people (atheists, agnostics, secularists) are our very good friends and acquaintances. However if they are honest, these people cannot help but see that we have achieved what they want if we live the gospel. Here are some examples of the differences between religious people and non-religious people.

• A 2004 study has shown that 43% of religious folks said they were "very happy" with their lives as opposed to 23% of secularists.

• When you account for variables, a religious person is 13 percentage points more likely than the nonreligious person to say he or she is very happy. The difference is even higher for Mormons.

• 36% of people who prayed everyday (regardless of whether they attended church services) said they were very happy versus 21% of people who never prayed.

• Religious people are significantly happier than atheists and oddly enough atheists are happier than agnostics of which only 12% are happy.

• Religious people are more educated and less ignorant of the world around them than people who do not go to church.

• When accounting for variables a college graduate is 7% more likely to be a churchgoer than the nongraduate.

• A religious person is 38% more likely than a non-religious person to give charity and they give away 4X more money per year.

• Religious people are 52% more likely than non-religious people to volunteer.

• They are 16% more likely than non-religious people to give explicitly to nonreligious charities and 54% more likely to volunteer for these causes.

• They are far more likely to donate blood.

• More likely to give food or money to a homeless person.

• More likely to return change mistakenly given by the cashier.

(These figures and accompanying explanations are found in the book Gross National Happiness by the economist Arthur Brooks.)

If we are engaged in "well doing" we will silence the ignorance of foolish men. If they really want what our lives embody, they will be persuaded to learn about our faith. Reasoning with these people will not budge them, but what you are, if you are what you ought to be, will call into question all they have come to believe about religion. I personally want to live my life in such a way that people will say, "There must be something special about Mormonism because Gavin is a Mormon."

Destruction and our connection with the future

I was just reading Helaman 13 about Samuel the Lamanite. Samuel, like Isaiah, prophesied of destruction to the people in their day. They not only prophesied of short-term destruction, but long-term—very long-term destruction as a result of wickedness. Samuel prophesied of the destruction that would happen to the Nephites 400 years after the coming of Christ. It seems a bit odd to prophesy about something that would not happen for another 400 years. If the people truly are wicked, which they were in Samuel's time, why would they care about something so far in the future?

It is probably the case that Samuel's prophecies were mainly for us in the Latter-days. The prophecy teaches us that the Lord is consistent with His word. He knows what will happen and we should not doubt that the prophecies will eventually come true. For us, we should prepare for the second coming, which will surely happen. But, the most important point, I think is that even if the second coming is still centuries away we should repent not only for our sakes, but for the sakes of those who we will influence in this life especially our own children.
In the Book of Mormon, the lamanites caused much sin and wickedness because of the tradition of their fathers. In D&C 93 we learn that, "that wicked one cometh and taketh away light and truth, through disobedience, from the children of men, and because of the tradition of their fathers." What we do today will leave a legacy, regardless of whether it is noticed or unnoticed, positive or negative. Repenting not only saves ourselves, but affects our children. Our examples will turn into traditions by which the next generation will be influenced. Therefore, we must repent in order to strengthen our eternal family who will be alive at the second coming. We are connected to those in the past, the present, and the future.

On a related note, we must also preserve a righteous laws to pass on to our children. Righteous laws help people stay righteous. In Helaman 4 and 5, "they saw that their laws had become corrupted, and that they had become a wicked people." Preserving righteous laws will not only help us in the short term, but will help our children in the long term as well. This is one of the reasons why the Lord chastened us to preserve the Constitution. Personal repentance and the righteousness of government are interconnected.

Arguments for the existence of God and accountability

I am learning about St. Thomas Aquinas in my philosophy class. He wrote 5 arguments for the existence of God. Here they are grossly summarized:

1. It is impossible for something to move itself. Everything in motion must have been moved by something else until you must eventually get to an unmoved mover—this is God
2. Everything that happens has a cause, tracing causes back will take you to the first cause of all things—There must be a first causer—this is God.
3. Somethings can exist or not exist, but they cannot change from existing to not existing or vice versa because then there would have been a time when nothing existed, and nothing could have begun to exist. Our existence is due to something that necessarily exists which owes its necessity to no cause outside itself—this is God
4. Things are better or worse. Therefore, there must be something that is best—this is God.
5. Things act intelligently and they must have received their intelligence from somewhere—it must have been God.

Even though Aquinas makes these arguments sound a lot smarter, they are all flawed. In our earthly existence, I do not believe that we will ever have a logical proof for the existence of God.

The reason why I do not think that we will ever discover a logical proof is because God loves us. As soon as we know something we are accountable to God for that thing. People would not change their behavior if they discovered an incontrovertible proof. Therefore they would be more accountable for their actions. Alma 32:19 says, "And now, how much more cursed is he that knoweth the will of God and doeth it not, than he that only believeth, or only hath cause to believe, and falleth into transgression?" Therefore, I think that God protects us by requiring that we develop faith. Our innocence and ignorance can sometimes be a blessing.

Now, to say that there is no proof does not mean that there is no rational evidence for believing. We can know that God exists through experience and witnesses. We often have spiritual experiences, but we do not always recognize them. We must first start with the foundation that God exists in order to see the evidences of Him. As Alma said, "The scriptures are laid before thee, yea, and all things denote there is a God; yea, even the earth, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form do witness that there is a Supreme Creator." I do not believe that Alma meant that one can look at these things and discover God, but that once we know God, we can then see His hand in our lives.

Judge not, What?

Later in when Christ is teaching the Nephites, He ceases talking specifically to the apostles and turns back to the multitude. He starts teaches that we should not judge others.
On the surface this teaching is also foolish. Christ's teachings are not foolish, therefore we must try to understand the proper context of His teachings.

We have to judge everyday. Anyone who has any with principle must be judgmental of some things. To not judge would be to accept relativism. We must not tolerate certain things. He must judge criminals and put them in prison. We must judge between political parties. We must judge between competing cultural conventions. We must judge the person that we want to date and eventually marry. If you reject a date, you judged that he was not worthy of you, if you accept a date, you are judging that he is more worthy. When we walk down the street and see a person who looks troubled and dangerous, we avoid him—this is judging. If we had infinite knowledge, we may have known that the odd-looking person is really a sweetheart, or a millionaire in disguise. But, we don't have infinite knowledge. Knowledge is not free. Because we are so limited in knowledge, we can only judge based on small cues—The way people dress, who they associate with, the way they talk etc.

What I believe that Christ means is that we should not permanently judge others. We have very limited knowledge, therefore we should not judge who is going to hell. That is not our job. Our job is to judge a "righteous judgement" (Alma 41: 14). But, it is God's job to give out eternal judgements. Therefore, we should never judge anyone is going to hell (unless we are told in the scriptures). We also should make sure that we are worrying about our own weaknesses before we worry about the weaknesses of others. When we overcome our own weaknesses, we will naturally be more understanding and forgiving of others. We will not want to give out any permanent judgement.

So, judge righteously, repent, and be forgiving.

Take no thought for the morrow. What?

In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ teaches, "Take no thought for the morrow, for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself." 3 Nephi 13:34
This teaching is horrible. Of course we have to think about tomorrow and organize our lives around long-term goals—especially financial goals. We have to plan and count the cost of our plans and prepare for the future. If this teaching was taken at face value, it would mean that we should not even think about food storage.
As most teachings of Christ, looking at the surface can be misleading. So what did He mean by this teaching. If we look at the entire context, we learn that Christ is speaking specifically to the 12 apostles (verse 25). He is teaching them that they shouldn't worry about what to eat or drink, or about what to wear. The apostles shouldn't worry about these things because they will be taken care of by the Church. The apostles had a very specific task to do—teaching and managing the kingdom. They would be able to focus more on this job by not worrying about what they will eat.
In the latter days, when apostles are called, they quit whatever they were doing before. Apostles are full time. They are given a sufficient amount of money to live. They don't have to worry about money. The money given them does not come from tithing or fast offerings. It comes from the investments of the Church.
3 Nephi 13:34 has a very specific meaning to a very specific group. This is a good example of why understanding the context of a teaching is vital to its correct interpretation.

Spiritual Leeches

We are surrounded by lakes that house spiritual leeches. They are places and people who could potentially harm the sensitive gift of the Holy Ghost we have been given.
Leeches lurk in dark places where they can be hidden. They try and avoid as much light as possible. Sinful behavior does not normally take place in mid-day where everyone can see it. It is done behind closed curtains, or doors. Sinful behavior always tries to hide itself where it thinks it will not be noticed. D&C 50:23-25 explains this principle: "And that which doth not edify is not of God, and is darkness. That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day. And again, verily I say unto you, and I say it that you may know the truth, that you may chase darkness from among you;" A major part of avoiding sinful behavior is staying out of "dark" situations. Places, or people that could be harmful to your spiritual well being. The book of Ecclesiastes shares some advice on how we can accomplish this, the preacher says: "Then I saw that wisdom excelleth folly as far as light excelleth darkness." (Ecc.2:13). Always standing in light and truth is wise, and will allow you to elude contact with spiritual leeches.
Avoiding spiritual leeches is our best option for spiritual well being. Let me explain why. Leeches, once attached to its host, have an anti-coagulating chemical that drains the blood more fluidly from the host to the leech. Sinful behavior in comparison is similar. Sin does not all the sudden appear in someone's life, rather it works its way in slowly, and once one has sinned to a degree, unless stopped immediately, it will be easier to commit greater sins in the future. For example those with addictions or problems with greed first had a small taste, and then things escalated into something they cannot control on their own. Nephi explained it this way: "Yea, and there shall be many which shall say: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die; and it shall be well with us. 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. And others he will pacify, and lull them away into carnal security, that they will say: all is well in Zion; yea, Zion propereth, all is well- and thus the devil cheateth their souls, and leadeth them away carefully down to hell. (2 Nephi 28:7-8, 21). As we search the scriptures we find many instances where this is the case. The first example we find is in Genesis with the story of Cain and Abel: "But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him." (Gen. 4:5-8). In those few short verses we see how a little sin unchecked can become a big problem. There are also examples in the scriptures of righteous men and women who knew what to do when "sin lieth at the door". Joseph while living in Egypt was tempted by Potipher's wife and Joseph was able to resist temptation partly because he knew the consequences of committing such a sin. He states: "There is none greater in this house than I; neither hath he kept back any thing from me but thee, because thou art his wife: how then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?" (Gen. 39:9). We all know how the rest of the story goes, Joseph runs from the "dark" situation that he had found himself in, and we should do the same.
Because of the anti-coagulating chemical that leeches carry, after a leech is removed from its host, the host continues to bleed for an extended period of time. We must understand that the consequences of sinful behavior do not end immediately after the sinful behavior has ceased. If this were the case we wouldn't hear anyone discussing the best food that cures a hangover, or hear any political debate on the topic of abortion. Some sinful behavior has some long term, and even life time consequences (D&C 88:86). It is sad to see the ones we love, or even ourselves submit to sinful behavior, but no matter how much we have been absorbed there is a way out. Christ is the ultimate healer and comforter. Isaiah testified: "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed." (Isa. 53:5). Christ paid the price to become such. As He explained the sacrament to his apostles he said: "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Matt. 26:28). As we dedicate ourselves more fully to his teachings we can feel of his healing power. A story from the Savior's ministry comes to mind: "And it came to pass on a certain day, as he was teaching, that there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and Judaea, and Jerusalem: and the power of the Lord was present to heal them. And, behold, men brought in a bed a man which was taken with a palsy: and they sought means to bring him in, and to lay him before him. And when they could not find by what way they might bring him in because of the multitude, they went upon the housetop, and let him down through the tiling with his couch into the midst before Jesus. And when he saw their faith, he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee. And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason, saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies? Who can forgive sins, but God alone? But when Jesus perceived their thoughts, he answering said unto them, What reason ye in your hearts? Whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Rise up and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins, (he said unto the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy couch, and go into thine house. And immediately he rose up before them, and took up that whereon he lay, and departed to his own house, glorifying God. " (Luke 5:17-24). This is a testament to all that Christ heals both our physical and spiritual wounds caused by sinful behavior.
There are many scriptures that testify of Christ's healing power through the atonement, but my favorite is Alma 7:11-12: "And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people. And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities." There is no one more qualified to heal us than our Savior. He loves us infinitely, and he gave the infinite sacrifice for sin (2 Nephi 2:7). He is our infinite Savior, and therefore saves us infinitely. We must come unto Him to receive the healing and forgiveness we need.
Eventually we will all be bitten by a spiritual leech. Let us immediately recognize our sins when they occur and learn to come unto Christ with a broken heart and a contrite spirit for healing to take place. We then must avoid the dark and stay in the light.

Cleave

GENESIS: 2

24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS

SECTION 42

22 Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else.

SECTION 25

13 Wherefore, lift up thy heart and rejoice, and cleave unto the covenants which thou hast made.

With my marriage coming up in a little less than a year, I have developed a strong interest to know exactly what I am committing myself to. While thinking about the subject a single word kept coming back to me: cleave.

cleave

   [kleev]

1.

to adhere closely; stick; cling.

2.

to remain faithful: to cleave to one's principles in spite of persecution.

I like the slogan I've often seen on television, "Verb, it's what you do", not, "Verb, it's what you ought to be doing." The word cleave is a verb. Once we understand what words mean, it is makes "to engrave them upon our hearts" a more meaningful commitment. In the world today, the society in which I have been raised, cleaving to one's wife is not portrayed well. The commitment of marriage is seen as limiting and degrading to a man, while living an immoral, single life with "no strings attached" is glorified and set as the role model for us by media and celebrities.

Though, I'm sure many of us are already well aware of this.

Have any of you seen Dick Van Dyke? It's one of my very favorites, in fact, I would say it is my favorite television program. In a particular episode titled The Man from Emperor, the main character Rob Petrie is faced with the very same issues I described above. His reactions and defense for his family strong values are admiral and warm my heart. Below is a link to watch the conclusion of the episode. For a little background, Rob has just come home from a business meeting to discuss a job offer from a magazine known as Emperor, which is known for it's very scandalously dressed women. I think it was meant to be a Playboy imitation of sorts.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/114054/the-dick-van-dyke-show-the-man-from-emperor?c=1237:1522

Though the link is only of the conclusion of the episode (about 5 mins) I hope you will take time to watch the full episode (25 mins). It' not only funny, but teaches even more good values.