The Undue Influance of Pop Culture

One of the most fascinating and relevant events to study in Church history is the creation of The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints that was formed after Joseph Smith was martyred.  It is fascinating to study because at that moment in time, their newly reformed church had every resource of truth that we had.  They had the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, the Articles of Faith, experienced leaders of the Church and even the culture of the Church.  The RLDS church had everything...except authority.

Without authority there was no possibility of receiving revelation for the direction of their church.  Thus their doctrine moved whichever direction the winds of popular culture blew.  If you look up the RLDS church today (now call the Community of Christ), you will find precious little similarity between our church and theirs and almost no difference between their doctrine and that of other modern Christian churches (including the ordination of women to the priesthood); yet they claim to be the rightful and direct line from Joseph Smith.  Which begs the rhetorical question, why would Heavenly Father and Jesus make a personal appearance to start a church that would ultimately be no different than thousands of other churches already in existence?

The study of the RLDS church is relevant today because it profoundly illustrates how revelation is an anchor that prevents pop culture from "tossing [the church] to and fro...with every wind of doctrine." (Eph 4:14)  Joseph Smith was instructed in the First Vision not to join any of the other churches.  If we allow pop culture to erase the differences between the restored church and pop culture churches; wouldn't that also violate the Lord's instruction not to "join" other churches by becoming just like them?


The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, sel. G. Homer Durham [1946], 212–13:
I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God.

Redefining Marriage

The following post is my personal opinion and does not reflect any official statements from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

When I was on my mission in Hungary, I saw many breath taking castles.  I marveled at the sheer number of these massive structures, all built strategically on  hill tops or with high walls and strong doors; making them impenetrable to outside forces.  A direct attack on such a fortress would have been futile; yet, each of them now stands abandoned and crumbling.

The question of how defeat found its way into these unyielding  fortresses, foreshadows eerily the current attack on marriage and the family.

Marriage is also a castle.  The adversary has no greater objective in this life than to destroy the fortress that houses the family unit.  But he has no intention of trying a direct frontal assault on marriage because the "baby boomer" generation clings to a solid understanding of marriage and its importance; spiritually as well as in society.  The way you defeat a castle, is to convince the next generation not to live there.  So, he marginalizes marriage with immorality and redefines it in the eyes of the next generation. Then he waits patiently while generations "X, Y and Z" abandon it into extinction.

In September 2013 Steve Young's wife spoke as an advocate at a gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community event.  She said to them, "One of the most beautiful things about this church is that it can evolve.  It may not go as fast as everyone wants, but it is evolving."

The way you can recognize someone that does not understand this issue as it relates to our religion is that they think we are just waiting for an outdated church leadership to come into the now.

Set aside the cataclysmic consequences to society and only consider this issue from a spiritual perspective.  The reality of such a change would mean that we would have to dismantle the temples and discontinue our belief in eternal marriages. 

Our existence here is a similitude or foreshadowing of the lives that will come in the eternities.  A dry run.  A chance to show that we can be endowed with greater power in the next life because we learned to control the power we have on loan in this life.  Specifically to this topic, the power of pro-creation here will become the power of creation in the next life.

The scientific definition of life states that in order to classify something as a living thing it must be able to reproduce.  The Liger (a mix between a Lion and a Tiger) is a perfect example.  It is a beautiful creature but will never be classified as a species because two Ligers cannot mate and make a baby Liger.  Its not a matter of belief, its a law of nature.

Temple marriage is not just a ceremony or a commitment, the sealing power creates a living bond for time and all eternity; worlds without end in the next life.

Simple logic then dictates that a same-sex temple marriage would be an eternal prison sentence; condemning the couple to spend the rest of eternity unable to participate in the greatest and only joy there is in eternity: creation of life.

Those who wait for church doctrine regarding marriage to change, do so in vain.  None the less; traditional marriage will be increasingly seen as a crumbling and outdated castle in the eyes of the forthcoming generations, including some who are members of the Church.  Once marriage is officially redefined at the state houses, our eternal temple marriages will be seen as prejudicial and out dated and temples will become the new focus of this movement in an attempt to force us to perform same-sex eternal marriages.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Who Is Right?

I took this picture on Sunday (3/23/2014) in Paradise, CA.  If you take out the bottom line announcing the "Pre-school and Daycare" services, you'll find a profound truth not often acknowledged by other churches:  Everyone cannot be right.

This photograph is a landmark because traditional Christians have held that it doesn't matter which church you belong to because, "All paths lead to heaven."

In fact, truth does exist which means wrong also exists.   The question is, how can you tell the difference?

I was visiting a Sabbath school a few months ago with a friend of mine from the Toastmasters Club.  A younger gentleman, probably for my benefit, made the comment that he couldn't understand why everyone didn't see the pure logic of their faith.  I was intrigued by this comment because I had been sitting there literally pondering how illogical what they were talking about sounded to me.

When we discuss or discover a spiritual topic we will feel the truth of it by the power of the Holy Ghost.  It is a mistake to try and identify truth through human logic or reason.

Peter lived in the presence of Jesus himself.  Yet, in Matthew chapter 16 when Peter identified Jesus as the Savior, Jesus responded, "...flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee..."

There is only one way to identify the true gospel of Jesus Christ...

Moroni 10:4-5
And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true...and by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

"Implausible Doctrine"

An article appeared a couple of months ago in a college newspaper by a woman named Ellie Schaack called Confessions of a cultural Mormon.  She is not a member of the church, but she grew up living the life of a member in Colorado.

Her article says, "Nearly all of my friends were LDS, and the only way to have sleepovers on Saturday was to accompany them to church on Sunday. The only way not to miss out on fun weeknight activities with the group was to go with them to Young Women. The only way not to be friendless for a lonely week during the summer was to go to Girl’s Camp, which is Mormon sleep-away camp up in the mountains. I’ve acted out scenes from the Book of Mormon between the Nephites and the Lamanites; I’ve sung 'I know a Mormon boy; he is my pride and joy.' I know what it means to CTR (choose the right) and Return with Honor."

Ms. Schaack then goes on to talk about how religious beliefs are preposterous generally and Mormonism specifically.  The interesting part is how the article ends...

"Our generation goes to church less and less. This column is definitely not a plea to go to church more—I recognize that Mormonism made me happier, yet that isn’t reason enough for me to overlook the implausibility of the doctrine..."

Is it the doctrine or the difficulty that is implausible? I've noticed when doing missionary work that many people find that the fruit of the gospel makes them happier, but as they realize the sacrifice of worldly pleasures required for that happiness; suddenly the doctrine becomes implausible. 

Ms. Schaack's article is a perfect example of how a person must first have a desire for truth; a willingness to accept difficult principles and refuse some of the pleasures offered by the world before they can accept the gospel.

Mosiah 3:19
For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord...

What's In A Name?

There has been a hard push the last few years with Mormon.org and the “I am a Mormon” campaign. I posted my own profile as everyone should.

But...is that our name?

I was talking with the pastor at a local church the other day.  We were discussing how his church had decided to change their name to project a more community based image.  This pastor and I are good friends; enough so that he is comfortable commenting humorously about the things he feels are strange about our church.  At the end of the discussion, he threw in a comment about how nice it is that he is able to pick the name of his church.  “Not like your churches that all have to have the same name.”

He shot me a sly grin, as though he had just scored a touchdown.  As he did, the most overwhelming, warm spiritual feeling came over me. We don’t need to pick or change our name;  this is The Church of Jesus Christ.  The is no other name under heaven.  

This is not just our name, its a declaration. 

Since the restoration in 1830 there has been a concerted effort to marginalize The Church of Jesus Christ, by stripping it of its name.  Has it finally worked?  Are we Mormons?

It is an honor to have a nick-name fashioned after one of the greatest prophets in The Book of Mormon, but have we allowed that nickname to replace the true name of Christ's Church in an attempt to appease the dis-approving eye of the world.  

3 Nephi 27:8

And how be it my church save it be called in my name?  For if a church be called in Moses’ name then it be Moses’ church; or if it be called in the name of a man then it be the church of a man; but if it be called in my name then it is my church…