Random Thought #41

I had a hard time coming up with an ID and a proper name for this blog. Usually most blogs have a theme or subject to them. I've seen blogs about certain technologies, couponing, a particular topic, all sorts of stuff. I wanted to find something that would best describe what goes on in my brain. I ended up with Random Mormon luckily enough. The best part about this title is that it allows me to jump from topic to topic and not actually have a theme. That's how my brain works. It never stays on a topic long enough to fully express everything there is about a topic before it jumps on to something else. The random factor is my theme. It kind of reminds me of some old adages such as "The only constant is change" or "the more things change, the more they stay the same".  I guess my adage would be, "my brain can be so unpredictable; if you don't like the way I think, stick around 5 minutes and my thought will probably change" :)

Random Thought #40

Remember when its Christmas morning or the day of your birthday, especially when you were young? Remember how your parents always reminded you to call those people who sent you gifts and thank them? I think that was a great start, but its kind missing the point. If you think about it, why are you calling them? When you were a kid, it was because your parents told you to. When you're an adult, why do you do it? When do you do it? Do you call them before or after your open the present? If its after, then why are you thanking them? What do you say? Thanks for the "such and such". We are thanking them for a particular material gift we've received. Wouldn't it be so much better if we called and thanked them for thinking of you on your special day or during Christmas? They would probably be a bit surprised too when they ask you, "so what do you think of the gift I got you? Do you like it?" when they hear your response that you don't even know what it is yet. I think this could help with ungratefulness too. If you call someone to thank them for thinking of you, it doesn't really matter what you get. Just a thought.

Random Thought #39

In this same article I've been referencing, there was a note about some of the text in the creation story. One of the things that caught one of Joseph Smith's contemporaries off-guard (can't remember his name) was when Elohim cursed Lucifer and said "on thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life". If Lucifer had appeared as a serpent, wouldn't he already be on his belly? Well if we take things literally as post #37 suggests, that would seem to say that snakes didn't get around on their bellies before that time. Well that just seems ludicrous. Are we possibly suggesting that snakes had legs? Actually, yes I am. As I'm going through this latest of my Hugh Nibley books, there are several vignettes that illustrate serpents as walking around on legs. I was curious so I googled it and found that archaeologists have now found a fossil of a snake down in Argentina that not only had legs, but a hip bone as well. Some things are hard to believe simply because we have had a set doctrine/life/set of experiences to draw from, which don't include these somewhat unbelievable things in them. If we hadn't been told the story of how the Lord lit the stones for the Jaredites in the Book of Mormon, would we have believed such an event occurred? Remember, the scriptures are quite literal, and when applying a bit of logic, its amazing what can be revealed. We just need an open mind, a desire for truth, and the knowledge of how to properly attain that knowledge. God himself said that whosoever asketh, shall receive. Start feasting on the scriptures and ask some of those questions you've been afraid to ask before.

Random Thought #38

Do we sometimes fall into the trap of sustaining our leaders so well, that we believe them to be infallible? Every word they speak is prophetic and revealed to them? If we challenge them, that we are somehow not worthy of the temple because we aren't sustaining our leaders? In my last post, I mentioned that Joseph Smith and Brigham  Young disagreed on the topic of how father Adam came to be. As I read the footnotes of the article in which this was mentioned, it says that just because Brigham Young was President of the Church and prophet at that time doesn't mean that everything he said was prophetic and revealed. He was a fallible human just like any of us are and is entitled to his own opinions. The scriptures clearly teach us that if we are to understand truth, we must do so by the spirit. The Holy Ghost will make manifest all things unto us which are true. If President Young were simply expressing an opinion and not necessarily teaching by way of the Holy Ghost, then its very possible that something he says is incorrect. It is always healthy to question, not for the sake of questioning, but to find truth. If something is taught by the spirit and understood by that same spirit, then both are edified and uplifted. Like any truth we seek, the Lord has told us that we must study it out in our minds and come up with our own answer and then ask God if it is right. The Brother of Jared is a great example. He asked the Lord, how are we supposed to breathe in our ships? There aren't any holes. He thought about this for a long time and then finally asked the Lord, at which point the Lord told him to make stopper plugs. Then he came to another issue. What should they do for light? The Lord said, good question, what do you think you should do? You can't use windows and you can't have fire. Guess you got a bit of a kanundrum on your hands. So the brother of Jared thought about it and came up with an idea to make 16 stones and propose the idea of the Lord touching them to light them. Talk about some faith. The Lord must have thought it was a good idea, and supplied the light. The point is that we need to think about anything that is said, analyze it, pray about it and ask for the Holy Ghost to confirm our initial thoughts, and the truth will be manifested unto us via personal revelation. We shouldn't just take every single word from the general authorities' mouths as doctrine. We are here to choose, not be blind followers.

Random Thought #37

The more I read, the more I see that the scriptures are very literal accounts. Every LDS scholar I read refers to things in the scriptures as being extremely literal. Even in Christ's parables, he uses examples that made sense literally to the people of the time. They seem a little more allegorical to us since we didn't live during that time and in those circumstances, but everything that is written is very literal. I think many saints don't take the scriptures near as literally as they should. One great example that I recently read about was the creation account. We have 3 accounts of the creation story (Genesis, Moses, and Abraham). All three stick to the basic theme that Adam was created from the dust of the earth and that Eve was created from one of Adam's ribs. Many may not believe that Adam was actually organized literally from the ground. It goes against our natural understanding. Everyone has a physical mother and father right? Adam and Eve had to have had a physical mother and father....but who? The scriptures say that he was created by the Gods out of the dust of the earth. Period. Joseph Smith stuck to this notion on many occasions, last of which was the King Follett discourse. This even puzzled Brigham Young as he made the statement that he personally believed that Adam and Eve were the offspring of someone from another planet and they were transplanted here and allowed to procreate in order to start things off on this planet. This was while he was the President of the Church. Imagine that!! How could Joseph Smith and Brigham Young see one issue so differently? Check my next thought.

Random Thought #36

So I found a new book online that is exactly what I've been looking for (at least so far). Its a compilation of articles from various religious scholars that pertain to various subjects, the first of which is astronomy. The very first article talked about how we have to think in terms of what is written and the time and context it was written. This was in reference to the sections in the Book of Abraham that have to deal with the cosmos. Back then, the prevailing thought about the cosmos was very geocentric (Earth is the center of the universe), which makes sense because everything astronomers saw was in relation to where they were, on the earth. This obviously differs from today's modern heliocentric model (Sun is the center; at least of this solar system). Many try to reconcile the two and can't, thus saying that science and religion can't be reconciled. I've always believed that the works of God must be explained by concepts we are capable of understanding. After reading this article and re-reading Moses' and Abraham's encounters with God and seeing the entire universe, I better understand that we can understand God's workings, just not all of them right now, but in due time. One example would be that statement that God's creations are not numbered unto men, but they are known unto him. To take that into perspective, we typically top out our number system in the trillions. Its hard to imagine the next step up. Well, in the cosmos, there are roughly 1 billion stars in our solar system. Our solar system is part of a local group of about 8 or so solar systems. (8 billion stars). This is part of an even bigger group called a supercluster which is made up of 1000s of local groups. (minimum 8 trillion stars). Within the range of our deepest searching telescope (15 billion light years), there are approximately 1 billion superclusters. (Anyone know how much 8 trillion x 1 billion is?) and this is not even a start to the number of his creations. By the way, in case anyone is wondering how far our telescopes can see, 1 light year is equal to approximately 6 trillion miles. So we can see approxiately 6 trillion x 15 billion miles away from us.

Another article I read today gave an astronomical account of the earth's creation. Based on our best estimates today, God started working on this solar systems about 4.7 billion years ago. Considering the numbers above, that doesn't seem too long :) God is amazing isn't he?

Random Thought #35

I read an article today about the early church and how the churches of today are nothing like the church was back then. It was mentioning about the apostles and how they were not really concerned too much about missionary work because they knew the apostasy was coming and soon. They were more just out there sounding a warning voice and sharing the gospel but it was more of a "we know you're not going to listen anyways, but its our duty to tell you the truth". In this instance, they were witnesses. This article was written by Hugh Nibley and he made a statement that makes sense but many in the church misunderstand this title. Apostles are called as special witnesses of Christ. They always have been since the time of Christ. In that instance, they personally knew Christ and testified of him but the point Nibley makes, and I tend to agree with him, is that they were witnesses to the fact that they shared the gospel with others and whether those individuals decided to accept the gospel or not, they did their job and gave them the opportunity. Everyone will have the opportunity to hear the gospel and choose to accept or reject it. That's only fair. Its our job to give them that opportunity and when the great day of judgement comes, each of us will stand before God and be judged.

This of a trial nowadays, there is a judge (Heavenly Father), a Defendant (us), an advocate/lawyer (Christ) and witnesses. Everyone we come in contact with will be a witness at our trial/judgement, even the earth and animals and plants. I know that sounds weird, but they all have spirits too and will all be resurrected. I read about the animals testifying before God at our trial so be nice to them :) The point though is that the Apostles has a charge to share the gospel and be ambassadors for Christ here on the earth. They stand as special witnesses and rest assured, every one of them will be there at our trial. Many believe that special witnesses means that they have seen Christ and therefore can bear personal testimony of his divinity and resurrection. I don't know if that's true or not, but this other definition of being a special witness definitely makes sense.