Talking with a Jewish fellow I work with, it appears he does not believe in Satan per se - rather he is willing to believe there are bad people and evil influences, but not an ultimate evil that is on par with God.
Yin Yang seems to follow the basic Christian idealogy that God and Satan are sparing partners much like Stallone and Bull Hurley in "Over the Top". This may explain why so many people have frustration trying to define Satan. How can there be an omnipotent Christian God if there is an equal and opposite force in the universe that He might lose to? Is the fate of creation really resting on some cosmic wrestling match? If that is so, then the ultimate questions of life should be, is punching below the belt legal? Who gets to wear the spandex and who gets the underwear on the outside?
Moses very specifically shows Satan /Lucifer as subservient to God. Out of all the things Moses could have gleaned from his first experience meeting the Saviour and Satan, he chose to explore the differences between them. Also, out of all the lost knowledge that Joseph Smith (or God - depends on how you look at it) chose to reveal to the world, the chapters discussing the origin of Satan are the pearls of great price in a field, that having found . . . he went out and bought it
Many Christians seem to feel that Satan and God are opposites and equal forces, but modern revelation (specifically Moses in the Pearl of Great Price) helps to vastly clarify the relationship between God and Satan.
And the idea that Yin Yang is similar to the classical Christian view of God /Satan should come as a suprise to no Latter-day Saints, after all, we believe Adam and Eve were the first Christians, and therefore all other religions are off-shoots of apostacy, including Shinto and Taoist philosophies.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
Sober Mormons
Perhaps there's something to be said for the sobriety habits of Latter-day Saints. After all, if we can not get drunk, we have to actually think of something to occupy our time. When you get drunk, you do not really care about the time or even what you are doing, only that the liquor continues. As long as the drinks flow, happiness ensues (at least until the next morning when you realize that not only was your aim bad, but also you were in the wrong room).
Saturday, April 25, 2009
Me, my self-reliance, and I
I gave the EQ lesson this last Sunday, which was on Bishop Edgley's talk from conference a few weeks ago. His talk mentions self-reliance, and I had a few thoughts about that term that didn't make it into the lesson. (Azoy vert dos kichel tzekrochen!) So I thought I would share them here. You're welcome.
I have lots of problems with the concept of self-reliance, and the emphasis we Mormons place on this. There's so much that we simply cannot do by ourselves. We certainly can't return to God on our own, for example.
But maybe this is like the problem some people have with the parable of the ten virgins. As they wait for the bridegroom, five of them run out of oil for their lamps and ask to borrow from the other five. But they refuse to share. The parable used to bother me because the obvious parallel is to us humans waiting for the Messiah, and there are lots of things that we can do to help each other as we wait. But then I realized that the parable is just not about those things. It's about the things we can't share. For example, I must repent if I want to be ready to see God. And no matter how much my brother Herschel repents, he can not repent for me. He can not share that repentance.
So maybe self-reliance is the same. I get mad because there are things we can't rely on ourselves for. But that's silly. I should instead ask myself: How can I make self-reliance a useful principle for me?
It might help if I start with an expanded vision of self. After all, we can talk about a family or a church community or a nation being self-reliant, right? So the self we're talking about can be larger than one person.
Given the nature of our God, is this really so strange? We're told to be one with God, and with each other.
So in the end, I guess I would say that I believe in being self-reliant, because I believe that together with God and with my fellows, I can accomplish anything.
--MOISHE
I have lots of problems with the concept of self-reliance, and the emphasis we Mormons place on this. There's so much that we simply cannot do by ourselves. We certainly can't return to God on our own, for example.
But maybe this is like the problem some people have with the parable of the ten virgins. As they wait for the bridegroom, five of them run out of oil for their lamps and ask to borrow from the other five. But they refuse to share. The parable used to bother me because the obvious parallel is to us humans waiting for the Messiah, and there are lots of things that we can do to help each other as we wait. But then I realized that the parable is just not about those things. It's about the things we can't share. For example, I must repent if I want to be ready to see God. And no matter how much my brother Herschel repents, he can not repent for me. He can not share that repentance.
So maybe self-reliance is the same. I get mad because there are things we can't rely on ourselves for. But that's silly. I should instead ask myself: How can I make self-reliance a useful principle for me?
It might help if I start with an expanded vision of self. After all, we can talk about a family or a church community or a nation being self-reliant, right? So the self we're talking about can be larger than one person.
Given the nature of our God, is this really so strange? We're told to be one with God, and with each other.
So in the end, I guess I would say that I believe in being self-reliant, because I believe that together with God and with my fellows, I can accomplish anything.
--MOISHE
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Mobsters
Schalom! My brothers and I have been very busy of late, but that should be no excuse of course.
Today in Elders Quorum we talked about Joseph Smith's months in Liberty Jail, and there was a quote from the prophet.
Now, there are two things that struck me as interesting here. First, in the US today when we say "the mob," we are always referring to organized crime syndicates.
But Joseph Smith and his judges weren't worried about some mamzer from the mafia sending them to sleep with the fishes. They were worried about the ordinary townsfolk painting their faces black and marching on the jail to take the law into their own hands. (Not that such a thing would ever happen, kine-ahora.)
This kind of vigilante riot used to be common here, but is now almost unthinkable. That's a good thing, I think. The mob we have now is bad, but I'm glad we don't have to worry about the mobs that afflicted 19th century America.
Second, I think that sometimes I play the part of the cowardly judge, locking up my better self for fear of what the noisy crowd would say. The Messiah comes to set the captives free, and that includes each of us. We are in bondage to sin and error, but we can be liberated if we follow the Lord instead of listening to the world.
If we don't, then we are exercising unrighteous dominion over ourselves. We are keeping our better selves locked up, instead of shaking off our chains and freeing ourselves from spiritual bondage. And why do we do it? As Joseph Smith wrote from his dungeon cell in Liberty Jail, it is because our hearts are set on the things of this world, because we aspire to the honors of men. Not only do we fear the mob, we want to join them.
And that's crazy! So, no more mob rule for me. I am walking out of this meshuggenah prison. Freedom fries, here I come!
--MOISHE
Today in Elders Quorum we talked about Joseph Smith's months in Liberty Jail, and there was a quote from the prophet.
“We are kept under a strong guard, night and day, in a prison of double walls and doors, proscribed in our liberty of conscience. Our food is scant, uniform, and coarse; we have not the privilege of cooking for ourselves; we have been compelled to sleep on the floor with straw, and not blankets sufficient to keep us warm; and when we have a fire, we are obliged to have almost a constant smoke. The Judges have gravely told us from time to time that they knew we were innocent, and ought to be liberated, but they dare not administer the law unto us, for fear of the mob.”
Now, there are two things that struck me as interesting here. First, in the US today when we say "the mob," we are always referring to organized crime syndicates.
But Joseph Smith and his judges weren't worried about some mamzer from the mafia sending them to sleep with the fishes. They were worried about the ordinary townsfolk painting their faces black and marching on the jail to take the law into their own hands. (Not that such a thing would ever happen, kine-ahora.)
This kind of vigilante riot used to be common here, but is now almost unthinkable. That's a good thing, I think. The mob we have now is bad, but I'm glad we don't have to worry about the mobs that afflicted 19th century America.
Second, I think that sometimes I play the part of the cowardly judge, locking up my better self for fear of what the noisy crowd would say. The Messiah comes to set the captives free, and that includes each of us. We are in bondage to sin and error, but we can be liberated if we follow the Lord instead of listening to the world.
If we don't, then we are exercising unrighteous dominion over ourselves. We are keeping our better selves locked up, instead of shaking off our chains and freeing ourselves from spiritual bondage. And why do we do it? As Joseph Smith wrote from his dungeon cell in Liberty Jail, it is because our hearts are set on the things of this world, because we aspire to the honors of men. Not only do we fear the mob, we want to join them.
And that's crazy! So, no more mob rule for me. I am walking out of this meshuggenah prison. Freedom fries, here I come!
--MOISHE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)