Tag: religion

  • What’s in it for Me?

    What’s in it for Me?

    “Ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”

    John F. Kennedy’s famous quote given in 1961. I think this has become a great weakness of humans today, and society as a whole. There are so few asking, “what can I do for you” and so many asking, “what’s in it for me?”

    There seems to be a great falling away from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There is a great falling away from religion in general. I think part of this falling away is based on this “me first” way of thinking. What does a church do for me?

    I believe there might be a plague in the Church of Jesus Christ of this way of thinking. We all know someone who has left the church for whatever reason. All the reasons aside, there’s often a statement included that the church wasn’t doing it for them anymore, the church wasn’t helping them, or they didn’t see the need of the church.

    I would say, ask not what your church can do for you, but what you can do for your church.

    Now, to be clear, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the greatest blessing in my life, both temporally and eternally. It saved me from the gutters of this life. It has provided me all that is wonderful and beautiful about life. It has provided me a stable family that loves me. It has provided me a wife and daughters who I love. It has provided me a foundation to hold to in a world that tosses us all around. More than all these blessings here, it has also blessed me eternally with a perspective on why I’m here, where I’m going, and what’s truly important. It has provided me light. It has provided me hope. It has provided me love. It has provided me everything. 

    I say again: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints which is how I know of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and Christ’s love for me is the greatest blessing in my life. Both here and for forever. 

    That said.

    The Church (and gospel) of Jesus Christ is not here on the earth for what it can do for me. It is here for me to learn what I can do for others. The Church of Jesus Christ is not here because of what it can do for you. It’s here to help you learn what you can do for others. The Church is a vehicle by which you can learn to be like Jesus Christ. I wrote about this in my post Do We Really want to be like Jesus.

    I think when we truly understand this, the world changes. It’s no longer, “what do I get out of this?” It becomes “what can I do to help someone else get something out of this?” This is what it’s all about. Love. Fellowship. Support. That’s why the Church is here. Not to bless your life. So you can bless lives.

    I’ll conclude with one last question, I hope you will truly ponder: did Jesus ever ask, “what’s in it for me?”

  • The God Question: Intelligent Design, Evolution, and God

    The God Question: Intelligent Design, Evolution, and God

    This is a version of an essay I wrote for a science and religion course. That’s why it has such an “official” tone, and the headlines. I don’t share this because I think it’s an extraordinary essay. But I do think I made some decent points about the “God issue” in science. When you spend this much time writing an essay that fits the theme of your blog, it’s just gotta be shared. So here’s my essay on intelligent design, evolution, and God.

    Intelligent Design and Evolution

    God is the center of the debate between science and religion, and in particular the debate between the theories of evolution and intelligent design. To claim any other conflict ahead of the question of whether God exists is to distract from the root cause that separates these theories. If the question of God’s existence could be solved one way or another, then evolution and intelligent design could coexist and potentially benefit one another. Unfortunately, the existential question of God will never be solved by science. Therefore, with God being the center of the issue, exploring the “God issue” between evolution and intelligent design is the best way to help the two theories reconcile with one another, even if the true question, “does God exist?” is never answered.

    The God Question

    Believers of evolution and believers of intelligent design have more to agree upon than is often realized. However, there is one topic or question that creates a gulf between the two fields. That question is: Does God exist? When evolutionists and intelligent design proponents come to understand this as the main question that separates them, it may be possible to relate and coexist, and therefore grow as fields of knowledge alongside one another. It is the loud voices of ardent atheist evolutionists such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Daniel Dennett who pronounce aggressive disbelief in God, and it is the loud and passionate voices of creationists who oppose belief in the undeniable evidence of evolution that create this void (Wolf, 2006). The milder, middle-of-the-road voices get drowned out by the louder minority. The believer in intelligent design who accepts the facts of evolution and the believer in evolution who can see the merits in intelligent design theory are the voices that bring these two fields to an agreement that benefits both. Intelligent design need not deny many aspects of the theory of evolution. Evolution need not devalue the merits of the theory of intelligent design. At the root of the conflict is the belief in God. Coming to understand God as the major issue and question can bring both sides into more agreement, or at the very least, a middle-ground of mutual understanding.

    Historical Belief in God

    The thinking of the world has transitioned aggressively from a belief in God. While there has been a movement away from God, especially in scientific communities, as can be illustrated in countless scholarly writings such as The God Delusion (Dawkins, 2006) and Why Intelligent Design Fails (Young & Edis, 2014), a large portion of the world still believes in some higher power, some creator that put humans on this earth. It is nearly impossible for a firm believer in God to remove that innate belief from their consciousness.

    In the book The 5000 Year Leap, Cleon Skousen (2011) discusses John Locke’s famous Essay Concerning Human Understanding. “In it Locke pointed out that it defies the most elementary aspects of reason and experience to presuppose that everything in existence developed as a result of fortuitous circumstance. The mind, for example, will not accept the proposition that the forces of nature, churning about among themselves, would ever produce a watch, or even a lead pencil, let alone the marvelous intricacies of the human eye, the ear, or even the simplest of the organisms found in nature. All of these are the product of intelligent design and high-precision engineering” (Skousen, 2011, pp. 95-96). Locke’s thinking agrees with the teleological argument of intelligent design put forth by William Paley in the 1700s (Crashcourse, 2016). Locke continues to expound on this topic by pointing out how a man can come to know God exists. Skousen concludes with Locke’s thinking, “And because any thoughtful person can gain an appreciation and conviction of these many attributes of the Creator, Locke felt that an atheist has failed to apply his divine capacity for reason and observation” (Skousen, 2011, p. 97).

    These examples from Locke are used to illustrate a point. It was not long ago that disbelief in God was deemed a ludicrous proposition. It wasn’t long ago that these theists were the louder voices. Historically, those with no belief in God have been discriminated against and ridiculed similarly to how science ridicules belief in God today. Ridicule of the belief of God is as counterproductive today as the ridicule of not believing in God has been throughout history.

    Attack on God

    An outspoken opponent of theism in the scientific community is Richard Dawkins. One of the basic attacks Dawkins uses against God is comparing belief in God to belief in any number of mythical creatures. Dawkins often refers to belief in God as being similar to believing in a Flying Spaghetti Monster (Dawkins, 2006). Dawkins says that because people believe in something ridiculous like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, doesn’t mean he has to accept it. This analogy is not close to comparable. There aren’t books handed down for centuries about belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. There isn’t a majority of the world population believing in Flying Spaghetti Monsters. We don’t have any support for the existence of Flying Spaghetti Monsters. This is just one example of an unfair attack from the “militant atheism” that Dawkins proposes (Dawkins, 2008).

    Scientists like Dawkins ignore the evidence that does exist out there because it doesn’t suit their needs or beliefs. This is the opposite of scientific progress and something Dawkins is “militantly” opposed to. There are many unexplained phenomena with adequate scientific evidence behind that scientists like Dawkins disregard simply because it’s phenomenal and they can’t understand it. Take, for example, near-death experiences. The catalogs and books being put together of people of different cultures, ages, demographics, and backgrounds all detailing a similar experience is dismissed out of hand. Science is based on observation. If any other phenomena like gravity or momentum had as much documented support as near death experiences that have been cataloged, scientists would explore further, not dismiss automatically.

    Another main critique of intelligent design is that the theory mentions design without defining who the designer would be. The reason intelligent design refuses to mention the designer is obvious. The mere mention of God is liable to get extreme backlash from the scientific community. Furthermore, it leaves the concept open to the many interpretations of the nature of God and who the creator may be across varying religions. This is an example of why the attack on God is counterproductive. It creates the dynamic where intelligent design theory talks about an ambiguous “designer” without simply stating that the designer is a theorized divine creator. God is the answer to the question of who the intelligent designer would be, and yet because of the aforementioned loud minority, God is not specifically mentioned. The issue is that while so many believe in this designer, in and out of the scientific community, no one can say the name for fear of being criticized.

    Intelligent Design within Evolution

    There is plausible proof of many elements of evolution. However, this does not remove the possibility of the influence of intelligent design. That is to say, it is conceivable that the world can evolve while also having the influence of an intelligent designer that planned for this evolution and progression. The two theories need not be at odds with one another. Intelligent design and evolution both have holes and flaws in their theories as Darwin himself admitted (Leddra, 2010). Neither theory is perfect. If either theory were perfect, there would be a definitive answer. That’s why they are still classified as theories. The conflict really comes down to one question: is there a God? This is where the entire conflict between intelligent design and evolution lies. That question will not be answered decisively by either science or religion.

    Science will not answer whether God exists. That will always be a matter of faith. If that question is answered it will mean that God has revealed Himself and His purpose, as science will never disprove God. This is obvious, for you cannot prove that something does not exist. If there is a God and He reveals Himself and His purposes, designs, and methods to humanity, then the conflict between intelligent design and evolution will instantly become a moot point. Humanity will know for a fact how living things came to be. The question of if they evolved, how they evolved, and God’s role in it, and these debates between intelligent design and evolution will become null and void. 

    Conclusion

    These examples showing the change in how God is perceived in both society and science, and how science has changed in the attack on God, go to show the underlying cause of all the controversy. It is ultimately about the existence of God. We can conclude, then, that it is extremely important for religion and science, and their respective theories, to consider how they can coexist with one another. By rejecting even the possibility of a God, science limits itself and its ability to explore the universe. By rejecting evolution, the theory of intelligent design limits its ability to coexist with science. Science will benefit by cooperation between the theories of intelligent design and evolution. This cooperation ultimately hinges on finding a way to reconcile the question of God, for the ability of all theories to progress to their fullest potential, and the furthering of knowledge for humanity.

  • A Wife Who: Message to my 22-year-old self

    A Wife Who: Message to my 22-year-old self

    Find yourself a wife that is kind, caring, and good.

    Find someone you know will be a good mother not by any one action or by any words but by their being; who they are.

    Find someone who will love, uplift, and support you through everything you want to accomplish.

    Here’s an important one: find someone that will love you conditionally. The world says to find someone that loves you unconditionally. That’s too easy. Where is the growth and progression in being loved unconditionally? Find someone who wants you to improve and be better as much as you yourself want to improve and be better.

    Find someone who also wants to be better.

    When two people independently want to be stronger and better, they collectively become stronger and better.

    As important as someone who loves you conditionally, find someone who loves the Lord unconditionally. Find someone who has a testimony of what is important in this life. While the world moves and shakes, find someone with a foundation. So that if ever your foundation becomes weak, you have someone whose foundation is strong.

    Keep your foundation strong for that person as well, so that they can rely on you when their foundation needs shoring up.

    Find someone who wants God to be a part of your life, family, and home. If God is in your home, your home can never fail.

    Find someone with faith. Find someone with devotion. Find someone you can trust.

  • Faith of an Atheist – Bouncing Atoms

    Faith of an Atheist – Bouncing Atoms

    What does an atheist have faith in?

    We all have faith. We have faith that we eat, and the food will sustain our body. We have faith that we drink, and the water sustains our body. We have faith that we breathe, and air sustains our body. We have faith that we will move, and it happens. Every act of our lives is an act of faith.

    As Lectures on Faith Lecture First says: “without [faith], both mind and body would be in a state of inactivity, and all their exertions would cease, both physical and mental.”

    Whether you believe in a Creator or not, this fact remains: all have faith. The only question is: what is your faith in?

    I previously wrote about the faith of an atheist HERE. That post talks about the hope of an atheist. What about the faith?

    If we all live by faith, what does an atheist have faith in?

    The only thing I can think that an atheist has faith in is their self.

    When you remove God from the equation, what else is there? There is you, your mind, your thoughts, your supremacy. Not only that, if there is no God, then this all just happened by chance. You are a product of random chance, with no meaning. You are an object with atoms inside of you bouncing around causing you to do things. If this is all by chance, there is no free will. If there is no God and we are all happenstance, if we are all a great coincidence, then we are Gods, and there are no Gods. There is nothing. There is no point.

    A lack of a belief in God is a lack of belief in anything. If this life is not about a bigger plan then it’s all pointless.

  • Attack on Mormons

    Attack on Mormons

    Legend has it my grandfather has a hidden room in his home for the day that followers of Christ are rounded up like Jews were in Europe during World War II. I spent much time trying to find that room without luck. I’m still not convinced it doesn’t exist.

    Beth and I recently finished a TV show called Under the Banner of Heaven. If anyone wants to see every anti-Mormon falsehood spouted in 7 hour+ long episodes, I highly recommend it.

    A story made headlines recently. A highly recruited quarterback from Utah was visiting an Oregon football game. He left the game when the student section started chanting “f- the Mormons.”

    The play “The Book of Mormon.”

    Southpark parodies.

    Imagine another religion being treated this way. Can you picture the outrage if a student section chanted “f- the Jews” for example? I felt wrong just typing that.

    And yet the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not shielded from this. Why is that?

    Under the Banner of Heaven being my most recent exposure to anti-Mormon media, that’s where I’ll focus this post, with my point at the end. Stay with me. Even if you haven’t seen the show (and despite what I said above, I DON’T recommend it) this will still be pertinent.

    An article was written in the Atlantic about the show. That article can be found HERE.

    If you’re interested, you should read the whole article. It’s well written and helped me understand the underlying feelings I had about this show.

    Here are some highlights from that article that I agree with:

    “[It] felt like seeing my religious life in a funhouse mirror, each detail-from the sacred to the mundane-twisted and stretched and distorted to appear frightening and strange.”

    When talking about the absurd use of the phrase “Heavenly Father” in the show, “But I gave up after a few episodes [counting the weird usages of “Heavenly Father], once I realized what was going on. To say that I have never met a Mormon in my life who talks like this would be to miss the point. These lines were not intended as shibboleths for Mormon viewers-they are there to serve a stereotype, to exoticize a people and flatten their faith tradition.”

    “Under the Banner of Heaven is one of the most openly hostile treatments of a minority religious group to appear in popular American entertainment this century. It is also an unqualified hit.”

    I could go on about the flawed and insulting nature of this show.

    Elder Bednar, an apostle for our church, was asked his thoughts on the show. He responded, “We don’t like it, but we don’t spend all of our time responding to it. We have a mission to fulfill.”

    The writer of the Atlantic article stated he initially felt good about Bednar’s response. Then on further thought:

    “But almost immediately, I doubted myself. Wasn’t I just taking the same path of least resistance – above-the-fray politeness, studious nonconfrontation – that Latter-day Saints always seem to take when faced with stuff like this?”

    This is exactly the struggle I deal with. I am in a constant “polite, studious nonconfrontation”-like attitude. It’s how I was raised. I was pretty heated by the end of the final episode. Episodes 1-6 I was just “bluh.” A feeling of, “whatever. They’re making us look weird, the show is weird.” Then that turned into the show is upsetting me. I found myself having an unsettled feeling after each episode that I couldn’t quite pinpoint. Truly, it wasn’t until reading the Atlantic article that full outrage started to settle inside me. How could a show treat my religion like this? Where would it be acceptable to treat any other religion like this? What’s next?

    It was to the point that I didn’t mention to friends I was watching this show because I didn’t want them to watch it. This included close friends that know me and my religion and (I hope) would see through much of the nonsense of the show.

    I hesitated to share because maybe this fear of others seeing my religion as cooky exists inside me. I know what my religion is. It’s precious to me. It’s sacred. It has provided every blessing in my life, I can’t spit upon and laugh at my Church, it’s too important to me.

    So, Bednar’s statement. I like it, in that, it’s how I would respond. Forgive. Turn the other cheek. Don’t get emotional. Don’t get upset. Above all else, don’t let them see you’re upset. But then, at what point do you stop being a cultural punching bag? Is there a point where you stand up for the church and religion that you love? After all, I know this to be Jesus Christ’s Church. Is a show like this really insulting Him? That causes real outrage inside me that I’m willing to speak out about. Spit on me, spit on my faith, spit on my church and my religion. Don’t spit on Him. Maybe that’s ultimately what got me upset. The idea being perpetuated through this show that it was Christ’s church that caused some extremist men to kill a woman and her daughter. I feel for Brenda’s family, her sister, who rightly pointed out that this show unfairly portrays her murder.

    And as the article points out, where is the apology? Where is the script before the show plays saying “Mormons are not an extremist, murdering people. This is a dramatization.”

    In an age where Disney has to apologize before The Lady and the Tramp, Under the Banner of Heaven needs no disclaimer apology for this? Remember that football player at the Oregon game, Oregon apologized for their student section’s behavior.

    As the article points out, we are moving backwards. Rather, we are being pushed backwards. Saints rarely live peacefully in a wicked world.

    What other religion could be ridiculed, spit upon, and disrespected in this way, without public outcry and support, besides the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

    In our forgiveness, we laugh it off and shrug. But a dangerous thing is happening out there. As Satan does in any dispensation where there are Saints to God, he is stirring up the masses against us.

    This leads to my point.

    The attack of this show on a religion seems like a small enough matter. “Who really cares” some might say, as I did, initially. It does matter. The attack on religion, on faith, on Christ is increasing daily. It seems dramatic to even consider the idea that Latter-day Saints could be rounded up like what happened 80 years ago. We can trick ourselves into thinking we’ve gotten better as a world and as society since then.

    Media attack on faith and on Christ are widespread and increasing. It’s not just the Church of Jesus Christ being attacked when shows and plays and TV openly mock it, it’s all followers of Christ and ultimately Christ Himself.

    This attack is going to increase, and we need to be aware of it. I hope that all my friends and especially those who don’t believe in God realize how important this is to be aware of. Believers need the support of nonbelievers in our defense. Otherwise, this world becomes a scary world for those of faith.

    Maybe it’s time for a return trip to my grandparent’s home to search out that hidden room. I hope it’s not.