Happiness Is...

I think nothing in life has given me more insight into the nature and character of our Heavenly Father as being a father myself.

Many people have taught this in various ways over the years, but this may be the first time I have put it into my own words: my greatest happiness in life comes from seeing my family happy. It's not about my money, cars, houses, prestige, degrees, callings, honors, retirement, or even health or legacies; it's about a righteous posterity, seeing the Lord pour out blessings on them as they strive to keep the commandments. Can you see the boy-ish happiness in Chris' face in this photo as he and his beautiful bride exited the Holy Temple? You should have seen it in mine.

Don't Fly With a Cold

My flight home was a most painful event. I thought I would be ok, but the moment we took off my ears started bothering me. I knew the descent would be tough. Was it ever! The last twenty minutes of the flight seemed to take hours. I was in such pain, I couldn't control the tears streaming down my face. When we landed, I couldn't hear anything in my left ear, and barely anything in my right. I was praying my eardrums wouldn't rupture (as has happened once before). I went to the urgent care clinic this morning and was diagnosed with a bilateral ear infection. I can't find the bilateral on this ear diagram, but that's where it hurts. Hurry Z-pack, kick in!

Rich was Robbed on Thanksgiving Day

So I made turkey and sausage/cornbread dressing, and a cheesecake for Thanksgiving. We also had creamed corn, orange rolls, jello salad, pumpkin pie, mashed potatoes and gravy, egg nog, just about everything you can imagine. UNFORTUNATELY, I have no idea how any of it tasted. I developed a raging cold and had absolutely no sense of taste. Is this what they mean when they say life isn't fair?

BYU Out-Flies the Air Force

It was sweet! BYU just ran over-no, flew over-the Air Force in a game that was fun to watch if you're a BYU fan, and I know you are.

BYU took to the air both in passing and in running plays, as evidenced by this photo. Who knew BYU receivers could fly? Or that AF would be so intimidated by flying wide receivers that they would just lie down to keep from being mowed down?

I knew the game was in the bag when the AF mascot just curled up in the fetal position.

Stealthy?

It's not every day that a B2 Stealth Bomber flies over your house. At least, not MY house. While waiting for the All-Star game to start, I was watching the pre-game show on TV and heard a very loud noise outside. It sounded sort of like a helicopter or low-flying plane. I went outside to check it out and saw TWO B2's circling the area, obviously just hanging out before making their fly-over appearance at Busch Stadium in St. Louis.

I hate to say this, but I think we may have wasted some money on these, because they're simply not very 'stealthy'. Oh sure, they don't show up on radars. But who needs a radar when they're this noisy? And that shape? It's cool and all, but even Sheryl Crow could pick it out in a crowd (and remember, she hangs out with communists working out of RV's). I'm telling you guys, a billion here and a billion there, it all starts to add up...

Your Best Questions, My Best Answers, #3

TITHING: DID YOU SAY TEN PERCENT?

The principle of tithing, or giving a tenth of one’s income to the Church, may well have kept more people out of the kingdom than any other. So many people can decide to accept all of the teachings of God so long as it doesn't require much sacrifice on their part, but at the mere mention of tithing, they are ready to reject everything they professed to accept and believe, because parting with a substantial portion of their income is more than they have faith to bear.

There are two issue to consider here. The first is whether there is even a need to make contributions to an earthly organization. My experience is that almost every one agrees that for the Church to function, funds are required, to build buildings, pay the utilities and upkeep, etc., and so they are prepared to donate, well, something, toward the cause. I know many people object to paying for a church leader's wealthy lifestyle we sometimes see in the media (I object, too!). When it is explained that The Church of Jesus Christ has a volunteer ministry, and thus tithing is not going towards paying a local minister's salary, that seems to feel right to most investigators.

The second issue is just how much should be contributed, and this is where many seem to have difficulty. "Ten percent of one's income" is often challenged. A few important points:

• I have read that the word “tithe” comes from the Hebrew word ma'aser {mahas-ayr'} or ma'asar {mah-as-ar'}, and has as one if its definitions “tenth part”, or payment of a tenth part

• One of the precedents for paying tithing is the example set by Abraham, who according to the Bible paid tithes to the King of Salem (Melchizedek)

• Malachi asks the penetrating question, "Will a man rob God?", referring to the person who doesn't pay tithing.

Tithing can indeed seem at first to be a sacrifice for those investigating the Church. In some cases, it is extremely difficult to pay tithing, requiring great faith on the part of the saints that God will somehow provide for them if they willingly give the first ten percent of their income to the Church. Addressing this subject of religion calling upon people to sacrifice, the prophet Joseph Smith is quoted as saying:

Let us here observe, that a religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things never has power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation; for, from the first existence of man, the faith necessary unto the enjoyment of life and salvation never could be obtained without the sacrifice of all earthly things. It was through this sacrifice, and this only, that God has ordained that men should enjoy eternal life; and it is through the medium of the sacrifice of all earthly things that men do actually know that they are doing the things that are well pleasing in the sight of God. When a man has offered in sacrifice all that he has for the truth's sake, not even withholding his life, and believing before God that he has been called to make this sacrifice because he seeks to do his will, he does know, most assuredly, that God does and will accept his sacrifice and offering, and that he has not, nor will not seek his face in vain. Under these circumstances, then, he can obtain the faith necessary for him to lay hold on eternal life. (Lectures on Faith, Lecture 6, P. 58)

Paying tithing, or ten percent of one's income (or better said, what ever amount God requires at a given point in history), makes complete and total sense, but only if it is really what God requires. So for me, it comes down to not so much a question of how much one should pay, but a “first principles” type of question: Is God really asking people to pay tithing? Once one finds the answer to this question, the amount becomes immaterial. I am convinced that any person who knows God exists, knows the nature of God and man’s relationship to Him, and knows that God will only direct us for good, will be eager to know whether God has inspired a living prophet to give a tithing commandment to us.

Your Best Questions, My Best Answers, #2

Why Don't You Believe the Bible?

A question I've been asked many times over the years is actually one of the first questions I had about the Church when I began investigating it. How could the LDS church claim to believe the Bible, and at the same time say that The Book of Mormon was scripture? My question was rooted in my understanding at that time of the passage in the book of The Revelation of St. John the Divine in the Bible, which reads:

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18, KJV)

It just seemed to me that calling The Book of Mormon “scripture” was adding to the Bible, which appeared to be expressly prohibited. I had read that passage in Revelation myself more than once, and had heard others talk about it on several occasions. It seemed rather clear.

However, there were several pieces of information I was missing, which are needed to fully understand the context of the passage in Revelation to which I was referring. Consider the following:

• The Bible wasn't written all at once, such as how one would write a novel. Rather, it was written in pieces, which pieces were assembled over the centuries and even millenia into what we now call the Bible. James E. Talmadge writes:

The word Bible, though singular in form, is the English representative of a Greek plural, Biblia, signifying literally “books”. The use of the word probably dates from the fourth century .... The word “Biblia” was thus endowed with a special meaning in the Greek, signifying the holy books as distinguishing sacred scriptures from other writings; and the term soon became current in the Latin, in which tongue it was used from the first in its special sense. Through Latin usage, perhaps during the thirteenth century, the word came to be regarded as a singular noun signifying “the book”. This departure from the plural meaning, invariably associated with the term in the Greek original, tends to obscure the facts. It may appear that the derivation of a word is of small importance; yet in this case the original form and first use of the title now current as that of the sacred volume must be of instructive interest, as throwing some light upon the compilation of the book in its present form. (James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith, Ch.13, Pg.237-8)

Each book of the Bible was produced as God inspired various writers from time to time. At different points in history, certain writings were canonized (recognized and adopted as scripture by an authoritative body) and bound together in a single volume. Even today, there is wide disagreement among religious groups as to what exactly should be included in "scripture". The Jews accept what is known to Christians as the Old Testament, but reject the New Testament in its entirety. The Catholics have a version of the Bible known as the Douay version, while much of the rest of English-speaking Christianity uses the King James version, which includes fewer books than the Douay version. Most versions of the Bible clearly reference other books of scripture which are not contained in the Bible--books which appear to be missing. So, without going through the litany of how we got to where we are today, let it suffice to say that rather than a divine manifestation wherein God himself handed the Bible in its entirety to a prophet, there has been a human-involved process through which inspired writings have become accepted and included in what is known as the Bible.

• Given the above, the next important point is that the Bible is not put together chronologically. All these books which make up the Bible were written at different times, but were not assembled in the exact order in which they were written. In fact, depending on the version of scripture to which one refers, the books might be arranged according to the importance placed on the prophet-author, or by subject matter (historical, poetical, and prophetical).

• We don't know the exact date that some of the books of the Bible were written, but we do know approximate dates for them. It is clear in most cases that one particular book was written before or after another, by virtue of reference to some historical event or to another book of the Bible.

• The Book of Revelation was written by John, one of Jesus' Twelve apostles. Rrecall that John was given the special promise that he would not taste of death until the Savior returned again to the earth. Historians generally agree that it was during the reign of a cruel Roman emperor, Domitian Ceasar, who was persecuting the Church, that John was arrested, carried to Rome, condemned to death, and plunged into boiling oil. John's life being miraculously preserved through the power of God, he was then banished to Patmos, a barren, rocky little island in the Aegean Sea. According to tradition, he lived there for eighteen months, at hard labor in the lead mines. It was while on Patmos that John received and wrote the revelation known as the book of Revelation, which of course contains the passage to which I had referred in my discussion with the missionaries.

But now, the point: John left the Isle of Patmos and returned to Ephesus, where he much later wrote what is now referred to as The Gospel According to St. John! This fact in itself is enough to show that the book of Revelation was never intended to be the last inspiration God would ever give to mankind, to be written and distributed for our enlightenment.

• Even more amazing is a second passage found in the Bible, quite similar to what is found in Revelation:

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. (Deuteronomy 4:2)

Clearly, the book of Deuteronomy, authored by Moses and found in the Old Testament, was written thousands of years before the book of Revelation. It would be totally illogical to think that everything contained in the Bible written after Deuteronomy is not authorized or inspired by God. The only explanation to all of this must be that when man is inspired to write, and adds words similar to what Moses and John have included in Deuteronomy and Revelation, that the instruction to not add anything is clearly directed at those who would have occasion to copy, print, edit, or somehow disseminate what God had intended to be written, in that particular epistle. It could not possibly mean that God had, at that point, severed all communication with mankind, and would never again reveal himself or give further inspiration to his children!

• One final point to ponder: During his earthly ministry, Jesus made this statement:

And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold; them also must I bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. (John 10:16)

Would it not seem implausible that these "other sheep" to whom Jesus refers would hear his voice, and yet not write down Jesus' teachings? And would not these writings be of great value to the world? Quite simply, this is the claim of the Book of Mormon--that the inhabitants of the western hemisphere were some of those "other sheep", that Jesus kept his promise and did speak to them also, and as they kept the sacred writings as they were commanded to do, these writings were brought forth in a miraculous way for the benefit of people around the world.

In the final analysis, there is really only one sure way to know that the Book of Mormon contains the inspired word of God; that is to know for oneself, independent of all the reasoning of learned men, apart from all the familial and cultural influences that anchor our point of reference, and beyond all possible scientific analysis that may come to bear on resolving the question; to know for oneself, by reading, pondering, and praying about the book until God reveals its origin to the sincere seeker. And one last point to ponder: I would posit that knowing that the Bible is inspired requires nothing short of the same effort.