The Fine Line Between Good and Evil

The pre-1990 Endowment contained the following exchange of dialogue (Don't worry, nothing under covenant not to be revealed is quoted here):

PETER: ... Do you know who that man is? He is Satan!

SECTARIAN MINISTER: What? The Devil?

PETER: That is one of his names.

SECTARIAN MINISTER: He is quite a different person from what he told me the devil is. He said the devil has claws like a bear's on his hands, horns on his head, and a cloven foot, and that when he speaks he has the roar of a lion!

PETER: He has said this to deceive you, and I would advise you to get out of his employ.

The lesson here is so important! Being beat into the minds of the Latter-day Saints for over a hundred years, it would be hard to believe that it could be forgotten in sixteen. Satan is subtle in his ways. In fact, he strives to appear completely Good and acceptable, and it is only his deception that allows him to gain any ground at all. Latter-day Saint scriptures are abound with revolutionary ideas of "Free Agency" and it is esteemed as one of God's greatest gifts to man.

In the scriptural accounts of the premortal council in heaven, we learn that Satan desired all to be saved. His idea was to enforce righteousness on all creation so that no piece of it could be lost.

Jesus Christ determined to carry out the plan of his Father, which included the great gift of Free Agency, and the fact that some individuals would not choose to return, and some would be lost and perish from their lack of faith and obedience.

The opposing forces here are: a tyranny of forced goodness - Lucifer's plan, against the allowed existence of both good and evil - God's plan.

If every human being could hold true to this idea, the Dark Ages would stay away. Ironically, it was this very concept, holy as it is, that permitted the Dark Ages to occur, and allowed all of the horror inflicted by the Church of Rome to come to pass. Yet, God values man's freedom to choose above all of those consequences.

In reality, no man gets more righteous by being forced to "Choose The Right", because a forced choice is not a choice at all.

Amongst the Saints themselves, removing temptations can be good, especially for the young and inexperienced, however, even that can have its dangers - Children grow up in a "sheltered" Utah culture, but when they step out into the real world, even if it is the warped sense of a real world that is BYU, suddenly they are faced with so much that they are utterly unprepared to cope with, it is overbearing and they cave in. This is why it is important to be in the world, but not of the world. Isolation is dangerous.

When setting standards and laws that affect people outside of the Church, we must be especially careful. We should not presume they hold the same values that we do. To put forth an extreme example, imagine completely removing drinks containing Alcohol of all forms from Utah. On the surface, this might seem like a good idea. After all, to the Mormon, alcoholic beverages are "sinful". However, putting this into effect as a law would prevent Catholic mass from taking place. It seems that one man's sin can be another man's virtue. We are absolutely and utterly not authorized to impose that decision on other people, and as a group who has Polygamy in our past, and in light of the reaction the rest of the western world had to it, it is the mark of complete hypocrisy for us to try to put an end to other people's practices, unless they are harming another person or hurting the freedom of others:

We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
--11th Article of Faith

Even then, we need to be careful. If we perceive someone taking away someone else's freedom we need to ask: Is it consentual? Outsiders may well view the Mormon church as taking away our Freedoms: To drink tea, to interpret the Bible for ourselves, or however they see it. But we have chosen this path. It is our will to submit to these restrictions, and therefore our freedom has not been revoked, but has actually been exercised. Making a decision ahead of time and then holding firm to it is a great example of Freedom of Choice.

I think taking away freedom ("unrighteous dominion") or permitting freedom to be taken away is just as bad as any sin it seeks to prevent, because it thwarts God's divine plan.

So, if each person can choose between Good or Evil that means we need to help teach and persuade others to choose Good, to choose Freedom: The course that allows true Good to exist at all (and Evil, as well).

Because "Choose the Right" seems to carry a political message with it and flirts too closely with Satan's plan, I call this "Choose the Light" -- indicating the way of enlightenment. Step out of the Dark Ages and allow man to think for himself.

Misunderstood LDS Temple

Although I totally dig the Temple, I think the ever increasing trend to Mainstream the Church has created a strange and unnatural dichotomy. The difference between the "Sunday" Church and the Temple is so stark and vast that I believe it actually hurts many who go through the Temple for the first time, or even every subsequent time.

The Church has worked hard to present itself as a mainstream flavor of popular Christianity, perhaps as a way to gather converts (or maybe as a way of appeasing the populace of Utah who are born into the system unwittingly), and in so doing, it has cast aside (if not altogether out) many of the doctrines that mark our distinctive theology and enlightened understanding of the after-life.

Steps have been gradually taken to modify the Temple Ceremony in order to minimize the impact, but they are in a tough bind: The Temple contains eternal, unchangeable ordinances. Straying too far off the mark would invalidate them. So only miniscule and gradual changes are made here, where the rest of the Church can be recast to fit any Public Relations need by publishing a few new Sunday School manuals, and merely omitting the interesting (offending) parts.

I do not believe this is a deliberate attempt to throw off the Restoration, but that cultural differences and generations of born-in-the-covenant members have failed to receive the further light and knowledge which was had by their grandfathers. They are making a sincere effort to do what they believe is right, to retain members, to gain converts. But anyone who studies Church History soon learns that the official histories of our day are like Fairy Tales compared to what has actually transpired.

The funny thing, I think, is that if the modern Converts, with the aid of the Internet, could start deciding what would help them, instead of those born into the Church, we would have far less cover-ups. I, for example, am a convert. In the process of investigating the Church, any thinking young person would naturally study it the same as any school subject - that means turning to Google.com for many, and we become painfully aware of the Cover-Ups involved in history. But, those who do, and yet join anyway are not ashamed of the things being covered up. The cover-ups themselves are what we see as shameful, and cause more harm than the doctrines, history, and practices supposed by the "Molly Mormons" to not be faith-promoting.

Give us the meat. Everyone knows that the meat must be eaten before the milk (dairy) or a meal isn't Kosher. Don't give us the pearls before swine line. We aren't swine, and take offense at being considered unclean animals. Meat is presently not given at all, it must be sought after on the Internet and in old books.

If the Church would embrace its "strangeness", and encourage study of things like the Temple, in a respectful manner, many valuable preparations could be made by studying the Old Testament, or extra-biblical Jewish histories and commentaries, for example, which would make the Temple a comfortable and spiritual experience for the first time patron.

The focus should be on converting people instead of getting converts. Getting a convert is nothing, if they are only going to fall away or feel uncomfortable upon future study and research, and feel betrayed by misleading statements received in their "youth" in the study of the Gospel.

I was reading several people's anonymous comments on the Internet about their reaction to their first Temple experience. It is extremely plain to me that numerous people go through the Temple, tolerate it, and due to peer pressure are prodded to lie and say that they enjoyed it. It gnaws at their minds and they either deal with it until they become numb to it, or some time, maybe years later, they fall away.

It just shouldn't be that scary. The answer isn't to make it less scary by altering the ceremony, it is to make it less scary by teaching and preparing people for the experience, by gaining true converts to begin with. If they feel more comfortable being a Protestant, let them BE a Protestant. We don't need them occupying space in our chapel if they are not interested or open to the Fullness of the Restored Gospel and if they are preventing those of us who are truly there to Fellowship, Worship, and Learn, they are stumbling blocks to the Saints.

That may sound harsh - But rather than throw them out, lets try to really convert them.