There’s other things like “In the name of thy Son Jesus Christ, amen” when bearing testimony. Are you bearing testimony to God the Father, or to us? If the latter, then it should just be “In the name of Jesus Christ, amen”. Of course, you “bear testimony”, not “bear your testimony”. “I bear testimony that …”, not “I bear my testimony that …”.

One that I don’t think many pay attention to is child blessings where the name is given. There is many faces to this. First, you start off by addressing your Heavenly Father, stating your intention to name and bless the child. Then, after doing so, the prayer should become a blessing. This means that when blessing the child, talk to the child as if they were actually listening to what you were saying. Don’t talk to God. You’re not blessing him. So, it starts as a prayer, then quickly becomes any other blessing. Second, GIVE the child a name. Don’t tell Heavenly Father what they will be known by on this earth and upon the records of the church. Actually take the time to GIVE the child a name. Something like “We take this child in our arms to give him/her a name and a blessing. And the name I give him/her is Adam Smith. Adam, at this time, we give you a blessing”. Even though the naming of a child is not an ordinance, it should be treated like one when speaking. The blessing is an actual gift, so give the child the name, then give the child a blessing.

However, the worst of verbiages in our religion is knowing that a physical object is true. We use it without thinking about it. “I know the Book of Mormon is true”. This probably doesn’t sound out of place to you, because you’ve heard it a thousand times. Yet, have you thought about it? Would you say “I know my computer is true”? Or, “I know this desk is true”? Of course not. That’s silly. Yet, we say it with straight faces with “heavenly nouns”. Well, it’s really strange, and people outside of our faith probably look at us with odd looks when we say “I know that the prophet is true”.

Probably what should be said is “I know the Book of Mormon teaches truth”, or “I know that the prophet will not lead us astray”, or “I know the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches fullness of the everlasting gospel”. See the difference? To say a noun is true, such as a physical object or person, means that the noun exists in physical space. Of course the Book of Mormon is true- it’s in your hand. Of course my desk is true- I’m typing on it. To say that a noun is false, is to say that it does not exist. Even then, it’s still very strange verbiage.

Of course, as members, we all know what you mean. You mean to say that the Book of Mormon contains truth. You mean to say that the LDS Church teaches truth. But, it’s strange to say that a physical object is true. Computers only do what they’re told; they are completely deterministic. So, one could say that computers always speak the truth. They certainly don’t lie or give you false information. They only give you what they were told to work on. So, you could say “I know computers are true”, but that’s strange.

I’m probably beating a dead horse, but it would be nice if we could clean up some of our verbiage. Maybe I’m being nit-picky or a bit silly. Maybe I should just put up with it, and let it go. We all talk silly in all walks of life. But then, I know that the English language is true.

No. Of course not. Think about it. Is the prophet inspired by the Holy Ghost when he decides to have Cheerios in the morning for breakfast? Is the prophet inspired to talk to his secretary about something, instead of going straight to his office? What about when playing with his grandkids or great-grandkids? Was playing with the toy trains an inspired action? You could easily say that the Holy Ghost will only inspire you to do things that pertain to your salvation, and the prophet is no different. The Holy Ghost isn’t going to sit here, and tell the prophet every minute detail of every nanosecond of his life, what he should do.

Actions are one thing, but what about things he says? I have no doubt that the sermons he gives over the pulpit are inspired. I have no doubt that when counseling the church on matters of doctrine, he is inspired. But is everything that comes out of his mouth inspired? Surely, he won’t lead us astray. We’ve been told that. But, does the Holy Ghost need to babysit every verbal utterance? No, of course not. You can’t tell me it’s inspired when he tells his wife “I love you”. It’s romantic, sure. But inspired? Maybe habit. Or how about when he expresses his political opinions on things of government. Inspired? Maybe, actually. But, maybe not. The prophet can certainly have an opinion without the Holy Ghost. Of course he can. This doesn’t make him apostate or evil.

So, while I appreciate everything the prophet does for us, he’s not always inspired. The prophet is still human. He has his own personal opinions and attitudes that do not directly conflict the teachings of the LDS Church, and that’s okay. So, while I will certainly follow the prophet, this doesn’t mean I’m not allowed to question why I’m following a certain directive. You should question everything, actually, but I’ll save that for another post.

So, in my interview with the stake presidency, I was wearing a light blue shirt and tie, with khaki slacks. After the interview concluded, I was told that “the brethren have told us to remind all priesthood bearers to wear white shirts at their temple recommend interview”. A white shirt? Seriously? Will I be turned away if I am not in a white shirt? Will I be prevented from attending the temple, because I cannot renew my temple recommend, because I was not in a white shirt at the interview??

Now, in my opinion, that is an abuse of authority. My worthiness to attend the temple does not have any bearing on how I am dressed in the interview. It only has to do with how I answer the questions in the interview itself, of which pornography is not specifically listed.

This is not the first time in this stake that I have been told I would be turned away, if I am not dressed according to the standards of my local leadership, and wearing a white shirt. I have been called as a teacher in elder’s quorum. During January, I wore a formal chinese shirt to church to celebrate Chinese New Year beginning Monday. It also happened to be the day I was teaching my lesson. Of course, I explained to the quorum why I was wearing such a shirt, and that I like to show my outward expressions of celebrating other cultures. Well, I guess a counselor in the elder’s quorum presidency was not happy with me.

A few weeks later, I had my PPI with this elder’s quorum counselor. At first, it started well. Then, the questions started getting weird:

Do you say individual prayers every morning?
Do you say individual prayers every evening.
Do you say family prayers every day?
Do you pray before your meals?
Do you read your scriptures every day individually?
Do you read your scriptures every day with your family?
Are you having weekly family home evening?
…

This line of questioning went on and on for about 15 minutes. I thought it was strange, personally, but I guess this is a personal priesthood interview. Maybe this is how they are supposed to go. When I served in the elder’s quorum presidency, I certainly didn’t handle them this way. I was more interested in how the elder was coming along in general with his family, and how the families he home teaches were doing. My interviews never went longer than 10 minutes, if I could help it.

This interview went approached an hour.

After the line of questioning, I was then told that our previous stake president, who has since been released, issued a line of rules that all members of the stake needed to follow. Some of these rules were:

1. No drinking caffeine.
2. No watching television when you travel.
3. You must be in Sunday best dress attending temple recommend interviews.
4. …

The list went on. He began to tell me this list contained some 30-45 items of things we were expected to follow as members of the stake. I thought it strange that the stake would be so anal retentive on rules and regulations. So far, the interview wasn’t going well. It was just strange. Then, in my opinion, it took a turn for the worse.

He started getting nervous. His voice was shaky, palms were sweating and he was avoiding eye contact. He was about to tell me something that he didn’t want to, but had to. What could it be? It turns out, by me wearing a chinese formal shirt to church, to celebrate Chinese New Year, this caused quite the ruckus with the quorum presidency, and likely the bishopric. In my interview, I was told that when I am teaching, I must be in a white shirt and tie. I am not allowed to wear any other shirt. While he appreciated my celebrating another culture, if I were to show up to church without a white shirt, on the day I was to teach, I would be turned away, and told to go home and change before I can come back.

Needless to say, I was offended. I was upset. Now, for the first time in my life, I understood what it must feel like to to leave the church because someone offended you on your choice of clothing. As odd as it sounds, if I didn’t have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, I would have turned away. I would remain home, and not attend church for some time. However, I have a testimony of the truths taught in this church, and I have too much respect for my family to not set an example for them. But I felt that pain.

What is it with white shirts and our church? I understand the symbolism, and I can accept that when performing ordinances. But, attending meetings or interviews? I thought the important thing about the Gospel of Jesus Christ was just that- the gospel. Last I checked, white shirts weren’t part of that gospel. Unless, of course, we’ve gone back to living the Law of Moses. Now, I understand the need for best dress on Sunday. I even understand why missionaries and positions of leadership are asked to wear white shirts. But, I don’t understand it for the general population.

What is it about white shirts that is so important? Why will I be turned away from teaching a lesson if I am not in a white shirt? Why will I be denied renewing my temple recommend if I am not in a white shirt? I’m not trying to kick against the pricks, I just don’t understand the importance of white shirts. Maybe someone can enlighten me.

Now, to be clear, I take no reservation against those who have made it a personal decision to not watch R-rated movies. An old friend of mine does not watch any rating higher that PG in his family. I commend him for his decision. No, my issue is with the judgement of those in Utah, who think to themselves that you are lesser than they, because you watch R-rated movies. So, I set out to set the record straight. What exactly is the LDS Church’s position on watching R-rated movies? Turns out, there isn’t one.

On one occasion in 1986, President Ezra Taft Benson, while addressing the youth of the church, made a reference to watching R-rated movies. His talk is titled “To the ‘Youth of the Noble Birthright’”. Taken in full context, here is what he said:

Young men of the Aaronic Priesthood, remember the scriptural injunction “Be ye clean who bear the vessels of the Lord.” (3 Ne. 20:41; D&C 38:42; see also Isa. 52:11.) Remember the story of Joseph in Egypt, who hearkened not to the wife of Potiphar and maintained his purity and virtue. (See Gen. 39:6–20.)

Consider carefully the words of the prophet Alma to his errant son, Corianton, “Forsake your sins, and go no more after the lusts of your eyes.” (Alma 39:9.)

“The lusts of your eyes.” In our day, what does that expression mean?

Movies, television programs, and video recordings that are both suggestive and lewd.

Magazines and books that are obscene and pornographic.

We counsel you, young men, not to pollute your minds with such degrading matter, for the mind through which this filth passes is never the same afterwards. Don’t see R-rated movies or vulgar videos or participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or pornographic. Don’t listen to music that is degrading.

It seems very clear to me, that the edict for the youth to not watch R-rated movies has a purpose: to not “participate in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive, or pornographic”. In fact, a great deal of that sermon is for the youth to pay special attention to the distractions of life, and to “not pollute your minds with such degrading matter”. It’s a clear warning shot to the youth, to understand what sort of world they live in, how impressionable they are, and how to counteract it.

There is no edict to abstain from watching all R-rated movies to the general population of the LDS Church.

Now, one could argue that many R-rated films contain this sleaze and filth, to which I agree. I would even agree that it is more likely you will find this filth and sleaze in an R-rated movie, than a PG-13. However, I would also argue that President Bensen would put PG-13 movies in that category as well. Today, we have the Internet in its full glory. The Internet doesn’t have a rating, yet it is trivial for youth to search out this sleaze and filth. Should we as an LDS Church avoid the Internet, because it is not rated (NR)?

Leaders of the LDS Church have made it very clear where they stand with regards to moral cleanliness. Pornography, masturbation, adultery, fornication, immodesty, suggestive entertainment, etc. has all been very clearly communicated over the pulpit. But R-rated movies? It’s just not there.

In the past two years, have you viewed any pornography?

I’m sure I had a confused look on my face.

No, but why do you ask? I just told you I live the law of chastity.

In my opinion, this is an abuse of position. According to Elder Dallin H. Oaks, in the 2005 General Conference had this to say about pornography being raised in the interview:

Some have suggested that pornography should be a separate question in the temple recommend interview. It is already. At least five different questions should elicit a confession and discussion on this subject if the person being interviewed has the spiritual sensitivity and honesty we expect of those who worship in the house of the Lord.

This seems to be a direct call to bishoprics and stake presidencies worldwide to not worry about it. Don’t ask it. It’s already in the interview in at least 5 different questions. And, the counselor was not inspired to ask the question. Turns out, he asks that question to everyone. My wife received the question, and I learned of others in the ward who had been asked that as well.

This is not a new interview question. It’s not in the handbook. This is a result of President Gordon B. Hinckley raising awareness for the issue many times in General Conference and other meetings in the LDS Church. I have had bishoprics clarify that the Law of Chastity includes not entertaining pornography, as well as masturbation, but never has it been raised as a separate question. It seems that stakes and wards are taking it in their own hands to determine what should be asked in the interview. It’s one thing to be led by the Holy Spirit. It’s another to make up your own questions.

The motivation for bringing the site back up was the recent news that Harold Camping has been making regarding The Rapture. I would like to provide commentary on what an LDS member thinks of this situation, and what the doctrine of the LDS Church is. Those posts will be coming up in the next few days.

Anyway, for those astute readers who still have my feed in your RSS reader, I’m back!

We started about 6-8 weeks ago, and we have not been 100% faithful in keeping that goal. However, it is only 11 pages per day. Just reading out loud, it takes about 30 minutes. Not too bad.

Why do this? Last year, President Gordon B. Hinkley challenged everyone to read the Book of Mormon by the end of the year. We did not do it, so have decided to take it a step further this year by reading everything cover to cover. We’ll make it.

The best part? As I am going along, I am putting a small checkmark in red ink to every reference to Jesus Christ, keeping running totals by chapter and book. Ultimately, I would like to see what the final count is once we finish. These references include nouns, pronouns, symbols and metaphors both in the first, second and third persons.

Right now, I should be at Judges chapter 1, but rather, I am at Numbers chapter 1. So I am a little behind. I’ll catch up.

You should see it. You should feel it and heft it. It is beautiful. It is trully a marvelous book. Even if I don’t agree with it’s teachings 100%, I will trully cherish this book.

The book is nearly 3 inches thick. It has a georgous cover with full color glossy pages. Looking through the book, it is extensive. The prologue, foreward and first 20 or so pages cover the meaning of the Qur’an, a little bit about its translation, and such. The most impressive part of the book however, aside from the message, is the extensive amount at which the publisher tries to get the reader to understand how to pronounce the Arabic vowels and consanants.  Included with the book are a letter from CAIR and a bookmark with an Arabic vowel and consanant pronunciation guide.

I would like to type what came from the letter.

“This is a book that We have revealed to you (Prophet Muhammad) so that you may lead mankind out of the depths of darkness into the light.” (The Holy Quran, 14:1)

Greetings:

Thank you for requesting your copy of the Holy Quran, Islam’s revealed text.  This is an important step toward understanding and coming to appreciate the universal teachings of Islam.

I hope you will take the earliest opportnity to read its verses and reflect on their meaning, thus doing your part to promote mutual understanding and tolerance of religious diversity in America.

As you may know, Muslims regard the Quran as the inerrant Word of God as revealed to the Prophet Muhammad in the seventh centure CE.  Coveyed by the Archangel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad in Arabic, the word “Quran” itself means “recitation.”

Translations of the Quran are an approximation of the Arabic revelation, though the larger themes of monotheism, justice and brotherhood transcend the limitations of language.

Muslims are taught from an early age to treat the Quran with great care and respect.  For example, Muslims avoid placing the Quran on the floor, near the toilet or sink, near the feet, or in dirty or wet areas, as this is considered inappropriate treatment of a holy text.

Many Muslims hold the Quran by taking it in both hands as one would a valuable piece of art and keep themselves in a state of ritual purity, washing before opening the holy book.

Just as Muslims are expected to treat the religious texts of others with the utmost respect and courtesy, so too do we hope that you will take the information above into consideration when handling the Holy Quran.

I hope you find your Quran both educational and spiritually uplifting.  Congratulations on doing your part to encourage greater interfaith understanding and mutual respect at this crucial time in our nation’s history.  If you have any questions about handling the Quran, call CAIR at 202-488-8787, or email cair@cair-net.org.

Sincerly,
Nihad Awad
Executive Director, Council on American-Islamic Relations

CAIR, America’s largest Muslim civil liberties group, has 31 offices and chaperts nationwide and in Canada.  Its mission is to enhance understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

Well, I am excited.  Not only to read the holy text, but to talk about it with friends and family.  I am most certainly not questioning my testimony in the LDS Church, but rather, looking at expanding my cultural and religious knowledge.

When serving my mission in Toronto, Canada, the most warm and inviting people were those of the Muslim faith.  They were always willing to invite us into their homes and feed us.  Heck, we had more “dinner appointments” with Muslims than members of our own church!   In fact, while serving, I received a paperback Qur’an.  I have studied much of it, and have enjoyed what I read.

Anyway, I hope that other LDS members, and Christians in general, can also expand their religious and cultural paradigms.  Just because we belong to one faith does not mean we cannot be elightened by another.

Let’s think about this.  Murder.  There are laws against murder to protect the citizens of the society.  Same with stealing, drunk driving, drugs, etc.  So, now, I am going to pose another topic, which as been fairly of hot debate lately.  Notice what happens to your blood pressure, and emotions.

Should the government allow same sex marriages?

Immediately, definitely if you are a proclaimed Republican, you say with a loud resounding NO!  Of course not!  It goes against everything we believe.  Gay activies are a sin and an abomination in the eyes of God.  Plain and simple.  I don’t think we need to clarify any further.

Now ask yourself why not.  Why should gays not be allowed the right to marry?  Because it’s a sin?  Careful, you just agreed that religion should not impose itself upon government.  But same sex marriages is an exception, right?  Well, what did we define the purpose of government to be?  Protect the citizens from the risk to others.  Tell me, what risk are same sex marriages presenting to you?

Again, going back to agency, God has given us the right to rule ourselves.  We have our agency.  So, whether or not we pass a law that allows same sex marriages, the law will not change the actions of those people.  So why not give them the same rights as a husband and wife?  Why not give them the legal rights to make life and death decisions for their partner?  I am not condoning the gay lifestyle, at all.  It is wrong, and a sin, as mentioned before.  But is giving them the right to marry a sin?  Are you sinning by seperating the religion from the government?  Interesting question, isn’t it?

Believe me, this took a great deal to swallow.  The principle is taught in the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and even the New Testament.  Setting laws and forcing someone to live the principles of religion is ungodly and sacreligious.  It is against the greatest gift that God has given us, the gift of agency.  When the Millenium comes, then will the laws of God be the laws of the people.  Until then, it is completely within the Plan of Happiness for people to exercise their agency, and for everyone else to allow them that right.