I have come to realize that my philosophy of God, will and fate, and the unity of the creation is identical to that of the Stoics. The fact that I came to identical conclusions independently is evidence of it's self-evidence. I found an article that outlines exactly the thoughts I have had about causal determinism and it's interplay with free will.
I have just read an article by the same author on the subject of Stoicism and passions. Many of their ideals are similar to mine. They are close enough that I'm thinking that maybe I'm a Stoic and didn't know it.
Friday, November 28, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
Revelations 22
Using Revelations 22 as grounds for denouncing the legitimacy of the Book of Mormon is piously ignorant. These three facts revert such efforts:
1. Deuteronomy 4:2. According to that passage and using the same sort of reasoning used with Revelations 22 to disprove Mormonism, the entire New Testament is an invalid addition to the Book.
2. When the Book of Revelations was first transcribed, the New Testament did not exist in a compound form. The first known selection of a canon was not until 70 years after the death of John and it is not the same canon that exists today.
3. 2 and 3 John were written after Revelations.
1. Deuteronomy 4:2. According to that passage and using the same sort of reasoning used with Revelations 22 to disprove Mormonism, the entire New Testament is an invalid addition to the Book.
2. When the Book of Revelations was first transcribed, the New Testament did not exist in a compound form. The first known selection of a canon was not until 70 years after the death of John and it is not the same canon that exists today.
3. 2 and 3 John were written after Revelations.
Monday, November 17, 2008
The Mormon and Christian God
I think Mormon's tend to assume that they worship the same God as do most Christians, but really the Father character in each tradition have such drastically different characteristics that they can hardly be considered the same entity.
The most common conception of God the Father in Christianity is a hybrid of the transcendent God of the philosophers and the covenant God of Abraham. He is the progenerator of the universe, omnipotent and omniscient while not interfering with the freedom of human will, benevolent and occasionally vengeful. He is something entirely inhuman, but with human sensibilities which are manifested to mankind in the form of Jesus in whom is contained all the attributes of the Deity.
The Mormon God, on the other hand, is a person of flesh and blood, perfect and incorruptable. He is, essentially, a man who has achieved through his efforts qualities which are ideal and the aspirations of all men. He even has a name, Eloheim. His power comes from his integrity and the hidden forces of the creation which yield to and are commanded by him. He did not make the elements, but they obey him and organize as he dictates. The Mormons believe the universe has always been and do not make any suggestions as to how it came to be or even that it needed to come to be. It just is. The actual capabilities of The Father are not perfectly outlined, but he is generally awarded similar attributes as the Christian God, such as omnipotence and omniscience, though these attributes must be confined to his own sphere of influence. Mormons do not discount the possibility of there being other deities similar to Eloheim who are lords of their own organized worlds elsewhere in the universe. This is why the Mormon religion is more accurately labelled as being monolatristic than monotheistic.
It is an equivocation for a Mormon to say to a Christian that he believes in God. Mormons believe in a Father who is not God. They don't believe God is needed. The reason he is called "God" is because that is how his name has been translated and because he plays essentially the same role in human affairs as God does.
Actually, that last paragraph is not entirely true, but only because the conception of God held by Mormons has changed some. It seems that the differences between the Christian and Mormon God has been deemphasized by the Mormon church. Many now seem to believe that the Mormon God is the same as the Christian God except that he has a physical body. I don't doubt that some in the church consider him to be the creator of the universe which is something that is irreconcilable with the teachings of Joseph Smith. Or it could be that they project that image of God outwardly to the world while inwardly they believe something different. Whether it is merely a deemphasis, an actual change in understanding, or just a change in outward image, the reason for it can only be the result of the evangelical mission of the church. History shows that the result of evangelism is often compromise. This is the primary reason why Catholics have saints and Christmas is celebrated in the winter. This is probably why the leaders of the LDS church have grown more quiet on this sort of doctrine. They want converts and are afraid that declaring what the church believed for the first century of it's existence will be too big of a turn off. So they don't really believe it any more. At least not as confidently.
It's a shame really. The Mormon doctrine on Deity is it's defining characteristic and also it's best. I think the church should emphasize the human attributes of the Father even more than they do. It's a doctrine that allows a person to deal with God rationally and potentially have true reverence for Him as a person. The God of Mormondom deserves our admiration because He earned it. Also, a doctrine of a God with a perfect character does not necessarily mean that God is infallible. If our spirit Father could be viewed as dynamically good but potentially fallible then we could each look at His actions and determine for ourselves what his successes and failures were the same way a boy will look at how his father raised him and choose what was good and what he will change when raising his own child. A Deity like that is one worth believing in even if he isn't actually God.
The most common conception of God the Father in Christianity is a hybrid of the transcendent God of the philosophers and the covenant God of Abraham. He is the progenerator of the universe, omnipotent and omniscient while not interfering with the freedom of human will, benevolent and occasionally vengeful. He is something entirely inhuman, but with human sensibilities which are manifested to mankind in the form of Jesus in whom is contained all the attributes of the Deity.
The Mormon God, on the other hand, is a person of flesh and blood, perfect and incorruptable. He is, essentially, a man who has achieved through his efforts qualities which are ideal and the aspirations of all men. He even has a name, Eloheim. His power comes from his integrity and the hidden forces of the creation which yield to and are commanded by him. He did not make the elements, but they obey him and organize as he dictates. The Mormons believe the universe has always been and do not make any suggestions as to how it came to be or even that it needed to come to be. It just is. The actual capabilities of The Father are not perfectly outlined, but he is generally awarded similar attributes as the Christian God, such as omnipotence and omniscience, though these attributes must be confined to his own sphere of influence. Mormons do not discount the possibility of there being other deities similar to Eloheim who are lords of their own organized worlds elsewhere in the universe. This is why the Mormon religion is more accurately labelled as being monolatristic than monotheistic.
It is an equivocation for a Mormon to say to a Christian that he believes in God. Mormons believe in a Father who is not God. They don't believe God is needed. The reason he is called "God" is because that is how his name has been translated and because he plays essentially the same role in human affairs as God does.
Actually, that last paragraph is not entirely true, but only because the conception of God held by Mormons has changed some. It seems that the differences between the Christian and Mormon God has been deemphasized by the Mormon church. Many now seem to believe that the Mormon God is the same as the Christian God except that he has a physical body. I don't doubt that some in the church consider him to be the creator of the universe which is something that is irreconcilable with the teachings of Joseph Smith. Or it could be that they project that image of God outwardly to the world while inwardly they believe something different. Whether it is merely a deemphasis, an actual change in understanding, or just a change in outward image, the reason for it can only be the result of the evangelical mission of the church. History shows that the result of evangelism is often compromise. This is the primary reason why Catholics have saints and Christmas is celebrated in the winter. This is probably why the leaders of the LDS church have grown more quiet on this sort of doctrine. They want converts and are afraid that declaring what the church believed for the first century of it's existence will be too big of a turn off. So they don't really believe it any more. At least not as confidently.
It's a shame really. The Mormon doctrine on Deity is it's defining characteristic and also it's best. I think the church should emphasize the human attributes of the Father even more than they do. It's a doctrine that allows a person to deal with God rationally and potentially have true reverence for Him as a person. The God of Mormondom deserves our admiration because He earned it. Also, a doctrine of a God with a perfect character does not necessarily mean that God is infallible. If our spirit Father could be viewed as dynamically good but potentially fallible then we could each look at His actions and determine for ourselves what his successes and failures were the same way a boy will look at how his father raised him and choose what was good and what he will change when raising his own child. A Deity like that is one worth believing in even if he isn't actually God.
Friday, November 14, 2008
I feel like writing
I'm in the mood to write, but I don't really know what I want to write. So, I guess I'll start writing and find out what's on my mind.
I was denied veteran's status by the Utah State University financial aid department. I had assumed that I qualified because West Valley College believed I did. Unfortunately, I think West Valley College is wrong and not Utah State. In order for a reservist to be awarded veteran status he/she must have served on active duty for a reason other than training, which I haven't done yet. Because Utah State does not recognize me as a veteran for financial aid evaluation, and because I am not married or 23 years old, my financial need is based off of my parent's income and not my own. Unfortunately, my father makes way too much money, but only because my family lives in a financially inflated part of the country. His inflated wage is counteracted by an equally inflated cost of living and the net product is not wealth. So, while the government expects my parents to pay for at least $10,000 of my education annually, they really can't pay for hardly any of it.
The point I'm trying to make is that I can't afford to go to school where I had planned on going next semester.
I have been forced to reevaluate what I am going to do this coming year. I have two primary options: I can continue living in Utah until I have established residency next summer and then go to a university here; or I can move back to California, go to a community college for one last semester, and then tranfer to a university in-state somewhere. I guess the question is really "do I have any reason to stay in Utah and is it worth the cost?"
My reasons at present for remaining in the infamous "Happy Valley" are these: So I can become a resident and go to school here; because I finally have something that resembles a band again; I know people here; I like the mountains; and I'm not living in my parent's house. The first reason, the one about school, I don't even know why is a reason. Why do I want to go to school here? I'm not particularily fond of Utah culture. I feel dismembered. That feeling is probably largely caused by my own psyche and not a reality, but the feeling exists none the less and it's a lonely feeling. As far as I can see there are two groups of people in Provo: Mormons and scum. I'm neither. As for the second reason, I doubt the project is going to become anything, but I hate to abandon it anyway. I guess this is the real stickler. Without this there would be no question at all about going home. I'd be gone.
I'm not in a good situation financially at present. I have a decent job that pays well enough, but being in the Marine Corps Reserve has become far too expensive and time consuming because of the travelling I have to do to get back there. The costs outweigh the compensation. I can't last doing things that way. If I went home I'd be able to go to school full time with very few expenses because I could live with my parents, though only for the short term. I'm probably deploying to Iraq sometime in the spring (presumably after the semester ends) which would be a good enough financial kicker that I'd be able to go to school pretty comfortably for a year. Plus, I would be a real veteran and couldn't be denied a grant. I could attain a A.A. degree by the end of the spring semester at West Valley, though in English and not in my intended major of Anthropology. I wouldn't mind though.
It makes so much sense to move back home for a little while. So, I guess that's what I'll do.
On another note, I've been writing music and I've been making slow and not so steady progress on a children's book that I'm writing. It's tentative title is "The Legend of Jeremy Crocket: A Christmas Adventure Story." I have a bare bones outline for it, and an idea for a (necessary) sequel, and only about 2,000 words of the actual text completed. It's about a young scholar and his effort to discover the truth about Santa Claus in order to confront the unbelief that has taken over so many hearts. The concept has drastically transformed from what it was originally meant to be. I've changed it into a fantasy of sorts, while it was originally supposed to be devoid of any magic other than what is contained in the human spirit. I think it's a good change. I've decided to make it meaningful in different ways. The story was originally conceived when I was fairly hopeless and unwilling to believe much at all. I don't want to write a hopeless book. I want it to be full of hope.
I'm a bit surprised at the sources I've drawn influence from for the story. It wasn't where it was meant to come from at all. I know that's a bit cryptic, but that's how it will have to stay. If I say too much it could draw comments and that would be detrimental. I don't want anyone to know anything about the actual story until I have a draft done.
EXEUNT
I was denied veteran's status by the Utah State University financial aid department. I had assumed that I qualified because West Valley College believed I did. Unfortunately, I think West Valley College is wrong and not Utah State. In order for a reservist to be awarded veteran status he/she must have served on active duty for a reason other than training, which I haven't done yet. Because Utah State does not recognize me as a veteran for financial aid evaluation, and because I am not married or 23 years old, my financial need is based off of my parent's income and not my own. Unfortunately, my father makes way too much money, but only because my family lives in a financially inflated part of the country. His inflated wage is counteracted by an equally inflated cost of living and the net product is not wealth. So, while the government expects my parents to pay for at least $10,000 of my education annually, they really can't pay for hardly any of it.
The point I'm trying to make is that I can't afford to go to school where I had planned on going next semester.
I have been forced to reevaluate what I am going to do this coming year. I have two primary options: I can continue living in Utah until I have established residency next summer and then go to a university here; or I can move back to California, go to a community college for one last semester, and then tranfer to a university in-state somewhere. I guess the question is really "do I have any reason to stay in Utah and is it worth the cost?"
My reasons at present for remaining in the infamous "Happy Valley" are these: So I can become a resident and go to school here; because I finally have something that resembles a band again; I know people here; I like the mountains; and I'm not living in my parent's house. The first reason, the one about school, I don't even know why is a reason. Why do I want to go to school here? I'm not particularily fond of Utah culture. I feel dismembered. That feeling is probably largely caused by my own psyche and not a reality, but the feeling exists none the less and it's a lonely feeling. As far as I can see there are two groups of people in Provo: Mormons and scum. I'm neither. As for the second reason, I doubt the project is going to become anything, but I hate to abandon it anyway. I guess this is the real stickler. Without this there would be no question at all about going home. I'd be gone.
I'm not in a good situation financially at present. I have a decent job that pays well enough, but being in the Marine Corps Reserve has become far too expensive and time consuming because of the travelling I have to do to get back there. The costs outweigh the compensation. I can't last doing things that way. If I went home I'd be able to go to school full time with very few expenses because I could live with my parents, though only for the short term. I'm probably deploying to Iraq sometime in the spring (presumably after the semester ends) which would be a good enough financial kicker that I'd be able to go to school pretty comfortably for a year. Plus, I would be a real veteran and couldn't be denied a grant. I could attain a A.A. degree by the end of the spring semester at West Valley, though in English and not in my intended major of Anthropology. I wouldn't mind though.
It makes so much sense to move back home for a little while. So, I guess that's what I'll do.
On another note, I've been writing music and I've been making slow and not so steady progress on a children's book that I'm writing. It's tentative title is "The Legend of Jeremy Crocket: A Christmas Adventure Story." I have a bare bones outline for it, and an idea for a (necessary) sequel, and only about 2,000 words of the actual text completed. It's about a young scholar and his effort to discover the truth about Santa Claus in order to confront the unbelief that has taken over so many hearts. The concept has drastically transformed from what it was originally meant to be. I've changed it into a fantasy of sorts, while it was originally supposed to be devoid of any magic other than what is contained in the human spirit. I think it's a good change. I've decided to make it meaningful in different ways. The story was originally conceived when I was fairly hopeless and unwilling to believe much at all. I don't want to write a hopeless book. I want it to be full of hope.
I'm a bit surprised at the sources I've drawn influence from for the story. It wasn't where it was meant to come from at all. I know that's a bit cryptic, but that's how it will have to stay. If I say too much it could draw comments and that would be detrimental. I don't want anyone to know anything about the actual story until I have a draft done.
EXEUNT
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Rough Takes
You can listen to (very) rough demos of a couple of my songs at myspace.com/thecommonastromer
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)