Category Archives: Agency

We Have Limited Free Will

Posted on by

We have limited free will. Within certain limitations, we can make choices and act upon those choices. Our choices are partially controlled and determined by outside forces and by the laws of physics. But we have agency to act within certain bounds of natural laws that exist. We can exercise that agency, make choices and act upon those choices. Logic dictates there is no purpose or meaning to life if we do not have some free will. We instinctively know we have power to act in some things without constraint of necessity or fate. We are bound or limited by physics but we are independent agents within our sphere of influence. We intuitively think or feel we are free. We therefore act at our own discretion. We are capable of responding to random chance with purposeful choices. Thus we can be held morally responsible and accountable for our choices and actions in both the deterministic world of physics and the indeterminate world of observable quantum mechanics that we are still discovering.

Absolute free will is logically incompatible with determinism because we do not control the universe. However, as individuals, we are able to take more than one possible course of action in any given scenario. There are obvious choices in life we can choose to follow. We can conceive and believe things. This proves some free will even though there are limitations on the choices available to us. For example, because I am not a fish, I do not have the choice of living underwater without some sort of breathing apparatus. It is determined beforehand that human life is incompatible with living unaided under water. I am therefore limited to certain pre-determined boundaries if I want to sustain life. In like manner, in some situations I have a limited number of choices I can make because of the randomness of life. I hope I never have to decide what to do if I am in a plane that is about to crash. I would have no control of the physics causing the plane to crash, but I still have some obvious choices I can make and act upon, like remain calm or panic.

As an argument against any kind of free will, consider the views of hard determinism. Determinists believe that our thoughts, feelings, actions and behaviors are all predetermined from the moment that time began at the big bang. A determinist advocates that we do not have any control over the state of the universe or the laws that govern the universe. Free will is an illusion, they say. You may think that your choices and actions have an effect on the universe but you are really no more than an observer. For a determinist, free will is a nothing more than a necessary delusion that allows us to build a society where praise and punishment actually mean something. Compatibilists hold individuals morally responsible for their actions as if they had free will. Although it doesn’t really exist, they say, we can act as if it does, thus providing a necessary condition for moral responsibility – accountability.

Following this logic, the universe is deterministic and bound by the laws of physics. Our bodies are bound by those same laws. If you are a materialist, you believe that all behavior is caused by chemical brain states outside of our control. In order for free will to exist, there must be a supernatural agent that is not bound by those laws to inject an input from outside the system; in other words, a God. I wish I could develop this further, but for now I will propose that there are only two arguments against free will. First, if determinism is the true state of things, then the will is not free because all events are caused and our actions are predetermined. Therefore, there is no moral responsibility or free will. The second argument against free will is indeterminism of random events or chance. If all our actions are caused by chance then we have no control, and therefore, again, no free will or moral responsibility. True free will requires we have control of outcomes. However, we do not control the universe or the laws of physics. If you think about it, we control nothing of this world or the universe. To prove free will, we must prove that we can control at least some things, thus becoming independent agents with power to act.

I don’t disagree with all the views of materialists or determinists. In fact, I readily concur with determinists that the laws of the universe are outside our control. I also concur that a large part of our body processes are apparently outside the control of at least our conscious mind and will. I can’t control the motion of the planets, the effects of nature, or prevent myself from dying someday. These things are determined. My bounds are set in these matters and many others. I also concur with indeterminism as it relates to many of the choices with which I am presented in this life. So many things are just random and purely by chance. I come across an object on the freeway that gives me a flat tire. It was pure chance that I happened to come upon that object and embed it in my tire first because I just happened to be there at that place and at that time. Random chance is just part of this life. So many things – most things – are out of my control.

So what do I control? There are many things over which I have control and thus free will. I control my responses to the choices I am presented in life. I can control my thoughts. I can control the things I put into my body. I control the things I say and the things I do. Nobody forces me to act a certain way or respond in a specific manner. I control my attitudes and my beliefs. I decide what I will do with my time, who I will go visit, what work I will do, what I choose to study. I may not choose many of the things that happen to me in this life but I can and do choose how I respond to those situations. I determine the character I build by using my free will adequately. My free will is limited to those things over which I have some control and have choices. I do not have free will when it comes to the laws of physics and nature. They are out of my control. In the things over which I do have control such as thoughts, beliefs and opinions I choose what I want to think about or believe. My thoughts are not caused and are not random. They are purposeful and demonstrate free will, especially when I act upon them. Therefore, my conclusion is that we have limited or adequate determinism and limited but genuine free will.

When prophets need to know

Posted on by

meteorjatuhI have a deep personal interest in the anticipated social response to the upcoming movie, 2012.  While it looks to be great entertainment from the fertile mind of Roland Emmerich, I am fascinated by the idea of how our society will react to some sort of a major catastrophic cataclysmic event like that depicted in the film.

I don’t go in for conspiracy theories that the government of the United States has a secret plan for the survival of the race.  I am certain that we have plans in place to ensure the continuity of the government in event of nuclear war or some other disaster, but the survival of the citizens of this country is a whole different matter.

A wise investment

As I get older, I take the idea of having a usable stockpile of food and water much more seriously than when I was younger.  We have dipped into our food storage several times over the past few years as the grip of a tight economy has reached into our personal finances.  But I value my food storage for a different reason.

I am convinced that the day will come, in my lifetime, that we will not be able to leave our homes for extended periods of time in order to go out and buy food.  It could be due to a flu pandemic or perhaps social unrest, but I am more inclined to think that it will be from some sort of a plague that will keep us indoors for weeks.

A prophecy of plagues

Now there’s a word that you don’t hear thrown around much these days.  Do I mean a plague like the kind that decimated Europe during the middle ages?  No.  How about a plague like the kind that caused so many deaths at the end of World War I – the 1918 flu pandemic?  No, I’m thinking of a different kind of plague.

Perhaps turning to the scriptures will bring it to a better light.  Let’s take a look at Revelations chapter eight. There are several references to plagues contained in the next few chapters but verse seven describes the beginning of the plague to which I refer now.  What things fall to the earth when the first angel sounds his trumpet?

Hail and fire and blood

I’ve written about this previously, but my interpretation of the phrase, “hail and fire mingled with blood” is this:  The hail is actually small stones or meteorites.  The fire is a sticky, burning petroleum-like fluid found in the tail of comets. It is also known as naphtha, a volatile and flammable liquid mixture of hydrocarbons.

The blood is a description of water of the earth mixed with a red dust that is some form of ferric oxide.  This red dust is water soluble, looks just like blood when it hits the water, and is highly toxic to life.  In addition, it is irritating to the skin and can cause a plague of microbes, insects and vermin to rapidly propagate in heat.

Writings of Anthony Larson

If this all sounds familiar, then you have read either the works of David Talbott, Immanuel Velikovsky or my friend and fellow blogger, Anthony Larson.  My wife and I met with Anthony last week to talk about collaborating on a book idea that has been brewing in my head over the past little while as my wife has been recovering.

I like Anthony because he’s a bit of a controversial figure in the church.  He has written and published five books on the subject of the events of the very last days.  His explanations of the scriptures pertaining to the last days are not the orthodox and standard answers you will find in the commentaries of today’s LDS scholars.

The prophecy trilogy

In fact, his writings have been denounced by scientists at our religious institutions of higher learning, such as BYU.  That doesn’t deter me.  I’m grateful for the gift of agency and the fact that the Lord allows us to choose what we want to believe about the scriptures, even if they don’t jive with conventional accepted teachings.

Is this a dangerous approach to learning?  I don’t think so.  The Lord tells us to prove all things and hold fast to that which is good.  I have been pondering what I have read in Anthony’s books for about twenty-five years since I first read his prophecy trilogy back in the 1980’s.  I have also prayed about what he has written.

Other inspired men

Now that may seem a little odd, different or downright dangerous in our LDS culture.  Why would you pray about what someone has written who is not a general authority?  Why, that’s unthinkable, preposterous even! Don’t you know that you are on the road to apostasy if you listen to someone besides an apostle?

Yes, men can be deceived and we can all point to examples throughout history where good people have been proven fools to follow after the interpretations of the scriptures by men who were not authorized to speak on behalf of the Lord.  But that brings up an interesting question that I wonder if you have ever considered.

Some prophets are experts

Where do prophets turn when they need to know something about which they are not experts?  For example, when our apostles want to know facts about something in the medical world, I’ll bet they consult with Russell M. Nelson, another of our apostles who just happens to be a medical doctor and renowned heart surgeon.

When they want to know something about the interpretation of law, there are several excellent choices among Elder Oaks, Elder Cook or Elder Christofferson.  For nuclear physics, they turn to Elder Scott.  For managing a university, we have President Eyring, Elder Oaks, Elder Holland and Elder Bednar, all great educators.

Turning to the experts

But what do they do when they want to understand astrophysics?  To whom do the Brethren turn when they need help interpreting and explaining the events that are starting to concern and even frighten more and more of the world’s population, as the end times draw to a close?  Who will help our leaders explain all these things?

Why, they turn to the professors of astronomy at BYU of course.  Or, if they’re not particularly fans of that institution – gasp! – then they turn to the smaller faculty at the University of Utah.  I’m sure there are a myriad of faithful LDS scientists who can provide the needed background to explain meteorites and other scary things.

Turning to the Lord

You may ask, “Can’t they just turn to the Lord in prayer and receive the necessary knowledge to guide the people when the catastrophes that are prophesied to happen begin to come to pass in earnest?”  Of course you know they can.  The Lord can and will “do nothing but he revealeth his secret to his servants the prophets.”

But we are taught and believe that the Lord requires us to do our homework before he confirms to our hearts and minds that what we have studied and determined on a given subject is correct.  The apostles are no different from you and me when it comes to the right to receive revelation, though they understand the process better.

Experts can be wrong

The problem with turning to the experts in Astrophysics is that the most of them do not subscribe to the views of ancient prophets on the subject of how the planets and stars behave.  Things were different back then and there is no written record of how things really were.  They prefer to use current observations for their facts.

Yes, the idea that the heavens have always been the way we see them now is very much in vogue even among our LDS scientists.  The idea that the planets in our solar system could have once been in a different configuration sometime within the last four thousand years even is unthinkable and has no scientific basis for proof.

Summary and conclusion

Yep, Tim’s gone off his rocker.  He is claiming that scientists are wrong.  He’s gone off the deep end and thrown his cap in with the crowd of crazies who believe in planet X and that 2012 is the end of the world.  No, I don’t believe that, but I do believe that Anthony Larson has made more sense of things than most scientists.

So until an apostle or prophet comes out and says that Anthony Larson is wrong in his interpretation of the scriptures, I have decided to join forces with him and have committed to write and publish a work of fiction based on his research.  Call me crazy but I’m looking forward to the ride.  Stay tuned for the exciting adventures.

Setting and acheiving goals

Posted on by

preachmygospelIn bishopric meeting this morning, our new bishop shared the spiritual thought.  He chose the subject of goals and quoted from page 146 of Preach My Gospel on how to set them.  Here are some excerpts of the goal setting advice offered on that page:

“Goals reflect the desires of our hearts and our vision of what we can accomplish.  Through goals and plans, our hopes are transformed into action.”  What we reach for in goals reflects what we desire in our hearts.  Our goals reveal our true selves.

Goals, faith and agency

“Goal setting and planning are acts of faith.  Do everything in your power to achieve your goals while respecting the agency of others.”  I believe the best goals are the ones that we can control.  It does little good to set goals dependant on the actions of others.

Think about it.  You can set a goal to have another person do some specific thing that is desirable, but you have no control over what they actually do.  You can ask, invite, persuade and demonstrate why they should, but you can’t make them do it.

Service improves progress

“The ultimate measure of success is not in achieving goals alone but in the service you render and the progress of others.  Goals are a means of helping you bring about much good…”  I like the idea of setting goals in areas that benefit not just our own lives.

I believe that the progress of others is directly influenced by the service we render to them.  I have seen this over in over in my own life.  Those whom I love and serve seem to respond better when I ask them to do something that I believe will help them.

Goals, plans and activities

“Carefully considered goals will give you clear direction and will help you fill your days with activities that help people…”  The achievement of goals requires that we make plans and then act to carry out those plans.  Goals are not achieved by magic.

“Challenging goals will help you work effectively and lead you to stretch and grow.”  Nothing good happens without work.  If you want to achieve something worthwhile in life, there must be effort put forth to bring about the achievement of good goals.

Goals and the big picture

Like me, I’ll bet you’ve had the experience of someone else setting a goal for you that was not achieved.  Perhaps you’ve even gone to the trouble of setting goals for others and then wonder why they don’t get reached.  The goals were worthy.

I’ve discovered over the years that unless I have a clear vision of how a goal benefits and blesses my life or my loved ones, then I am less than enthusiastic in putting forth the effort to achieve it.  I don’t think that’s selfish.  I think that it’s just human nature.

Shared vision motivates

So anytime we start talking about goals in church, I always look for the leader to help me understand their vision.  Unless I can see for myself what they hope will happen, I have a hard time connecting my energy and focus into carrying out assignments.

Again, I don’t think I’m expressing any fundamental character flaws here.  I look for the same thing in working with people in my career.  A great leader is one who inspires by sharing vision.  When vision is shared and understood it is highly motivational.

Where there is no vision…

How do you feel when someone asks you to do something that is hard to do without sharing with you the vision of what they hope will be accomplished when the task is completed?  If you’re like me, sometimes other things take priority over the assignment.

Don’t get me wrong.  Most of us fulfill the basics of what we are asked to do.  It’s not hard.  We have instruction manuals and if you have been in the church for a while, you can pretty much figure out how to do any calling successfully with enough time.

Vision based on true principles

But I suspect that we can be much more effective in our callings and in our lives when we have a vision of ourselves achieving the righteous desires of our hearts.  I also suspect that we don’t spend enough time creating and enlarging those future visions.

I am convinced that the best leaders motivate by sharing vision in a compelling way.  Hopefully the ability to inspire and help people see themselves in different or better circumstances is based on true principles of honesty, integrity and hard work.

Summary and conclusion

So I have come to the conclusion that the best way to set goals, at least for me, is to concentrate on discovering the desires of our hearts.  Activities that create a vision of each other enjoying those righteous desires are motivating and encouraging to me.

Once you know what you really want, find a way to visualize it and share it with others.  The more people that share your vision, the more likely it is that it will be achieved.  The goals and plans we make then become the stepping stones to fulfill our visions.

The authority I give to prophets

Posted on by

Now that may seem like a strange title of an essay. What authority could I possibly give to a prophet? We believe and teach in our church that prophets get their authority from God. In fact, the whole concept of authority to speak in the name of the Lord is a big deal in the LDS Church. I mean, if our claim to authority is bogus, as some say it is, then the Mormon Church is a fraud.

I have written previously about our claim of authority to act in the name of God. We teach that Joseph Smith received multiple visits in his day from resurrected beings who ordained him and gave him priesthood authority. That’s an amazing claim in itself that has been contested since the day he made it but that’s not the type of authority I would like to address in this short essay.

We all have the type of authority I would like to discuss. It is not gender specific. Both men and women and even children possess this authority. We are born with it and we will take it with us into the next life. It is a great gift and one that I cherish dearly. I have used it for both good and bad throughout my life. So why would I agree to give it willingly to someone I have never met?

My authority is my agency

The more I learn about this church, the more and more impressed I have become with this gift of authority that is mine. If there is anything that I know more than anything else, it is that I can choose to believe whatever I want. Nobody can take that away from me. I don’t think anybody can form an argument that could convince me that I do not possess this ability. It is a part of me.

This authority to choose my own beliefs is something about which I feel very passionate. When I was younger I would do all kinds of stupid things in an effort to assert my authority and prove to others, mostly my parents, that this power was mine and mine alone. It is an amazing power. It can bring me great happiness or it can bring me great sorrow and it is all based on my beliefs.

In other words, I can choose to believe what I want to believe about what brings me happiness. I do not need some philosophical explanation to define happiness. I know when I feel happy and I think I am getting pretty good after all these years of identifying which beliefs and actions are the cause and effect of my happiness. My power of choice is the authority I have over myself.

Giving my authority to another

Whenever I choose to believe something that someone else tells me, I give away a part of my authority or control over myself. That’s especially true if I can’t prove what they have told me. That may seem like a crazy thing to do. I guess it all has to do with the reliability of the source. We all do it. There are things we believe that we haven’t been able to prove and never will.

For example, in relation to my membership in the LDS Church, I believe things about our history for which I will never be able to obtain or provide empirical evidence. I was not there when Joseph received the visit from the Father and the Son, nor was I there when he received the visit from the angel Moroni. There were no witnesses to these events. Yet, I choose to believe them.

I have given away a part of me – my intrinsic authority or agency – when I accept what I have been taught about these historical events while growing up. I believed what I was told because I trusted the source – my parents, my Primary teacher, my Sunday school teacher, my priesthood advisor, my Seminary and Institute teachers and just about anyone who taught me the gospel.

The transfer of that authority

When I became an adult, I had to decide if I still intended to give my authority to others who represented the source of that knowledge. In particular, I had to decide if I would transfer that authority from teachers and parents, many of whom were now dead, to leaders of this church. I felt comfortable about that transfer of authority and have now placed it in apostles and prophets.

Most of the men who were the leaders of this church when I became an adult are now dead. So of course, that authority simply slid down the line with each new prophet until today, I place my trust in President Thomas S. Monson and in the other fourteen men who lead this church. I am no different from millions of others who have had to go through this same logical process.

Last night I sat in my stake center with hundreds of my fellow brethren of the church and watched the broadcast of the priesthood session of General Conference. I listened very closely as each of these priesthood leaders spoke and weighed very carefully in my mind if what I was hearing was inspired of God and worthy of acceptance. As always, I was not disappointed. I was impressed.

The current repository of my trust

Of course, all men are fallible and so are prophets. Individually, some of the early apostles left the church and some even fought against it, denying many things that they had previously taught as facts, or truth, to be falsehoods and lies. Hmmm…that presents a bit of a dilemma. Now who do I believe – those who remained or those who left and claimed the original leaders were liars?

Fortunately, that hasn’t happened in my day so I haven’t had to make this choice among living apostles and prophets. But what if it did – what would I do then? One of the teachings of our church is that the authority for doctrine is comprised in two quorums – the quorum of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. I don’t have to rely on just one leader.

In my lifetime, I have witnessed a prophet of the church fail in mental health until he was simply incapacitated and could not act as the living mouthpiece or oracle of the Lord. That’s OK. I have written about this previously and explained there why I had no problem with this. I am convinced that this church can survive even when the prophet has Alzheimer’s. That’s amazing!

The ultimate placement of my faith

A prophet wouldn’t be a prophet to me unless he leads me to Christ. I look to these men to teach me about the Savior and how I can draw closer to Him. We have a saying in our church that we repeat often – follow the Brethren. We teach our children to sing the song – follow the Prophet. We do this because we have a tradition of confidence that these men will lead us unto Christ.

So ultimately, I give my authority and my agency to the Savior Jesus Christ as these men teach me to do. I like that. Of course, I haven’t seen the Savior or been personally visited or taught by Him. Although I believe it is possible if it were necessary, I don’t believe that I need to have to receive such a visit to exercise faith in Him. In fact, it wouldn’t be faith if I had such a visit.

That’s why I am so grateful for the gift of the Holy Ghost. I think I would be lost without this special gift that teaches me truth and leads me to God. Now this is something with which I have personal experience and personal knowledge. It is not empirical and never will be. That’s OK. It is very real to me and makes perfect sense. I know things in my heart that I can never prove.

Summary and conclusion

We all have a kind of personal power and authority that can only be used by giving it away to someone else. We call it agency. In particular, we have the right, power and ability to choose to believe what we want. It is very important that we find trustworthy sources to whom we can look to teach us about God and Christ. God must be revealed to someone or remain unknown.

Since I haven’t seen God, I must rely on those who claim to have seen Him to teach me about Him. Of course, it is critical to my salvation to be certain that my sources are authorized to speak on behalf of God. We call these men prophets and I have been listening to them all weekend. God knows that this is a leap of faith to trust a prophet so he has given us a way to be certain.

There is one wonderful piece of empirical evidence that God gave the prophet who brought forth the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That evidence is the Book of Mormon. To me, the whole process and procedure of knowing for myself is so logical. I am confident that I have given my authority to a trustworthy source and am grateful for the power this knowledge brings.

Certain souls will not be saved

Posted on by

The Prophet Joseph Smith taught, “The contention in heaven was-Jesus said there would be certain souls that would not be saved; and the devil said he could save them all, and laid his plans before the grand council, who gave their vote in favor of Jesus Christ. So the devil rose up in rebellion against God, and was cast down, with all who put up their heads for him” (TPJS, p. 357).

Source: Encyclopedia of Mormonism, War in Heaven

That phrase has always intrigued me. We believe that eventually all will be resurrected and will be assigned a kingdom of glory. Does that mean that most will be saved? We teach that there are very few who will become Sons of Perdition. A simplified definition of a Son of Perdition is one who has had open visions of God and Christ and then goes about fighting against their work.

The unembodied spirits who supported Lucifer in the war in heaven and were cast out (Moses 4:1-4) and mortals who commit the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost will inherit the same condition as Lucifer and Cain, and thus are called “sons of perdition.” Again, we believe that it is very difficult for most people to commit the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost.

The War in Heaven

We believe and teach that spiritual growth is dependent upon agency, or the capacity to act for ourselves, and to be accountable for those actions. In other words, we have the freedom to choose our actions. Most people I know feel very strongly about that freedom. There are some of course, who reject the idea of being held accountable to anyone else for their actions.

Satan proposed that all could be saved or redeemed and brought back into Heavenly Father‘s presence. He felt that he could ensure the obedience of everyone through force. In other words, he would remove choice from the plan. We would pass through mortality without opposition. Amazingly, he eventually became the one who provided the source for opposition in our lives.

My understanding of the War in Heaven is that we fought a war of words and opinions over elements of Lucifer’s plan and our Father’s plan. We debated over the details of obedience, submission, faith, repentance, the need for a Savior, opposition, choice, freedom, agency and a myriad of other basic doctrines of the gospel. It’s the same stuff we debate about today.

Opposition and temptation

We believe and teach that Lucifer and those who followed him were cast out of heaven and came to this earth as devils, never to have the opportunity to become mortal or have physical bodies of their own. We also believe that they can and do possess, even if just for a few moments, the physical bodies of mortals when we sin, or knowingly disobey God’s commandments for us.

Although it is true doctrine believed and taught today, I don’t think we should get hung up on this concept of evil spirits possessing the bodies of mortals. For most people, their influence is only momentary, such as when we lose our temper or when someone gets so drunk that they are no longer in control of themselves. Being under the influence of evil can be subtle or obvious.

I think most people, or at least Christian people, agree that the influence of the adversary can be seen in the world throughout history and especially in our day. We see his influence in the misuse of drugs, in pornography, in crude language and behavior, murder, rape, abortion, adultery, homosexual behavior, oppressive tyranny, war, divorce and in many other areas.

Some will not be saved

Now this is going to be pure conjecture, and I throw it out there as speculation. I wonder if maybe what the Prophet Joseph taught, that there are certain souls that will not be saved, applies to many who were born into mortality. In other words, I don’t think his explanation of the war in heaven was limited to the loss of just those who followed Lucifer and were cast out.

Of course, this really requires a clear definition of what it means to be saved. I define salvation as being placed beyond the power of one’s enemies. It means redemption from the bondage of the consequences of sin and the lasting power of death. Of course, to be saved from sin, one must accept Jesus Christ as their Savior and abide by the conditions of the atonement.

Therefore, when the prophet Joseph Smith taught that there are certain souls that will not be saved, I believe we can logically apply that to many mortals as well. They are not saved from sin because they will not believe in Jesus Christ, exercise faith in him, repent of their sins and obey the laws and ordinances of the gospel. They will not be saved from the consequences of sin.

The War in Heaven continues

Now this may seem very obvious and you may wonder what point I am trying to make in this essay. I’ll try to spell it out clearly. I know individuals, as you probably do too, who have been taught the gospel and at one time understood it well enough to know what the Lord requires of them, and yet decided to exercise their agency and not believe or act upon their knowledge.

In other words, they have been taught what it takes to be saved from the consequences of sin, and yet they refuse to take advantage of that free gift of salvation. They will not be saved. They must suffer the consequences of their sins and someday pay the price of suffering themselves. So Joseph taught and it is central to God’s plan, that some just will not believe and be saved.

The War in Heaven continues. We fought over the idea that some would not be saved. I see great evidence all around me that many believe in Lucifer’s plan – that there should be no consequences for sin, that we should not be held accountable for our actions or our beliefs. This is most evidenced by those who refuse to accept personal responsibility for their own lives.

Summary and conclusion

While we believe that all will eventually be resurrected and obtain a place in the Kingdom of God, we do not believe that all will be saved. To be saved means to not have to suffer the price that justice demands. To be saved means to have mercy extended to us upon conditions of faith, repentance and obedience to the commandments of God. It is obvious that not all will be saved.

Perhaps it is stubbornness or pride that prevents them from accepting the free gift of mercy. They are so invested in the idea that they should not be held accountable for their actions that they will not do something so simple as to believe and repent. That idea is a holdover from the War in Heaven. Lucifer said that there is no sin and that it isn’t fair to be accountable for sin.

Accepting responsibility and being accountable for one’s own life can be a tough decision to make. It precludes a belief in God and the idea that there are standards of behavior that He requires. In other words, we can’t live our lives with the idea that anything goes and that whatever we do is not sin. That just won’t cut it. Those who believe that will not be saved.

Note: Almost all the hyperlinked references in this essay are to the new HTML version of the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, now available online at BYU. Thanks to those who provided it.

Choices in spite of difficult circumstances

Posted on by

I just have to comment on the tragedy in Omaha the other day. It was a horrible thing to have a young 19-year-old man take the lives of eight others before taking his own. Any mass murder and suicide is an awful thing to hear about. It is a reminder of the Columbine killings and other tragedies where troubled young men committed horrific crimes.

But I have to ask, why do I not read anything in the news reports where someone questioned if maybe the adversary might have had something to do with what happened? Is that just not considered politically correct? We read the news reports searching for explanations. Numerous people are interviewed from the young man’s life for their viewpoints.

We want to know. What went wrong? What could have been done to help this young man before it grew too late? He was in and out of foster homes, had threatened to kill his stepmother, was a known drug user and could not hold a job. I doubt he did well in school. What is it about young men who feel like failures and misfits that causes them to take it out on society?

Was there any religious influence in his life? Wasn’t he ever exposed to the principles of faith and of forgiveness, of service to others and of working hard to get an education and provide for a future family? Are those good Christian values or good American values or just basic good human values? Don’t we all value happiness that comes from education and hard work?

Have we become so tolerant of drug use in America that we don’t see it for what it really is – the adversary’s plan to destroy young men and keep them from fulfilling their true potential in life? “Oh, it’s just a little marijuana,” you may say. It’s no worse than drinking a beer or two after work. Really? Try telling that to the families of the people this young man killed.

Now I know that not everybody who smokes marijuana is going to go out and kill a bunch of innocent people at a shopping mall. And I know that there are a lot of people who lead perfectly normal and acceptable lives who smoke marijuana or drink beer. But haven’t we had enough examples of what can happen to young men who go down this route?

We are taught that life is all about making choices and I know that is true. We all have our agency. We can choose to do what we want, to listen to whom we want, to believe what we want and to live our lives the way we want. But isn’t it clear and obvious by the way some of these young men have chosen to live their lives that the end result is not a happy one?

Can we say that it’s not his fault? He had a broken home environment or he had learning disabilities or he fell in with the wrong kind of friends. He was depressed, his girlfriend dumped him, he was in trouble with the law, he was introverted, he was troubled, he was a ‘lost puppy’, he had ADD, he did poorly in school, he had a drinking problem and the list goes on and on.

Those are just excuses and our efforts to try to understand or explain away what happened. Hey, the bottom line is that this guy listened to the voice of the adversary whispering in his ear so long that he decided to believe it and acted upon it when it told him to kill. Robert Hawkins was responsible for his own actions and he didn’t have to do what he did. He had a choice.

One of the things that Robert Hawkins wrote in his suicide note was, “I can’t take this meaningless existence anymore. I’ve been a constant disappointment and that trend would have only continued.” One of the effects of heavy marijuana use is that it saps any enjoyment of life. To those who are heavy users of the drug, it seems that life has no purpose or meaning.

What do you think? Can we explain away this terrible tragedy as the actions of someone with mental illness, charge it to the ills of society and all that he suffered or was Robert Hawkins responsible for what he did because he listened to the promptings of the adversary?