To War or Not to War

I apologize if this is a controversial topic, but I've been thinking a lot about it lately and I just want to hear everyone's opinion, and this is a great place to share.

I've been bored this week-- my husband is a surgical resident and has been gone for 8 days in a row--home around midnight and gone at 5-- so I've been spending my free time at nights surfing the old www (yes, I know, I should have been doing laundry or dishes or something else-- but mindless surfing is fun for me). Anyway, don't ask me how I got here, but I fell into reading some Catholic and Christian bloggers take on the war in Iraq. The consensus on this issue is anything but that-- there is no agreement whatsoever. Some people cite Joshua's "preemptive" strike at Jericho as justification for why we could be in Iraq (they were evil, being led by Satan) while other people cite Jesus's sermons (and strong example) about loving our enemies.

I was looking at a scripture in Exodus 21:12-14 which reads: "He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death. And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will apoint thee a place whither he shall flee. But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take hime form mine altar, that he may die." While I was reading this I thought, basically "People that kill other people may deserve the death penalty, and sometimes if someone is "presumptuously" ready to kill, he too, will deserve to die." (that is, of course, a small paraphrase).

As members of the LDS church, I think we've got another 'handy' book (aka BOM) which may help elucidate God's feelings about war. I am thinking mainly of the the war chapters in Alma. I haven't yet delved into them looking for answers, but I am remembering the imperatives from God which basically said that if the Nephites were to defend themselves from robbers or Lamanites, they would be victorious, but if they were to "pre-emptively strike" God would not be with them. To me, in these circumstances, a 'pre-emptive strike' by the Nephites would have been the outward action of malicious intent and hatred-- thus the 'no support' dictum from God.

Anyway, I am going to go back and look at these scriptures and try to find some answers because on one hand, I really thought Saddam was so wicked and working towards goals of killing others for gain, while on the other-- I am not sure America was in imminent danger when we went into Iraq. Were we justified in our actions?

I would like to open this up to friendly and doctrinal discussion and hopefully we can learn something from each other. In the end, we might not figure out if war was justified or not, but at least we will learn something, I hope!

Any thoughts, any takers?

How did May go so quickly?! Wow. Well, what are you all thinking lately? I would love to know!

Stake Conference

This lovely weekend my stake was restructured. Elder Nielson of the Seventy and Elder Bednar were sent to call the new Stake President. What an amazing insightful experience it was. During the adult session, Paul and I were frantically taking notes- it seemed like everything they said was new and personally applicable. Here is a running thought...

Elder Nielson discussed a meeting of the Seventy that he attended while Elder Maxwell was alive. He said Elder Maxwell asked the group, "If all your children knew about the Gospel was what you personally have taught them... how much would they know?"

That is a very poignant question. My first thought was, "luckily, I have been with all of my children in Primary since they have been in Primary." But now, after pondering that thought for a day, I have learned that it is not Sunday that he was asking about. My instruction should be constant, both spoken and unspoken- Sunday should be a time for review of what I have already taught them, not new information.

In the very next hour, Elder Bednar said, "we cannot sit back and be casual about our children. Satan is not sitting around hoping they will choose his side; he is kicking and pitching and fighting to make them his. We cannot force or compel our children, but, parents, you better be pitching and doing all you can."

Elder Bednar spoke a lot about moral agency, explaining that, "Agency was given to us to choose the right (Moses 7:32). Once agency is used to enter into a covenant (which is a contract where the terms and conditions are set by God), agency is exhausted. Now, we must keep the promise made."

If I can teach my children one thing, it is this very clear and very misunderstood doctrine. It is a doctrine that helps me "pitch" the Gospel and gives understanding to them of why we choose the right. They chose to come to earth- they entered into a covenant before they were born (i.e. agreed to the terms God established- Abraham 3:25, 26) and now have a body. Their agency is exhausted in that choice. Their life must now be spent proving themselves.

I was truly humbled, chastised and comforted by the Holy Ghost this weekend. The "spoken" lessons were ones I will be teaching my children. The "unspoken" lessons (but just as clearly heard by my heart) were ones I was taught. I should be living and strengthening my testimony and understanding of these powerful doctrines. I was comforted to know that as long as we are finding joy in doing what is right, the Lord can teach us and correct us.

I will be studying this topic of moral agency and ask for this to be our new topic (some scripture refernces above). Please send me any thoughts or talks on the subject! Thanks!

Can the Atonement be simplified?

I was touched by the quote Sarah included from Hugh Nibley. I am forced to wonder if I am someone who truly does NOT understand the atonement in its entireity. It is humbling to think I am someone who has been charged with the task to teach the children in our ward gospel truths--including this topic.

When I recently tried to explain the Atonement to our (junior) Primary children (ages 3-6) (we've got a lot of little kids in our ward), I struggled trying to find an analogy that they might grasp. After much thought it occured to me that Christ's Atonement was his way of serving our "time-outs." Even small children know that when they hit a friend, throw food on the ground, yell at mom, or tease a sibling, their punishment is set and in many homes, involves a punishment like a time-out. No matter how hard my kids beg not to go to time-out when they've done something wrong, there is no negotiation. They did the crime, now they must do the time.

In the case of the Atonement, the "crime" has been done by each of us--the crimes are many and varied, in some case they are sins of omission. No matter the misdeed, however, Christ serves our time-out for us, and we reap the reward--the eventual chance to become a God ourselves! This is the most amazing example of selfless service I can think of. Christ does not withold his "time-out serving" for anyone, no matter how despicable the person or the sin.

The kids "got" this concept, but I would like YOUR help with something. I believe it is in Alma (I'll try to look this up later) that we learn that Christ not only suffered for our sins, but he also took upon himself our sadness, sorrows, infirmities, and sickness. How does this knowledge fit into my little "time-out" analogy?

Also, I'd like any other ideas you have for teaching children about the Atonement.

I hope you all had a wonderful Easter and that you are anxiously awaiting General Conference! Not too many comments on the previous topic of the Atonement! While I was pondering an explanation for this (which definitely included all your busy, fabulous lives) I remembered this great quote from Hugh Nibley,
"So cool has been the reception of the message of the Atonement that through the centuries, while heated controversy and debate have raged over evolution, atheism, the sacraments, the Trinity, authority, predestination, faith and works, and so on, there has been no argument or discussion at all about the meaning of the Atonement. Why were there no debates or pronouncements in the synods? People either do not care enough or do not know enough to even to argue about it."

The group that is a part of this blog most assuredly is NOT made up of people who do not care. But even in studying that beautiful talk by Elder Bednar on merely the enpowering aspect of the Atonement, I learned a ton of new things. There is so much to learn, to study, to know.

Bruce R. McKonkie said, "The Atonement of Christ is the most basic and fundamental doctine of the gospel, and it is the least understood of all our revealed truths. Many of us have a superficial knowledge and rely upon the Lord and his goodness to see us through the trials and perils of life. But if we are to have faith like that of Enoch and Elijah, we must believe what they believed, know what they knew, and live as they lived.
May I invite you to join with me in gaining a sound and sure knowledge of the Atonement."

I love that very peronal invitation! Last Sunday, my Bishop bore his testimony and challenged our ward to study the Atonement (I always find it fascinating that when you are studying a specific topic, it pops up everywhere). So, let's keep this a running topic- and as you gain new insight on the scope of the Atonement... share!

Here we are. A new item to discuss. Let's try faith. Start with Alma 32 and the definition of faith in Mormon Doctrine. Thanks to all of you for your help in making this a positive, enriching experience!

Alright! Today is the first day of Spring and Easter is upon us! Since we were discussing the Fall, and given the season, let's continue our discussion with the Atonement (as they go hand in hand). It would be totally appropriate to continue with thoughts on the Fall, especially in how it relates to the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

Elder Bednar gives a beautiful lesson on the Atonement of our Savior and it can be found at the following site: http://www.byui.edu/Presentations/Transcripts/Devotionals/2002_01_08_Bednar.htm

Please share your references, thoughts, testimonies, etcetera and Happy Easter to you all!

Eve's Motivation

I am very intrigued by Eve's motivation in eating the fruit. She is an amazing woman. Satan's first temptation didn't seem to affect her (delicious to the taste and very desirable). She very insightfully questioned his motives (Who are you and why would you be tempting me to do this?) She wasn't fooled by his enticings or distracted by his offering. Perhaps she didn't feel the consequence was worth his offering of good taste and popularity.

It wasn't until he changed his tactic to something worth more to her that she considered his offer. When he offered knowledge she started taking his temptation seriously. Although by all accounts her life in the garden should have been idyllic, she desired to understand more. She made the decision with eyes wide open -- she knew the consequences and yet decided that the cost was worth it. This amazes me. She reassures Adam that the pain and sorrow they were about to go through was worth the knowledge they would gain. I don't know if I could handle a mortal life with all the challenges associated knowing that I could have stayed in the peaceful, pain-free garden. (I know I made a choice to accept this life and its challenges, but I don't remember that choice during mortality). Eve lived with the choice everyday and had the courage to say "it's worth it". I love her desire to learn and grow and especially her courage to be willing to take the difficult path.