Intelligence & Agency

I've discovered a fantastic, thought-provoking website at LDSPhilosopher.com. I've enjoyed reading through their archives and I'm sure I will be sharing more from their site as time goes on.

One of their series of posts is named "Intelligence & Agency" and I wanted to link to it from here. The series is about what the Lord means by intelligences in the scriptures. There has not been too much revealed on the topic and these guys do a pretty good job deciphering. After reading the series, I posed a question regarding the millennium and received a satisfactory answer. Here are some excerpts:

Part One

There are a lot of vital doctrines the Lord usually focuses on: priesthood, repentance, the second coming. Usually it seems like he chooses such doctrines because they are vital to our salvation or help us in the process of repenting and becoming like him. On the other end, there are a lot of things he has chosen to not reveal: the full process involved in creation, the timing of the second coming, the history of the lost tribes. Usually it seems like he withholds such doctrines because we’re not ready to understand them, or because we don’t need to know them. Revealed truth doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The Lord always has a purpose for every bit of information he reveals, and it usually involves some kind of moral obligation on our part. He doesn’t reveal things on a whim, just to satisfy our curiosity.

So why bother telling us there is a mysterious something called intelligence and then not tell us anything more about it?

Part Two

Some people think of humans this way: since we were created by God, he decided the initial set of variables in our spirit, and that set of dispositions and inclinations causally determines all our later decisions, which cannot be genuine choices. Free will, then, must be a myth. But since the set of variables and equations are so complex and beyond our understanding, it appears to us that we have free will. So it is a helpful myth that we like to believe.

Part Three

Through the lens of creation ex nihilo, humans seem like mere puppets that act out the will of their divine puppeteer, or dominoes that merely fall because they were pushed by another domino from behind. It’s difficult to see how humans have a will of their own, because every part of their makeup was determined by the Creator, and thus every “choice” is just the inevitable result of the initial set of conditions they were created with.

But when we understand that a part of us, “intelligence” as used in the standard works, has always existed, then it’s easy to see that we have a will of our own.

Part Four

Imagine for a moment a situation in which only some of these ingredients [for there to be agency] were present. The potential for agency would exist, but agency in its fullness would not be functioning. If I tell you to choose whichever candy bar you want, but I only offer you a Butterfinger, agency is not in force. When you complain that you don’t like Butterfingers, imagine if I said, “Then why did you pick it?” I may remind you that you are accountable when exercising your power to choose, but it’s a farce of agency, because you didn’t really have anything to choose between (opposites).

Perhaps intelligence, before it is organized at spirit birth, constitutes such a situation, in which not all the ingredients necessary for agency are present.

Introductions and links for each post in the series can be found here. Great read!

Faith - Initiatory & Enduring

The purpose of this short essay is to explain the concept of faith as I understand it. As I have exercised and studied faith, it seems to me that there are primarily two types, or levels, of faith. The first type I call initiatory faith, and the second, enduring faith. These names describe the differences in these two types of faith well.

Initiatory faith, I believe, leans more heavily on hope. For as the Bible says, “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen,” (Heb. 11:1). Though I can't see if I will make it to work safely, I hope that I will. And because I have made it to work safely every day in the past, I have faith that I will today. It takes initiatory faith to move me to start my car in confidence.

Enduring faith is developed faith. It takes action, which is initiatory faith, and time to have the perfect faith that I will arrive to work safely. Having done it hundreds of times, having seen it every day over the last few years, I can easily say I know that I will arrive to work safely. What if I don't? Has my faith been destroyed? Hardly, rather, nothing has changed. My faith will endure tomorrow as I start my car, possibly having learned a valuable lesson.

The Journey

So it is with faith in God, but it's much grander. I believe the greatest thought one can have is God, and the greatest behavior we can imagine God exhibits is creation and that he created this universe, but more spectacularly, that he created us. I want to be like this God. I want to have everything he has and I want to be able to do everything he can do. At this point, I am open to the possibility that He may have other plans for me, or that he doesn't even exist. What's important right now, is that I have faith that I can know the truth regarding the existence of God. Initiatory faith is what moves me to search for Him.

Once I've begun my quest, initiatory faith is still the primary faith I am exercising in my search. I read a little here. I read a little there. I begin to understand how others see God. I learn that over the thousands of years of human history, all different concepts of God have been developed. I study them. I begin to recognize a few consistent themes, like prayer and morality. Perhaps these themes are universally accepted, that God is the source of morality and that we can communicate with Him.

Since I have always tried to live a moral life, I begin to have hope that if there is a God, that he will accept me as being a moral person. My initiatory faith has now developed some. Of all the books explaining the concept of God, some with great similarities between them, one of them stands out. This book is much like the others, but was published hundreds of years later. It contains some of the same characters as the older books, but also some new ones. It's central doctrine seems to be the same as well. The end of the book claims that if you pray to God, he will tell you if it is true.

The initiatory faith that I have had until now has so far endured. I know I am making progress in understanding the different concepts of God. The claim this book makes is quite fantastic. It says that we can talk to God, and that He will talk back! What better way to know if He exists than if He tells me so? But how will I know that it will be Him, and not my imagination?

I decide that before I will test the claim, I will study the doctrines of the Church that published the book. I am still acting through initiatory faith. As I learn the Gospel according to this Church, I imagine how good it's fruit would taste if it were true. My knowledge of this Church's history and doctrines increases. I trace connections with the book and the older books and as I study them together, I recognize their consistent message.

The Gospel seems to be the same in both, and this Church's doctrine is that the God of the older books is the same God in the newer book. That the older books were written by one group of people a few thousand years ago, and that the newer book was written by a separate group of people around the same time, on the other side of the world. The newer book was not always around in it's present form. The Church claims the original book was revealed to their founder and he translated it by the gift and power of God into what we read today. The events regarding the publication of this book seem impossible, as well as the testimonies given by so many individuals regarding it's authenticity. The Church also claims to be a restoration of the Church established in the older books. It claims to have the authority to act in the name of God, as did the Church in the older books. Both the older books, the newer book, and some other publications by the Church seem to be consistent and seem to explain each other.

I soon decide, having used reason to eliminate all other possibilities, that if God exists, that this must be His Church and His doctrine. For that, I decide to learn more about what this Church calls “the plan of salvation.” This doctrine explains that we were all created by God, that we look like Him, and that we can become like Him. If we follow the plan of salvation, make and keep sacred covenants, we can be gods ourselves. This is called exaltation. How I would love to achieve exaltation! To be a heavenly king and queen with my wife, and to create worlds! This is a very appealing prospect.

Of all that I've learned about this Church and the promises of it's doctrine, my initiatory faith has developed and I begin to feel ever more confident that I can know if God exists and if this is His Church. This faith that I have, and this hope that I have, causes me to act in accordance with the principles of this Gospel. I begin to change my manners and habits. I apply the dietary principles of what is called the Word of Wisdom and soon I know that they are true. Though I have yet to test the claim in the Church's book, I have tested other aspects of this Church's doctrine and I have come to a knowledge that they are true principles. I have seen how a belief in this book have helped others to become better people and to live better lives.

As I test the different principles, I see their effects in my life and in the life of my family. I feel that I am in a good place, and if there is a God, perhaps he has helped me get here. My initiatory faith is strong and enduring well. I begin to study the arguments made by those not in the Church, about the Church. I study them side-by-side with the counter-arguments made by those in the Church. With each claim, I find a logical counter-argument. I begin to have enduring faith that every argument made against the Church has been answered satisfactorily and reasonably. My belief that if God exists, he exists in this Church, is strengthened. But the question still remains, does God exist? I also wonder why the existence of God is not obvious to all. The only answer I have is that he may only want to reveal Himself to those who seek after Him. This is not unreasonable given that He has not made His existence obvious to everyone.

I am finally to a point where I have initiatory faith and sincerity enough to test the Church's book. This is very important to me and I must get it right, and I must be prepared for the outcome. Truth about God was always my goal. If He exists, then it is Him that I will align myself with first and foremost. I proceed to do as the book instructs.

Perhaps I get what the book claims I'll receive, immediately, but perhaps I don't. Perhaps I only get a little; just enough to really stir up my thoughts in wonder; just enough to keep my initiatory faith moving forward. Thinking about all of the principles and doctrine in this Gospel, and all of the promises that will be fulfilled if the covenants are kept, I decide to continue participating with this Church.

The more I hope that the promises will be kept, I commit myself to living a Gospel-centered life and studying the words of those who are believed to speak for God. I am careful not to accept just anything, but I am willing to believe that I can have someone to help me they call the Holy Ghost. To show this, I agree to their baptismal ordinances and believe this is the right thing to do at this time. The more I continue in this path, the more I see how many blessings I have. I decide to thank God for them and assume that He is there and expects gratitude from his creations.

The years pass and my initiatory faith is being transformed into enduring faith. I believe that my faith has been confirmed time and time again through keeping the principles of this Gospel. I am now living, full-swing, a God-centered life. I have faith in God and faith in His promises. I teach these to my children and admonish them to always hold the search for the truth about the existence of God as their goal. I teach them how important and glorious it will be if the promises are true. Their faith is initiated not only through my example, but through their own search as they grow.

As For Me

Perhaps the above has a little self-reflection in it. I was born “in the covenant,” as they say, but I don't consider my conversion until I was an adult. It too was a search for truth. The search for truth for each of us is different, but the levels of faith are the same. I believe I have found truth, so far as it has been revealed to me, in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I have good reasons to believe it's principles and doctrines are true.

I believe I am past the level of initiatory faith and have moved on to enduring faith. It is this faith that I must allow to guide me towards knowing God. I will continue hoping for the covenants I have made to one-day be fulfilled. I will continue studying the Gospel, and sharing what I have found to be true, for myself. I feel the spirit of doubt from time to time, as I'm sure everyone does. I always find answers to the questions that I have. And I will continue growing and serving and doing everything I hope will get my family and I to the Celestial Kingdom and beyond. For this, is faith.

My Exchange with Bill Keller

It's been almost 3 years since a short email exchange I had with the Reverend Bill Keller of LivePrayer.com. I thought this blog would be a better place for it than my Gmail archive. After writing an article for USAReligiousNews.com (cross-published at TheChristianPost.com) about the Mormon church, I sent him an email to start what I hoped to be a good debate. But I was disappointed, as you'll see in his reply. It seems USAReligiousNews.com has removed his article after I forwarded our exchanged to them expressing my disapproval in their publishing of his article. I will separate each email with "-----" and his words are in blue:

(September 7th, 2006)
Mr. Keller,

This email is in response to an article you published at USA Religious News (www.usareligiousnews.com) on September 6th, 2006. You have made several statements that I believe to be inaccurate in regards to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I would like to present your article back to you with my comments after each of your points, in italics:

Mormon Church is a Cult, Not a Protestant Denomination (title)

The Mormon church, or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is as much a cult as any other religion. The Oxford Compact English dictionary defines the word cult as "a system of religious worship directed towards a particular figure or object."

Furthermore, the LDS Church has never claimed to be a Protestant denomination. In fact, it is neither Protestant nor Catholic. It claims to be the same Church organized by Jesus Christ, and prophesied to be restored before His second coming; "And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters."

2006-09-06 -- USA Religious News -- Commentary

By Bill Keller, Founder LivePrayer.com

(LivePrayer.com) -- The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints presents itself as a denomination among denominations. In reality, it has all the signs of a religious cult.

Again, I'm not sure if you are using the term "cult" as it should be used or as a dishonest scare tactic for the unlearned. Either way, I'm interested in seeing a list of these signs that make it a religious cult. (The term "religious cult" is redundant, by the way.)

This particular cult, abbreviated more often as "Mormons," espouses much that is not Christian, though its public relations image presents members as clean living, upright citizens under Christ.

I don't know if I can respond to this. It really doesn't offer anything tangible. What it does give me is a lot of rhetoric that I think is better to ignore.

Like some other bizarre entities in a democracy as the United States, secular investigators are reluctant to delve into Mormon myths. Therefore, Mormons continue day by day with their operations intact.

Of course they do. Their operations are honest and led by revelation from God; "We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."

Mormons exhibit themselves as true to the Bible while in reality they appropriate dogma in contradiction to the Bible. By adding The Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price on the same par as the Bible, Mormons disobey God by desecrating the Scriptures.

How is it that by publishing new revelation from God, the LDS Church desecrates the Scriptures? Is God not allowed to add to His word? Where in the Bible is this doctrine taught? Since the Bible doesn't say this then it must be in error. But that can't be. What we have, in this case, is a paradox. Fortunately, I don't believe that revelation has ceased, and neither should any disciple of Jesus Christ, "Upon this rock (that being revelation, as Peter had received concerning the divinity of Jesus Christ) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Divine revelation states that no one is permitted to add to or subtract from the biblical data provided by the Eternal One. Yet Mormons discard such warning by placing their own humanly manufactured literature in parallel to God’s World.

I believe that the Eternal One has every right to add to or subtract from the biblical data that He has provided. I'm unaware of any Biblical scripture contrary to this belief. I'm curious to know your beliefs on whether or not any revelation or authority was given to those who compiled the King James version of the Holy Bible, or any version for that matter. Was it God or man that decided what to include or exclude in that book? If it was God, did he communicate that through revelation? I'm sure you'll reject that notion. If it was man, should it be so heavily leaned on? After all, men or mortal, and to err is human.

Further, Mormons state the name of "Jesus Christ" in the title of their cult, one of the cleverest moves for Mormons do not regard Christ as divine. Christ, according to Mormon definition, is a lesser god. He is not a part of the triune godhead but lower cased.

This statement is either a blatant lie or it shows your complete ignorance of LDS theology. "We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost." This is the Godhead. Jesus Christ is the Son of God. He is subordinate in the same sense that I am subordinate to my father. If you were familiar with LDS doctrine, you would know that we believe Jesus Christ is Jehovah of the Old Testament. With this in mind, it's easy to understand our beliefs of the divinity of Jesus Christ. That he created this Earth. That he condescended below all things to take upon him the sin of mankind. He laid down his life for us. He took it up again through the resurrection, that in Him all may be made alive. He performed what only a God could perform, an infinite atonement. "For as death hath passed upon all men, to fulfil the merciful plan of the great Creator, there must needs be a power of resurrection, and the resurrection must needs come unto man by reason of the fall; and the fall came by reason of transgression; and because man became fallen they were cut off from the presence of the Lord. Wherefore, it must needs be an infinite atonement." "Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit."

Recently Mormon polygamist Warren Jeffs has come to the fore in the news. This item affords the opportunity to reveal the Mormon camouflages, this group masquerading as a legally and spiritually legitimate body of believers.

The Warren Jeffs group is not affiliated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in any way. They are a separate church with the separation of everything else that goes along with being a separate church. They don't claim to belong to the LDS Church. It's this type of misinformation that encourages misunderstanding and irreverence towards other religions. I don't believe Jesus Christ would influence such behavior, at least not the Jesus Christ of the Bible.

The Mormon cult, headquartered in Salt Lake City, has worldwide holdings worth billions of dollars. Included are TV and radio stations as well as newspapers; therefore, Mormons have the ability to use the secular media in a major way to help further their cause.

The LDS Church will obey the will of God in spreading the message of the restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ through whatever avenues are opened to them. But they will do it "only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned." Further, "We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men; indeed, we may say that we follow the admonition of Paul—We believe all things, we hope all things, we have endured many things, and hope to be able to endure all things. If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things." And encourage others to do the same.

As soon as the Jeffs case broke, the cult’s media machine went to work to distance itself from this man. While the FLDS is not part of the main body in Salt Lake City, non-Mormons must not be deceived. The theology of Jeffs’ FLDS comes from one source — the flawed dogmatic contortions of Mormon Church founder Joseph Smith.

This is simply more rhetoric on an old theme. Joseph Smith was ordained of God to restore the Gospel of Jesus Christ. What the world re-obtained through Joseph Smith was here while Christ was on Earth and shortly thereafter. If you would care to explain what you mean by "flawed dogmatic contortions," I would be most willing to discuss them with you.

For instance, polygamy was a hallmark of Smith’s cult from the beginning. His false theology teaches that after men die, they will have many wives in "heaven."

This is more ignorance of LDS theology and practice. We believe what Jesus Christ told his disciples about the seven brothers and their wife in the question posed to him, "Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." What this means is that unless a man is married and sealed to his wife by the authority of the Priesthood, they will not be married in the next life. You state that I believe that when I die I will have many wives. This is untrue. I will only have those sealed to me by the authority of the Priesthood. Currently, LDS men can only be sealed to one living woman.

As the cult went mainstream in the past 50 years, it realized that it would have to distance itself from polygamists’ beliefs since polygamy became illegal. So the headquarters in Salt Lake City changed this part of Smith’s cultic tenet in order to make a public stand against the practice. However, though forced to acknowledge US law, Mormons within their souls believed polygamy acceptable.

We do not deny that plural marriage, or the Patriarchal Order, is a principle of the Gospel. The revelation on this is still included and accessible, by every person, in our canon. It is the main revelation referenced when dealing with marriage in our theology. The Lord suspended the practice only, not the doctrine. We do not deny this. What we do deny is that any members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who practice polygamy are considered "in good standing" with the Church. All those who do practice polygamy are excommunicated from the Church.

One other point on this; the early LDS Church did not see their beliefs in conflict with the Constitution of the United States, they weren't. They saw the unconstitutional laws of men in conflict with the Laws of God. What would you do if your government wrote laws to ban the practice of baptism, as I'm sure you perform? Would you comply forthwith and abandon the practice? Let's be honest, we both know you would write an article for USA Religious News promoting civil disobedience to those laws, as I'd agree you should.

This public stand against polygamy is what gave rise to groups such as FLDS. What the public does not know is that there are hundreds of FLDS clones. Those living in Arizona, Utah, Idaho, parts of Western Canada understand this fact full well. Then why not bring to justice these polygamists? The answer is that there are not enough jails to hold them all if they were sentenced via American courts.

What sort of justice would you consider just? Would you have brought the same form of justice to Abraham or Isaac or Jacob, who were all practicing polygamists? What you are doing is spreading hate and misunderstanding, both I reject are inspired by the Prince of Peace, our Savior Jesus Christ.

Now note Elizabeth Smart’s kidnapping in June 2002. Eventually she was found alive, returned to her family. Why was she not murdered? Most kidnapped females are found dead or never discovered at all. She was found alive because she was Mormon, her wealthy father being a Mormon bishop. The parents surmised Elizabeth had been hidden inside a polygamist’s harem. Many girls her age suffer such fate.

I'd like very much for you to prove that the Smart family "surmised Elizabeth had been hidden inside a polygamist's harem". This is the silliest thing I've ever heard. It doesn't even deserve an intelligent response.

The reality is that she was kidnapped by Brian David Mitchell, a polygamist Mormon. However, Salt Lake City would make certain that that detail never got into the mass media.

Elizabeth had been whisked from her home to be one of Mitchell’s wives. He, reporting himself "a prophet of god," would have used that term for deity to brainwash young Elizabeth. Mormons believe that man becomes deity. Elizabeth then would have resigned her future to the "prophet," believing such to be divine will.

I think I've tired myself with the idea that you are being completely honest with your views of the "Mormon" church. It's hard to imagine one such as yourself professing to be a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I pray you will try to give an honest and accurate portrayal of the LDS Church to those you influence.

I look forward to reading a reply. May it be uplifting towards reaching a higher level of understanding of one another.

Regards,
Skyler J. Collins, Sr.

-----
(September 7th, 2006)
hey Skylar..I don't waste my time debating via email BRAINWASHED CULT MEMBERS..NOR WOULD I WASTE 2 MINUTES READING YOUR DRIVEL....I love when you cult members quote Smith's fantasy book..LOL..for the record..I have read the Book of Mormon..the Pearl of Great Price..your D&C...know personally Ed Decker..one of your favorite guys I am sure..LOL!...as well as another 12 very close friends..all who were once "bishops" in your cult..so trust me..I not only know your history..but the inner workings of your hideous cult..
..you can buy people like Larry Jones and others who do what they do for $$$..but a guy like me is only in this for one things..like Paul..to see men saved..Gal 1:6-12 is the applicable verse that describes your CULT..don't worry..you can keep tying to deceive people you are "just another Christina church":..but we both know there is NOTHING about your theology that is Christian..form your denial of the deity of Christ down thru your idiotic temple worship practices Joey stole form another cult he was part of..the Masons!!..
...now run along and keep spreading your lies..but don't worry..over 2.3 million people worldwide subscribe to the Daily Devotional that I write every morning..over 100k watch my "live" TV program 5 nights a week..that is going nationwide the first of the year..so I will continue to use the influence the God of the Bible ahs given me to insure many times a year I warn people of your CULT that is leading men's souls to eternal damnation..
..bottom line ..you are nothing but a tool of satan..but like your daddy..you will continue to be exposed!!!..BK

You will be in my prayers, be richly blessed,
Bill Keller

-----
(September 12th, 2006)
Mr. Keller,

I'm sorry you feel that way. I was looking for intelligent conversation with someone who is open-minded. I see that will not be the case here. My prayers go out to you and your congregations. May the Lord bless you and them in your endeavors.

Sincerely,
Skyler J. Collins, Sr.

An Objectivist Critique of Mormonism?

A friend of mine, Chris Brown, has written an excellent article looking at the objectivist critique of Christianity and examines whether or not it applies to Mormonism, for LDSFreemen.com. His introduction:

Many latter-day saints were drawn to ideas of laissez-faire capitalism after reading Ayn Rand’s best-selling novel Atlas Shrugged. While Rand’s views are foundational to her fiction works, it is in her non-fiction works, and particularly those of the founder of the Ayn Rand Institute Leonard Peikoff, where her philosophy—Objectivism—is delineated and developed into a more coherent framework. While Objectivism heavily criticizes Christianity as nothing more than mysticism, the more relevant discussion for this article regards whether this criticism applies to Mormonism. It is meant to answer whether the Objectivist judgment of Christianity in general, including faith and the nature of God, also applies to Mormonism.

In order to answer the question it becomes necessary to understand how Christianity is defined in the Objectivist system. The answer is neither simple nor straightforward because of revealed Mormon doctrine regarding the Apostasy, or the general falling away from the Truth that occurred over time. Additional complexity arises because Mormons, who also consider themselves Christians, employ the same, or at least similar, terminology as other Christians, but sometimes with sharply different definitions.

Read the entire thing here.