Elder in Exile

Let me preface this by saying I'm not a whiner and (most of the time) trust in the the Lord's inspiration when the bishop extends a calling. The only time I have ever asked to be released from a calling was when the bishop called me to be a YM leader without releasing me from the Nursery first. Anyway,...

In the less than 6 years we've been married, we have lived in 3 different wards (2 different stakes) and I have been called into the nursery in each of those wards. The first time, we had been married about a year and the ward had a lot of nursery children so I had a blast paying with all of them. And, because there were so many kids, we had several leaders, who were all cool and we had fun hanging out together those 2 hours.

The second time I was called into the nursery, we had just barely moved to a new stake and a new ward and it was just my wife and I in the nursery and, on a good Sunday, a maximum of 3 kids. Not so much fun. Then, my wife got pregnant and had a hard time with morning sickness so several Sundays we had nursery in the foyer of the church so my wife could relax on the couch. By the time my wife was ~8mos pregnant, they called me into the YM's organization and still had not released us. That's when (as mentioned earlier) we asked when we were going to be released.

A couple years down the road now and about a month before our youngest turned 18mos (and therefore eligible for Nursery), lo and behold, I get called into the nursery of our third (and current) ward. At first I didn't mind it and was having a blast playing with all the kids. The kids love me and the other leaders (sisters) are always commenting how the kids love me (its because I get involved and play with them, and not just sit and watch them and make sure they don't do anything they're not supposed to).

As I said, at first I didn't mind it, and both my kids love having me there, but then a couple weeks ago I had an epiphany that has dramatically affected how I view my calling. I realized that it kinda sucks that, just when I was about to have a  break from them and be able to listen and participate in lessons, I get pulled away from the chance to meet and associate with my peers in SS and EQ and am sent into exile and sequestering watching kids run around for two hours. After this thought came to my head, I started to wonder if I should explain how I feel to the bishop and ask to be release or just bide my time. And then I feel bad because we are ingrained that we shouldn't feel/think like this when it comes to church callings and they always talk about how hard it is to call people to the nursery. I don't want to sound ungrateful (or whatever the right term is) and ask to be released because the other three nursery workers (all sisters) have been in there far longer than me (one is even the bishop's wife) and I don't want to place the burden of finding a replacement back on the bishop sooner than he was ready. And I don't want it to look like I don't think the Bishop was inspired to call me there in the first place.

So there you have it. Now I sound like a whiner and a complainer. :-) Other than the standard "find a way to enjoy it, because God has a purpose in mind" advice, what other thoughts are there on this matter?

Star Wars Apologetics

a·pol·o·get·ics  (ə-pŏl'ə-jět'ĭks)   
n. (used with a sing. verb) 

1. 
   
   The branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines.
2. Formal argumentation in defense of something, such as a position or system.
   

So the other day I discovered that scientists named a recently discovered bacterial species after midi-chlorians (from Star Wars). I saw a discussion about it and one of the comments was something along the lines of "Great, now I'm going to have to pretend it doesn't exist, too." 

A sentiment (and one of many criticisms of the prequel trilogy) that seems to be common among many SW fans is that there is a big anachronism between how the Force is described in the original trilogy and the prequel trilogy. viz.:

In ANH (A New Hope, Episode IV) Obi-Wan Kenobi explains the Force to young Luke Skywalker thus:

The Force is what gives a Jedi his power. It's an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together.

 However, in TPM (The Phantom Menace, Episode I), Qui-Gon Jinn explains to young Anakin Skywalker that: 

Without the midi-chlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force. They continually speak to us, telling us the will of the Force. When you learn to quiet your mind, you'll hear them speaking to you.

Essentially, they were a symbiotic bacteria that lived inside the cells of all creatures, etc. 


Right from the start, looking at the two quotes, I can see a distinct difference. Obi-Wan was talking about the Force, itself, while Qui-Gon was explaining how it is possible to feel the Force. But as I was thinking about this at work this morning, I didn't have the luxury of having the quotes right in front of me so I realized something along a different line of thought. When Qui-Gon was explaining the Force, he was living in the Golden Age of the Republic where knowledge flowed freely and technology was continually advancing. While Obi-Wan was explaining it, the universe had more-or-less fallen into a "Dark Ages" similar to the Medieval Era of European history. A lot of the former knowledge had been forgotten or tainted, descended into realms of legend or myth, while the advent of technology had stagnated. Whether Obi-Wan, in his old age, simply forgot the previous light and knowledge he once had as a Jedi Knight in the Golden Age of the Republic, or he purposefully withheld the more complete and advanced information regarding the Force, it is unclear but if it was the latter, like I suspect it probably would be, the circumstances they were in were obviously not ideal for an in-depth lesson on history, science, etc., a much simpler, basic answer was sufficient for their needs. They were en route to the enemy base to go on a fool-hardy mission to rescue a princess from the enemy while they were on the ship of a smuggler that they had met earlier that day. Luke needed basic lessons on how to listen to the force and use a light-saber, not a detailed lesson on why they can hear the force. He needed a how not why explanation and I think Obi-Wan did a fine job of it, given the circumstances.


(P.S. if you can't tell, I'm one of the type of fans who actually really liked the prequel trilogy. Yes, I understand the negatives {Jar-Jar Binks must die!} but as a whole, I thought they were good to round out the story. Also, I'm also a fan of the changes GL made for the 1995 re-release and the DVD release. As GL has said, the changes he made were what he would have done had he had the resources back then. The DVD version is the version he had envisioned all along.)

Lara Hits A Big Milestone!

Today Lara poo poo'd in the potty! Lara has been sitting on the potty for a while now. Today she started squatting into position and Dave saw her and asked if she wanted to poo poo in the potty. She said yes, so he put her on the potty and she did it! Of course we forgot to take a picture of her big achievement (sitting on the potty, not of the actual poo). She is trying to show her big brother up. All he has done is sit on the potty...well he has pee'd in it before, but that was months ago. Whenever we ask him if he wants to go on the potty, he tells us no. Once we run out of diapers for him we're not giving him the choice anymore. That's going to be fun times =) Isn't it great how as parents it's ok for us to talk about pee and poop like its no big deal?
I guess I should stop stocking up on diapers for Lara if she's going to keep this up. Is it wrong of me to hope that she waits a while longer before potty training completely because of the stockpile of diapers I have for her?

Keeping the Sabbath Holy

So, where do you draw the line?

The Wifey and I minutes ago had a quick discussion about cleaning and keeping the Sabbath Day holy. She mentioned how it was strange that one of the only times she really feels strong motivation to clean the house is on Sunday when it is her personal belief that cleaning and chores like that are breaking the Sabbath. I, on the other hand, am a little more lenient and don't have a problem doing those things. Oddly enough, I don't think its OK to do laundry at a laundromat (or the apartment complex's laundry room ) but am fine doing laundry if you have a washer/dryer in your home. Even more oddly, my wife recently started couponing and having me go out Sunday morning to buy multiple copies of the newspaper for the coupons inside. I don't have a problem using the vending machines to do that (and today I even had to go inside a convenience store to get the last copies she needed. I know, sinner!) :-) So I'm wondering where everyone else draws the line. Is it okay to clean on the Sabbath? Do laundry? What are your thoughts and feelings?

Feeling Judged - In My Head Or For Real

A couple days ago my husband wrote a blog post called Brethren, Love Your Wives. In it, he expresses his appreciation for me and thoughts on where he would be without me. During, and after, reading it, I found myself not being able to appreciate what was said about me. Instead several thoughts crossed my mind such as, "Everyone thinks I am so lazy, they'll never believe what he is saying about me." How awful it is that instead of feeling lifted, loved and appreciated, I feel put down, alone and judged. My mom would say it's just in my head. I would have to agree if it wasn't for the fact I know people have said things behind my back. I've even been accused of not wanting to be a mother to my children, a comment that makes my heart ache, and makes the already harsh feeling towards myself, for not being able to take care of my children the way I wish I could, more intense.
Why is it we are so judgemental of others? Instead of trying to help out or find out what is really going on, we make snap judgements about what we see and let that affect our treatment of others. I know I have been guilty of this, and maybe that is why this is my trial. I need to remember the feelings I am going through so that I will refrain from doing the same to others.
It has been a trying several years, especially this last year. I never thought that child birth and recovery would be so hard on me. I never thought that I would go through some of the challenges I'm facing. I was once told, "You have your work cut out for you." I thought I knew what he meant at the time, and I'm realizing I have no clue. I realized I have been so caught up in wanting everything to go smoothly and quickly, but nothing in my life has ever been smooth and quick. Sometimes one or the other, but not both. You would think I would be use to it by now. I thought the trials I have already been through would be the hardest trials I would have to overcome, and this last year I was given a harder one. I'm sure it won't be the hardest trial I'll go through either.
I have been blessed with the ability to put on a "happy face." Though sometimes it feels more like a curse. People think I live a "perfect" life, never having a hardship or sad experience. I think I grew tired of it and let down my mask quit a few times the last couple of years. Maybe it's time to make my life seem "perfect" again. I don't think very many people like the "un-happy face" Corrina.
I think I've rambled on long enough. This was probably more cathartic for me than anything else. But I will end this post like this:
It's almost Father's Day and instead of focusing on how he would like to be appreciated, my husband decides to showcase me. Maybe he wanted to show others that what they may perceive as our relationship may not be the reality. Until my pregnancy with Jaron, I was the one who supported Dave. While others told him that he could not accomplish his goals, I was there to encourage him. It was not easy for him, I was not sure he could do it, but I did not let him know my doubts. Instead I gave him a shoulder to cry on and took care of things so that he did not have to worry. Since my pregnancy with Jaron, Dave has had to support me. He has been the one to take care of things while I've suffered. He has struggled, and most of the time he probably felt like a single parent. He has not complained about me. He has felt overwhelmed, and at those moments I was able to support him again by giving him an ear to listen and words of encouragement. There will come a time when it will be my turn to support him fully again.
I would be remiss if I did not recognize the true reason we have been able to make it through our trials, our Heavenly Father. He has provided the way for us to survive and make it through. Without Him, we would not be where we are today.
I'm truly fortunate to have a husband who cares greatly about me and puts me before himself. Even my mom reminds me of that when I forget, lol. I'm so thankful he is my companion and the father of my children. I'm glad that while the world may judge me, he does not listen to their negativity and continually praises me, even while they try to convince him that I do not praise him enough. I love you honey! We'll make it through this season of our life despite the criticism and judgement of others. I'm so thankful for your ability to ignore their attacks and focus on what is truly important. Thank you for your kind words and service, thank you for caring, thank you for being my husband.

WoW - Use of Tobacco

I was thinking about the Word of Wisdom (WoW, not World of Warcraft) recently and the focus of my thought process was led to the section on tobacco. I've always thought it interesting that it says: "And again, tobacco is not for the body, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill." (D&C 89:8) What does it mean to be used for bruises? I bang my shins up quite often at work and have what I call "perma-bruises" They just don't seem to go way. They're not painful or tender or anything, just a permanent darkened area that looks like a bruise. So I was wondering, could I just go buy a can of Skoal or Redman and rip off a plug and slap it on my shin? How does it help sick cattle? What does it men to be used with judgement and skill? Does that only refer to the sick cattle part or the bruise part also?


I decided to search online to see if I could find anything. I was able to find a couple sources about it but it was mostly just discussion board chatter. However, this news article describes the research of a doctor back in the '80s regarding it, and it does seem that he was finding evidence that distilled tobacco juice healed bruises 20% faster than non-treated bruises, but they had no clue as to what substance in the bruise could be causing it.


Websites about using tobacco for sick cattle was even scantier and many of the top responses to the Google Search "tobacco sick cattle" were critical of the church. But as I delved a little deeper into the search results, I did find some talk on a couple discussion boards about it. Does anyone have any better insight into this passage in the Word of Wisdom?

Brethren, Love Your Wives

(cross-posted on "Behold, It is Written...")

This is the title to an article in the July 1981 Ensign by Elder James E Faust. In it, he relates a time when Elder Boyd K. Packer asked him "What would you have been without your wife?" His immediate answer could have been "not much" but he chose to ponder and reflect upon that question for the next twenty-four hours before giving a full, self-honest answer. Although we've only been married less than 6 years, and we don't have a far-from-perfect marriage, I have often reflected on that vary question. I can honestly say that I wouldn't be much with out Corrina. She has given me direction, motivation, drive, and without her I would still be living with my parents, going to ARC, not really knowing what I wanted to do when I eventually got a degree from some university, somewhere (probably CSUS). I don't know what kind of job I would have and I would probably still rely on my parents' cars to get me where I need to go (why would I buy one myself when I could just use what's readily available for free?) To parrot Elder Faust's response: "I would have to answer honestly that without my wife I would have been pretty much a failure." Thanks to Corrina, I have completed a bachelor's degree, in the process of applying for pharmacy schools, and I know what area of expertise I want to specialize in.

The most sacred, intimate, and blessed relationship of life is between husband and wife. I do not love anybody like I love my wife. My mother has father, and my children have their companions, but Ruth is me. Our wives become part of us, and they become like our own flesh—and as Paul counseled, we should love them as such. (See Eph. 5:28–33.) The simple truth is that it is not good for man to be alone. The greatest sustaining influence in my mature life has been the constant supporting, unqualified, unreserved love I have felt for my wife. The sacred relationship with my wife has been the supreme benediction of my life. I just can’t imagine what my life would have been like without having had that blessing.

I struggle with this concept and I know I'm a horrible husband sometimes, but so far Corrina continues to stand by my side, pushing me to be a better husband, father, and person.

"One of the areas in which our wives perform a very great service is in their loving discipline of us. In their discipline they keep us closer to what we ought to be in our holy callings. In their discipline they teach us. It is part of the polishing we need to fill in the holes in our character and smooth the rough edges and make us more adequate. Together we are a team—we are one." Ain't that the truth! I admit that Corrina is WAY more spiritual than I could ever hope to be and she is the one that always pushes me to magnify my callings the best I can.

Elder Faust then relates about President N. Eldon Tanner:

President N. Eldon Tanner’s daughter, Isabel, says about her father, which with his knowledge I share, “When Mother married Daddy he was just a farm boy.” But she went on to say that when Sister Tanner would give him a loving suggestion, unlike many men who bridle or argue when their wives tell them something that is good for them, he would simply say, “If you think that’s what I should do, I’ll do it.”

I definitely have a lot to learn from President Tanner.I urge every man reading this to heed the words of Elder Faust:

Perhaps in these times of great stress we can become what we ought to be in our relationships with our wives. Perhaps the eternal “every day” causes some of us to be more casual than we ought to be. Of course, we love our wives, but perhaps we take them for granted too much of the time. Perhaps too often we fail to express our appreciation to them in little ways. I know I do. We could certainly show more affection and always look upon our companions with love and respect. We can surely be polite and courteous if we try. We can nourish and cherish them.

I love my wife, Corrina, more than words can describe. Unfortunately, actions speak louder than words and I don't do a very good job of showing it either. But, as I strive to follow the examples of Elder Faust and President Tanner, I hope that I can make it so not a day goes by without Corrina feeling the love I have for her. What can you do to improve your relationship?

Further Light and Knowledge (updated)

As I am a newcomer to the Bloggernacle, I was pleasantly surprised that I have been finding quite a bit of discussion on the topic of evolution and how it fits into the gospel. Having taken several biology courses, and even  recently completing a course on Evolutionary Psychology, this has been a topic of great interest to me. Even though I have a solid testimony of the truthfulness of the Gospel, and realize that only through prayer and manifestation of the Spirit can this be obtained, I tend to also think logically and scientifically. I am very aware that many in the Church feel that the two are not reconcilable and it is dangerous to discuss gospel topics from a scientific stand point.

I believe that God is a god of science and uses scientific truths/laws in his works (some, if not most, of the laws he uses are science that has not yet been revealed to man, and therefore appear miraculous. An example of this is electricity: lightning was a miracle until it was discovered how to harness the power of electricity to use for our purposes). I'm not trying to say that all of His scientific laws are able to be discovered during our sojourn here on earth, but they exist and someday, as we continue our education in life and in the life to come, part of our Eternal Progression will be able to be creators of worlds and we will need to know those laws.

Many members (most?) look at evidence provided by the earth and justify it away as a way for H.F. to test our faith: the geologic strata, as well as the fossil record says the earth is millions and millions of years old and evolution is how life came to be upon the earth, but its been only 6000 years since the Fall of Adam so therefore that must mean H.F. just put all that there to see if we would believe the Heresy of Darwin or the teachings of the Gospel. I, however, don't feel that is the case. In Alma 30, Alma is contending with Korihor, an Anti-Christ, who claims that he believes there is no God. In response, Alma declares:

 40 And now what evidence have ye that there is no ^aGod, or that Christ cometh not? I say unto you that ye have none, save it be your word only.

  41 But, behold, I have all things as a ^atestimony that these things are true; and ye also have all things as a testimony unto you that they are true; and will ye deny them? Believest thou that these things are true?

All things testify of God. All things. Some look at the "Golden Ratio / Fibonacci Sequence" as evidence of the existence of God. I whole heartedly agree; I think it is really amazing. I go one step further and declare that even the geologic strata and the fossil record testify of H.F. because they are the physical evidence that was left behind during His creative process.

Now, I don't even pretend to have all the answers. And the more I've been reading into the subject, the more questions are developed. For example: The fossil record is very clear that animals have evolved over eons. There is even the fossil record of pre-Homo sapien hominids. How do Neanderthals, Homo habilus, etc. fit into the scriptural doctrine that A&E were the first humans H.F created? (What is human? is Homo sapiens the only acceptable definition of 'human'? This question is discussed on this post over at MormonMatters. The author of which post, FireTag, has been helpful in directing me towards other sources for reading on this and other topics.

Even well known Mormon scholars have chimed in over the years (as to be expected) concerning this topic. Some pertinent opinions can be seen here (muchos thanks go out to Jared* over at LDS Science Review for the post and the subsequent conversation in the comment section). He also pointed me over to this blog that, although (he explained to me) is not used much, it is still full of valuable information.

One line of thinking (that, so far, I seem to be most aligned to) is this: The seven "days" of creation were who-knows-how-long periods of creations, not seven, 24-earth-hour periods. Additionally, we have no idea how long A&E were in the The Garden before they partook of the fruit and were thus cast-out. Therefore, It is possible that God set evolution in motion outside of the garden for the plants and animals found there. However, a major argument against that idea is that there was no death before The Fall.

2 Nephi 2:22:

22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.

Moses 6:48:

 48 And he said unto them: Because that Adam ^afell, we are; and by his fall came ^bdeath; and we are made partakers of misery and woe.

 Many Church leaders have spoken in favor of the idea that this pertains to the whole earth. Many others (perhaps just as many) have spoken against this interpretation. Joseph F. Smith and B.H. Roberts, for example, were of the former opinion. While James E. Talmage, on the other hand, felt that was incorrect. The following  I have taken from this website, also linked above (thanks again to Jared*).

One must also not overlook an earlier debate on the issue of "pre-Adamites" between Elder Brigham H. Roberts of the Seventy and then-Elder Joseph Fielding Smith was brought to an end at the instruction of the First Presidency. Part of the debate centered around whether there was death prior to the Fall. At the request of the First Presidency, Elder James E. Talmage gave a talk in the tabernacle, entitled "The Earth and Man." In it, he spoke of fossilized animals and plants and said:

These lived and died, age after age, while the earth was yet unfit for human habitation.

With the approval of the First Presidency, this address was published in the Deseret News, as a Church pamphlet, and later in The Instructor.^[5] Clearly, then, a universal lack of death prior to the fall is not a necessary belief within the Church, since leaders and members have held both positions.

 Another scholar, whose other work I find reliable and trustworthy, is Hugh Nibley. In the limited research I have done on my own, I have not found any definitive statements establishing his opinion on the matter. However, this site contains for download research notes and other unpublished works. This article was written by Nibley about archaeology and religion (admittedly, I have not read it yet). And this blog post also discusses the subject. Please correct me if I am interpreting it wrong, but it seems to me that he strongly disagrees with evolution. However, I can't help but wonder if his opinion would have changed with the ever increasing fossil evidence. He seems to be an honest and open scholar that would be slow to discredit the increasing evidence to support the theory of evolution.

So basically, I feel that evolution happened, and still happens. We have sufficient evidence to support that plants and animals have and are evolving. What I don't understand is how humans fit into it all. There is ample evidence to suggest that Homo sapiens evolved from other hominids over many eons. But the scriptures say that A&E were the first man and woman created. on a couple different occasions, there have been statements from the Catholic Church suggesting their doctrine is shifting over to an idea that the A&E story is more figurative and that H.F. let evolution occur until He decided to place a soul in a couple Homo sapiens and call them A&E and the first people. I don't personally believe that, but felt it pertinent to express one possible idea.


UPDATE: Ok, so there's a lot of discussion currently happening in the Bloggernacle about this subject, stuff being said faster than I can analyze it. After originally posting this, I was directed to more source material that shed new light on the subject in my mind. Allen, over at The Convergence of Science and Religion, directed me to an essay he wrote on this very subject. Fortunately for me, it was fairly easy reading and explained more fully. Basically, if I understand it well, the Fall of Adam, from a physical world standpoint, was not instantaneous, but took millions of years for life to evolve, etc. The basic timeline is:

• God created a physical world that had no death. This world included the Garden of Eden.
• Adam and Eve were placed in the garden and were thus immortal.
• Adam and Eve partook of the fruit, and the immortal world was replaced by a mortal world, i.e. the Fall of Adam occurred, a fall from immortality to mortality.
• The process of the world becoming mortal was not instantaneous. It took millions of years in earth time for God to create the mortal world via the natural laws that govern the mortal world, and God used evolution as one of his tools in creating the mortal world.

 One paragraph from his essay further clarified it that mortal time is not the same as immortal time, the following really clarified the concept in my mind:

Am I saying that Adam and Eve just sat around for millions of years waiting for their mortal world to evolve? No, not at all. I expect the millions of years it took for the earth to evolve passed quickly for them, since time belongs to mortality and Adam and Eve were not yet mortal. Perhaps this time of waiting was the time between their partaking of the fruit and their leaving the Garden. In other words, they chose to become mortal, and a short time later, from their viewpoint, they inhabited the new mortal world. From our viewpoint, Adam and Eve chose to become mortal, and millions of years later, they inhabited the mortal world. In support of this difference in time, Einstein’s Theory of Special Relativity teaches that time is variable, that a series of events might take a long time or a short time, depending on the viewpoint of the observer.

 And then just yesterday, as I was pondering the above new information, I saw this discussion regarding what Nibley thought about evolution. Fortunately, it has a quote from FAIR that parrots my own beliefs, mentioned above, about Nibley: "The science has advanced substantially since Nibley's article, and so its scientific claims should no longer be considered current. However, his theologic and historic perspective is still useful." 


So basically, although I have found answers for a lot of personal questions regarding this topic, and feel I have found a little bit of the "further light and knowledge" referenced in the title, I think I have dived in over my head trying to summarize it and present it from an interesting and fresh perspective in a blog post, when there are so many other voices out there that are doing a great job investigating this and presenting the material. However, I would like to put a question out there to anyone who may read this: How do you think A&E fit into the fossil/evolutionary record? please discuss.

Sword of Laban

Hello Dear Readers,
I am going to throw a question out to y'all and let you discuss:

What was the ultimate fate of the Sword of Laban? Did Moroni bury it with the Gold Plates in Cumorah? Were they in the stone box when Joseph Smith recovered the plates? We read in the BofM that it was passed down from king to king, along with the Liahona and other relics:

 16 And moreover, he also gave him charge concerning the records which were engraven on the ^aplates of brass; and also the plates of Nephi; and also, the ^bsword of Laban, and the ^cball or director, which led our fathers through the wilderness, which was prepared by the hand of the Lord that thereby they might be led, every one according to the heed and diligence which they gave unto him. (Mosiah chapter 1)

 Let me note that Moroni never records what he buried in the Hill Cumorah with the plates because he never actually relates burying them because he was busy writing on them. In the PoGP, Joseph Smith relates:

52 Having removed the earth, I obtained a lever, which I got fixed under the edge of the stone, and with a little exertion raised it up. I looked in, and there indeed did I behold the ^aplates, the ^bUrimand Thummim, and the breastplate, as stated by the messenger. The box in which they lay was formed by laying stones together in some kind of cement. In the bottom of the box were laid two stones crossways of the box, and on these stones lay the plates and the other things with them.

 He never specifically mentions it was there, but at the same time, he never mentions that it wasn't. My wife and I read that this evening (well, from the abridged version in the intro to the BofM) so I asked her if the sword was in the box. When she realized that JS never mentions it, she began to wonder where that idea came from. With a little investigation I discovered D&C 17:

1 BEHOLD, I say unto you, that you must rely upon my word, which if you do with full purpose of heart, you shall have a ^aview of the ^bplates, and also of the ^cbreastplate, the ^dsword of Laban, the^eUrim and Thummim, which were given to the ^fbrother of Jared upon the mount, when he talked with the Lord ^gface to face, and the ^hmiraculous directors which were given to Lehi while in the wilderness, on the borders of the ⁱRed Sea.

 So, we know that the three witnesses were promised to see the Sword of Laban along with the plates, Urim and Thummin, etc. We also know that JS gave the plates back to the angel Moroni so that the Angel could reveal it to them (see The Testimony of Three Witnesses).
So, was the Sword in the box with the plates or was it not? discuss.

Jumped the Gun

Some may have briefly seen a post titled "Further Light and Knowledge". It has temporarily been taken down as I was directed to new source material after it had been published, (hat tip Allen). Once I have had the chance to examine the new material, I will edit the post and re-publish it. Thank you for your patience as I work out the bugs of this blog.

Marvel Vs. DC

Marvel and DC are the two biggest mainstream comic book companies in the United States.

DC is famous for heroes like Superman, Batman, Green Lantern, um... Robin?... OK, so that's all I got for DC.

Marvel is famous for heroes like the entire X-men Team, Iron Man (Red Robot, as Jaron calls him), The Incredible Hulk, Spiderman, The Fantastic Four, DareDevil, and the list goes on and on.

I was thinking about it today and I realized they have some fundamental differences and yet one very noticeable similarity: Iron Man and Batman. They were both child prodigies born to bazillionaire families, both have no actual super power (therefore, completely self made heroes) both use a ton of cool gadgets, that they invented themselves(!), both have special armour (granted, Iron Man armor is a little more all inclusive than Batman armor). Now, I'm not going to discount the differences. Batman is motivated by revenge while, (if the movie portrayal is accurate to the comic book) Iron Man is basically just a spoiled rich kid out for a good time (although there is the whole "my company has been selling my weapons to the bad guys, I have to atone for this", but he is still out there thinking "I'm flying around in a metal suit I made and that's friggin' awesome!")

Of the two of them, I think I definitely prefer Batman over Iron Man. Don't get me wrong, I think Iron Man is awesome, perhaps it is just because I have more exposure to Batman. The dichotomy is, however, I definitely prefer Marvel over DC any day of the week. I was never of fan of Superman (c'mon, he's an alien with super strength, laser vison, xray vision, can fly, etc. etc. etc. and the only way to kill him is with a space rock). Marvel heroes are all normal people that have had their powers thrust upon them (for the most part) by accident, usually involving radiation. The X-men, obviously, is caused by a genetic mutation, but they are still just trying to cope with the burden they've been given. Another big difference, when you think of superheroes with capes, you think of the DC camp: Superman, Batman,...um...does Green Lantern wear a cape? But I can't think of any Marvel hero that wears a cape. And, as Edna Mode pointed out to Bob Parr on Disney/Pixar's The Incredibles, capes are a bad idea, they get caught in jet engines, snagged on missiles, caught in elevators, etc.




So what do you think: If Iron Man and Batman were to get in a brawl, who would win? Why? My money is on Batman. Also, which is better, the Marvel Universe or the DC Universe? Discuss.