Celebrating personal discordia and spiritual anarchy.




Search This Blog


"Anarchy is not intended to be sustainable. It is not a system of government, a codified list of rules and beliefs, or a mind set geared toward cultural constructivism. It is a spark, a flash, a small flame that ignites a paradigm-obliterating explosion. It is destructive by nature. It lies dormant and, like diesel fuel, can only be ignited by tremendous pressure. It deconstructs. It strips flesh from bone and grinds bone to dust. It is doomed to consumption in the conflagration instigated by its own primal spark. It is a catalyst. It is tinder. It is powder and fuse."

Rich Oliver




Gods-eye View

Sexual attraction cements a relationship if the relationship can be consummated within the first year to 18 months...after that, hormone levels drop and the pace becomes less frenetic. That's why a lot of young LDS couples meet, court and marry in less than a year, then wonder what happened when the attraction wanes. Marrying because you can't wait to have sex is not much different than having sex because you can't wait for marriage.
A long term relationship should be based on trust, compatibility and the long conversation…not so much on hot newlywed sex. Really, it passes.

It’s not a bad thing being attracted to your fiancé, just make sure that isn’t the only compatibility you share before you tie the knot ESPECIALLY if neither one of you has any previous sexual experience. Sex isn’t amazing the first time, or with everyone and people change after the initial attraction wears thin. Put a year or so in the courtship before you tie the knot….or get down and dirty and see if the attraction is real and not based on anticipation and fantasy. Sometimes the anticipation is the real attraction and the actual sexual union is anticlimactic.

Does he have a job? Does he like kids? Is he kind? Is he honest? You should be having these kinds of discussions before you let the hormones dictate the pace and path of the rest of your adult life. Also…it’s a lot harder to be the attracted one in a relationship than the attractor, believe me. It’s better if he’s into you, honestly.

If he matches up on all areas, and you still wanna get married, then by all means do it! Marriage is a gamble at any rate with 50-50 odds. Just hedge your bets at the onset…

ALSO is anyone else creeped out inviting the spirit into the bedchamber or even wondering if your naked, awkward, impassioned, bare-assed blunderings, confused forays and spontaneous guttural expressions are “pleasing” to your father, even a Heavenly one? I am afraid that you may be in for a very, very rude awakening when things are unwrapped and plugged in if you are not. Sex isn’t like the movies ya know…or maybe you don’t…We are talking about an act even more private, and often less elegant, than using the toilet here…. Is God invited into that as well? Jeepers. Ug. Damn. Jeepers again. Ew.

The very thought of spiritualizing sex on that level is pretty much nature’s birth control for me. Seriously? If my wife had asked to say a prayer before our first night, it would have taken several bottles of Viagra to restore the mojo and a quart of Johnny Walker to dissociate from the image of a heavenly voyeur…. I am soooooo creeped out right now……

Raptured by Zombies

Damn

Two days left till the good people fly up into the air and the dead rise to walk the earth. Zombie apocolypse is here and I don't have all the ammo I intended to horde. That sucks. Really sucks. I should have spent more time at the shooting range and in Walmart's ammo department than at Betos...

Yea, I ain't flyin out, so I'm preppin to kick zombie ass. See you Saturday, aye?

Filter Me, Jesus

Language is a construct, a program for translating electrical stimuli into sound waves and broadcasting it. My guess is the creator is not even obligated to use this method. In a state of existence that presupposes absolute knowledge and omniscience, indirect communication is neither effective nor warranted. Language is a product of the vessel (US) imposing structure upon the incoming stimuli. The Creator doesn’t work in language, but image and direct, experiential somatic stimuli. Language is subjective and cannot possibly convey the experiential knowledge required to get the cosmic message into our minds. Our ability to explain the message to others, however, is where the communication falls flat. That’s why it has to be personal, intimate direct and experiential. Think about that the next time your ecclesiastical leaders tell you they have a revelation for you…they are going to filter that direct communication through their own semantic / experiential filters and it will, unavoidably, be colored and biased by the limitations of both.

When I image God, I imagine a state that leaves nothing to interpretation… a “world” where subjectivity cannot exist and everything is a direct empirical, sensual sampling in real time. You would know what kind of soul a person possess because you would be able to experience it directly without filters, measure it precisely and formulate an exact, fact based Gestalt based on solid evidence. No guesswork. No faith…just sure knowledge.

What if the Creator exists as an instrument of pure sensate interface and, as such, is able to delineate, without error or deviation, each and every aspect of the cosmos individually as it is encountered…rather than the learned being applying subjective gleaned knowledge to each and every decision and observed process? Which would be more omniscient? Which would represent fairness and justice more? A Creator that takes passion and opinion out of the equation and sorts our individual souls according to an actual weight and measure of our intrinsic soul-stuff would be the ultimate Gestalt engine, the ultimate impartial judge, the ultimate source of absolute fairness in the universe…..

Damn, that would leave us with a real dilemma then, with real responsibility for the makeup and resonance of our own souls…

The Science of Prayer

In my belief system, spiritual promptings are somatic reactions to fluctuating electrical impulses....like pressure, a warm spot, even the subtle movement of a pendulum. They register on the human body, basically a bio-electric pulse engine, and an individual can learn to recognize the somatic manifestation through attention and practice. Look into kenesiolical response based alternative treatments like EFT and Meridian Therapy, Chakra healing, Yoga, acupressure and acupuncture, etc… The “still small voice” is often our own internal dialogue calling an integral somatic response to our attention. LDS theology suggests a similar mindset, that a somatic, physiological response of a certain order (in this case a burning in the bosom or a stupor of thought) occur as an indication of affirmation or negation in relation to an analogue request. The verbiage is archaic and based in 19th Century lexicon, but the archetypal underpinnings are concise none the less. I think the error occurs in assuming that one person’s subjective somatic response will be the same for others. Some people get a ringing in the ears, some feel dizzy, some actually get the stupor for yes and the burning for no (yea some of us are hardwired backwards it would seem).

Next time you are in the midst of prayer, in a quiet room without TV, radio, computer or your cell phone, (electrical interference, yo), your kids or your spouse…while not under the influence of drugs, alcohol, tobacco or a recent church meeting, ask for a confirmation of the “yes response’ and sit very still observing everything in your body from a slightly detached mental position. Note anything that wiggles, moves, or feels differently. Now do the same for the “no response”. Try it a few more times until you see a pattern. Try it outside of the prayer situation. Ask simple, mundane questions that you already know the answer to and observe the somatic response. Try asking short-term, future based questions with analogue yes/no answers …”will there be mail in the mailbox?” or “will my SO be home by 5:15?... and see if your response matches the actual event. Confidence grows with experience and practice.

Prayer is a science. We are machines. It is possible to apply empirical processes to learning and developing prayer-ability. It really is.

Pedantia Christianus

I love CS Lewis, but he is fettered by a nagging, obtuse refusal to look outside of a black and white universe. He anthropomorphizes good and evil and, in doing so, externalizes the shadow self, the unloved aspects of the human soul that we all try so desperately to distance ourselves from and deny. Christianity as a whole seems plagued by the practice of sanctification, of removing the dross and chaff when there really is no way to remove these aspects of ourselves without essentially performing a spiritual lobotomy. We are woefully incomplete without the unloved, shadow aspects of self. Good and evil exist within the souls of every living thing. Positive and negative aspects of creation move in perfect accordance within both micro and macro systems throughout the cosmos. Both exist only in relation to one another. Both are essential for creation to distill into material reality.

We cannot dispel or destroy the negative aspects of ourselves without obliterating ourselves in the process. We can, however, strive to achieve equilibrium between light and dark through the practice of moderation. Moderation suggests experiential knowledge of all things at a moderate level….abstinence isn’t moderation anymore than indulgence…

Externalization of the shadow aspects of our own soul is, essentially, shirking responsibility for them. Assigning an external, anthropomorphic form to them and assigning responsibility for our salvation, actions and happiness to these forms represents complete and total subjugation to an external locus of control. It is voluntary servitude…slavery…the very opposite of self actualization and enlightenment.

Lights and Knowledge and Bears, Oh My!

I feel errors in prophecy occur when, once again, mythos and logos collide and demand rectification.

I read tarot and engage in dream interpretation. These tools are, literally, considered Urim and Thummim.

(Don’t believe me? Look at this) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urim_and_Thummim

Keep in mind that Joseph’s was the one used by the Brother of Jarrod and not the same one used by Aaron and Moses. Each had, reportedly, different functions and abilities…

I am able to see the present and past quite clearly, but the future, especially in terms of time, is more mercurial and is completely dependant upon choice. Time means nothing in fourth dimensional (imaginable) reality. The readings are subject to the beliefs of the reader and his/her interaction with the one seeking advice. The quality of information received depends on the ability of the reader and the particular mindset at the time of the divination…sleep, alcohol, illness, mood all influence the outcome of the reading and the accuracy. Personal interpretation can be clouded. When my Thoth tarot says “something dark is brewing” it can really mean “someone is making coffee”. It’s pretty subjective and needs to be approached with a very open, educated mind and interpreted according to archetypal means. I think it is a mistake to assign meaning to ANY archetype without asking the seeker what the archetype means to them. The readings, and their subsequent interpretation, are incredibly intimate and very subjective. It is not advisable to apply, for example, a reading received for an individual to an entire group of individuals.

Here’s a vivid example. I did two readings last month. Both for struggling LDS members. One advised her to step away from the church and enjoy her own interpretation of personal spirituality. The other was advised to renew her faith in the LDS church, make amends with her religion and begin attending meetings. The information created peace and harmony in both and both report an improvement in the quality of life.

Truthiness

Truthiness as truth.

I am amazed at the emphasis of the the word “truth” in relation to the LDS Church as preached from the pulpit. It appears, to this writer, that there is a concerted effort to profess this concept as an emphatic, dominating theme. Why the emphasis, I have wondered. Should not truth be self evident? Isn’t truth something that is easily demonstrated? What if an organization, person, etc claims access to “the only truth” or “the complete truth” at the exclusion of all other sources? Should proof be applied and accountability demanded? If these statements are, in fact, demonstrable, wouldn’t an actual demonstration settle the debate? Does truth fear examination or contradiction?

The stake president in my girlfriend’s ward stated “I know for a fact that the church is true. I know for a fact that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God”. I was left wondering about the truthfulness of this statement. Is this a verifiable statement? What is a fact, anyway?

fact [fækt]
n
1. an event or thing known to have happened or existed
2. a truth verifiable from experience or observation
3. a piece of information get me all the facts of this case
4. (Law) Law (often plural) an actual event, happening, etc., as distinguished from its legal consequences. Questions of fact are decided by the jury, questions of law by the court or judge
5. (Philosophy) Philosophy a proposition that may be either true or false, as contrasted with an evaluative statement
(Law)
after (or before) the fact Criminal law after (or before) the commission of the offence an accessory after the fact
as a matter of fact, in fact, in point of fact in reality or actuality
fact of life an inescapable truth, esp an unpleasant one
the fact of the matter the truth

So…. A fact is subjective. Interesting

Here’s the kicker…if purported truth cannot be substantiated, is it really truth and is it ethical to continue to refer to unsupported historical / theological information as such?
What if we call it something else? What about “truthiness”?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In satire, truthiness is a "truth" that a person claims to know intuitively "from the gut" without regard to evidence, logic, intellectual examination, or facts.
American television comedian Stephen Colbert revealed this definition as the subject of a segment called "The Wørd" during the pilot episode of his political satire program The Colbert Report on October 17, 2005. By using this as part of his routine, Colbert satirized the misuse of appeal to emotion and "gut feeling" as a rhetorical device in contemporaneous socio-political discourse.
Truthiness, it seems, is a powerful toll in the toolbox of conversion to any cause that is devoid of demonstrable, evidence based fact. It is the still, small voice. It is the burning in the bosom. It is all subjective, personal somatic response to a spiritual meme. That seems more precise. Lets start saying that .
Hmmmmm. There is a problem with the word “truth” itself. It doesn’t always mean what we think it does, especially in relation to religion. Interesting.
Contrast this with truth.
truth [truːθ]
n
1. the quality of being true, genuine, actual, or factual the truth of his statement was attested
2. something that is true as opposed to false you did not tell me the truth
3. a proven or verified principle or statement; fact the truths of astronomy
4. (usually plural) a system of concepts purporting to represent some aspect of the world the truths of ancient religions
5. fidelity to a required standard or law
6. faithful reproduction or portrayal the truth of a portrait
7. an obvious fact; truism; platitude
8. honesty, reliability, or veracity the truth of her nature
9. accuracy, as in the setting, adjustment, or position of something, such as a mechanical instrument
10. the state or quality of being faithful; allegiance Related adjectives veritable, veracious

So…. truth is subjective. Interesting

Which of these, if any, can we apply to LDS doctrine and system of belief?
Is it true, genuine, actual or factual?
Is it proven or verified?
Does it demonstrate fidelity to a required standard or law?
Is it a faithful reproduction or telling?
Is it an obvious fact?
Is it reliable?
Has the doctrine changed?
Are the facts, especially concerning history and early origins, transparent and readily available to the body?
Is there an open, honest, concerted effort toward scientific validation of the existing records and facts?

If the fullness of truth is contained in LDS doctrine, and if this claim is the official position of the Church, there should be no fear, concern or opposition regarding a thorough examination of the facts. If truth is subjective, and the claim of eternal truth is taken off the table, no such proof is required.

There is nothing wrong with truthiness as a basis for belief. Spirituality is a very subjective thing. Truth, however, is another issue. All authority within the LDS church derives from the claim to a fullness of restored, eternal truth as a basis for the very organization itself.

“Truth” is a mighty strong claim. It demands strong evidence. Fortunately for the brethren, both “truth” and “fact” can also apply to one’s own personal system of belief. They are, in fact, telling the truth when they state their convictions and beliefs over the pulpit, albeit the selective, personal nature of those beliefs. Doesn’t this approach actually validate ALL personal belief regardless of what that might be? How does one actually maintain authority over a subjective, personal process? Hmmmm, that might just be the snag. Perhaps the bridge between subjective truth and universal truth is only bridged by that elusive ability to disregard the facts. Faith.

faith [feɪθ]
n
1. strong or unshakeable belief in something, esp without proof or evidence
2. a specific system of religious beliefs the Jewish faith
3. (Christian Religious Writings / Theology) Christianity trust in God and in his actions and promises
4. (Christian Religious Writings / Theology) a conviction of the truth of certain doctrines of religion, esp when this is not based on reason
5. complete confidence or trust in a person, remedy, etc.
6. any set of firmly held principles or beliefs
7. allegiance or loyalty, as to a person or cause (esp in the phrases keep faith, break faith)
bad faith insincerity or dishonesty
good faith honesty or sincerity, as of intention in business (esp in the phrase in good faith)

So…. faith is subjective. Interesting

Given the total subjective nature of faith, truth and fact, how can anyone, really, claim authority?
I’m just sayin…

So many questions. So little faith.

Man-stration

Threadjack….

But not really, just an illustration of a very real aha moment regarding the relative angelic nature of women, as experienced personally…

See here's the thing. My SO is on her cycle and has been pretty short tempered and ill mannered as of late. If I EVER treated her in that way she would punt me out of the house, but I am expected, somehow, to overlook the behavior and attribute it to a hormonal phase. Yea, I know...I'm poking a sacred cow here and no, I have never experienced PMS directly, though I am an old hat at vicarious PMSing and at being the monthly punching bag. Save the castigation, please.

Ok. I get it. It sucks. You have my sympathy.

But what about MANstration? that's hormonal, isn't it? What happens to me when I am absolutely fuming with testosterone, put on the couch for weeks on end, expected to make her the sole focus of my sexual attention and expected to maintain a high degree of civility? Where is my license to misbehave?

I am angry, aggressive and ready to throw approaching males in the bushes. But I don’t. I want to make love to my SO, but I don’t because I am trying to be sensitive to her needs and her boundaries. I want to spend time in the man cave fixing a motorcycle so I can forget about my attraction to her for awhile, but, at her insistence, I leave the dark safety of my sanctuary to accompany her to a ballet where I see lithe dances in tight costumes flit about like milk bones before a starving cur. I am angry, aggressive, randy and ready to throw ballarinos in the bushes. “Go to the gym” she says, then plans five consecutive evenings of wedding receptions where I am expected to dress up and dance close with her in her stunning black dress and four inch heels.
“Go hiking” she says, then plans a short hike to a secluded, nude hot springs with three other athletic thirty something couples. I want to throw myself over a cliff and into some bushes. “You can handle it, sweetie. Real men can control their urges.” She says this as she slides nudely into the hotsprings next to the other equally naked couples…

I think I will use that line the next time she dives into a case of Blue Bunny ice cream sandwiches or asks me to give her several hours of alone time in the tub in our only bathroom. Maybe I will remember and remind her of this the next time they have a 70% off sale at Big Lots. “You can handle it Sweetie. Real women can control their urges…”

I am growing tired of the sensitivities afforded to mystique of femininity and the lack of the same afforded to the shallows of masculinity. I don’t wanna be stoic all the time. I don’t want to be the breadwinner this weekend. I don’t want you in my garage or my workshop. I want to skulk, grumble, hide and just be. I want to sit in my mancave, drink a Bud Light, listen to Motley Crue and fix that damn carburetor that has been driving me crazy for months now. I want to tell someone to go to hell. I want to refuse to wear that sweater your mom gave me to the Christmas brunch with your boring-as-death coworkers and their quasi autistic spouses. I really, really hate Alanis Morissette and Kate Bush.

I want to run, screaming and slapping passersby, all the way to the strip club where I can remind myself that sexual attraction is only a game, that a pretty face don’t mean a pretty heart, that everyone is in a relationship for self-satisfying-something and I can have all you can eat steak and eggs for $4.99.

BUT I don’t, because you ask me not to and you, as I know, are more socially, spiritually and intellectually advanced than I can ever hope to be. I just wish I had an excuse every three weeks or so to act a little badly. For the sake of my sanity.

Oh wait, I do. MANstration.

Prophecy in the Nick of Time

The LDS "church" is composed of individual members that hold opinions across the spectrum. It's not an entity, except in a collective sense. The collective consensus opinion does change with time. Thus, the church changes. It is intended to be dynamic rather than static, as indicated by its reliance on continuing revelation. If it was fully suited for application in real time, the principle of revelation would not be incorporated. The base tenant of Mormonism speaks of dynamic revelation as a function of evolving cultural forces. It was never intended to be static and dogmatic.

How does change happen?

It takes place through social evolution on a collective level. That is what we are doing, building a consensus, the 100th monkey thing, regarding areas that are changing and evolving within consensus reality on a national level and trying to ensure that our basic belief matrix stays flexible enough to provide us with spiritual guidance and structure in the face of change. We are addressing change on the macro level and attempting to understand and interpret it according to our mythos. I don’t think this changes “God’s church”, it only stretches and enhances our own ability to find a context within the gospel structure for social and cultural issues as they evolve.

If the church is a club with static, dogmatic rules, why do we require ongoing revelation through a prophet? If all the answers are contained within the canonized works, why do we need the patriarchal structure for real time interaction with deity?

Things change. Revelation happens. Most of the revelations given in the early church were in direct response to issues raised by the membership. Keep that in mind. We are asking some very hard questions based on some very hard observations. We are asking our leaders to take these concerns to God and to receive additional revelation regarding them. That is all we are doing. That is what this church is all about, not a “take it or leave it” kind of organization really… the “bylaws” are not static in this organization. If you are looking for something more dogmatic and pedantic, you should probably turn your attention to some other organization.

Regrets of a Young father

Don’t get me wrong, I love my kids, but I could have made better decisions. I am literally paying for, as a forty something single father, decisions I made in good faith, with trusted advice, when I was 19 to 25 years of age. I did everything right…mission, temple marriage, kids coming “naturally”, full time work, full time school, encouraged my wife to stay at home and raise the kids…. Funny how things change. Student loans, post divorce custody battles and IRS audits, exponentially increasing student loan debt, demolished credit, bankruptcy, financial aide for kids to go to school, hospital bills, tickets, fines….ad freaking infinum.

In an alternate universe, I may have chosen to stay single well into my thirties, take my time and get a solid degree, a lucrative job and a comfortable lifestyle. I may have dated women around my own age with the same level of achievement. With that as a solid base, we could have afforded to give our children everything they needed for success in this life. That would be nice. I like that universe.

I was a True Believer. The men of my generation were encouraged to marry within a year of their mission ending. They were encouraged to have children and were told it was alright to go into debt for school and a home. They were admonished to allow their wives to stay home and raise their children. I was told, in plain language, by my Mission President, that I was expected to be married within a year. I attended BYU and was completely bombarded by leaders reminding me that my time was ticking away…that I was in danger of being a “nuisance” if I remained single into my mid twenties.

I married within that year. In the married ward I attended, the focus was on “letting children come naturally” instead of planning and using birth control. We were repeatedly indoctrinated to keep our wives out of the work force. That meant credit cards, medical bills, student loans, multiple jobs in order to survive…and I was only 22 years old. I was a child myself with no sense of who I was or how to make it in the world. I didn’t understand finances, interest, compounded interest, penalties, spiraling debt…

I could barely balance a checkbook and pay rent. I had no business marrying and bringing children into this world. Really. I have caused, through my naive adherence to terrible advice, a great deal of anger, hurt and missed opportunity for my children. They will have to rise from poverty and make their own way because I am unable to assist them. That isn’t fair to them at all. The responsible, humanistic approach would have been to get my life together and find out who I was before I dropped a couple of unwitting souls neck deep into my search for identity.

Advice from a twenty one year veteran father… don’t have them until you can afford to give them every opportunity they deserve. If you do, you are serving yourself and your own selfish desires. Wait a few more years. Date a few more people. Find your self. Learn about the world and figure out how to live in it. You can’t throw someone a lifeline from a sinking ship. I’m just sayin… None of those leaders that preached irresponsibly from the pulpit and in the classroom has ever been there for me when the dust settled. Their advice, however, and the natural outcome of adherence to it has stared me in the face every day for the past twenty years. They were not inspired. They were irresponsible. And I was a dumb, trusting, young father trying my best to follow the words of the brethren. Coulda, shoulda, woulda…twenty years wasted in stress and worry.

Will you be able to put them through college, pay for their weddings, help them with starting a business…??? It seems like a long way away when they are in diapers, but it comes skidding up to you and suddenly they are men and women ready to face the world, like you young parents are right now. Clueless, lost, trusting, scared and looking to their leaders for guidance. Scares the crap out of me just thinking about it.

Love the Subjective Sinner

"Sin" is a relative term and exists only in relation to canonized authority. If I decide that I am not subject to that particular authority, am I then "sinless"? Something to think about.

You cannot transgress or come into conflict with externally mandated morality if you run according to an internal locus of control. Any perceived sin is only categorized by the observer when viewed from the perspective of a participant within the externally mandated moral protocol and has no real bearing on the perceived sinner. It represents an extremely egocentric viewpoint and assumes universal acceptance of applicable mores and taboos.

It could be that the very categorization of sin according to ones own system of beliefs predisposes one to transgression and sinning as an act of transgression against the predominant system of belief and its inherent authority structure.

If the locus of control is internal and not external, the authority is self appointed and integrated within the individual and does not necessarily lead to a transgression of ideals or beliefs as the individual tends to be self empowered rather than rendered powerless.

Yea, I said it. Religion creates sin. Sin only exists in relation to religion. Guilt is prescribed as the appropriate reaction to and consequence of sin.

Look ma. No guilt. Self regulation. Personal empowerment. Internally regulated morality.

What’s the downside again?

And NO, I don't think that religion stops the world from digressing into a dog eat dog existence. I feel that spiritual progression demands radical responsibility and a firm, internal locus of control. fear based, reward based, black and white, us and them thinking or belief is not congruent with spiritual development. Neither is coercion.

Apostacy and Social Change

Do apostasy, or deviation and distrust in any system lead to refinement and reconsideration of that particular system?

Nature screams to differ. Mutation is all about breaking the mold and reaching for something beyond. Our own secular history is one of bucking and questioning the system. America was based on dissention. You are right, war and bloodshed often follow...but only if the governing system is rooted in complete control and is unresponsive to the needs and desires of its free citizenry.

I have another view...revolution, dissention, apostasy...all of these latent drives are activated when a controlling body pushes beyond prudence and artificially constrains the souls and will of mankind. We are built for freedom and agency. Control of that agency is the basis for the war in heaven, is it not? I feel that the brethren forget that point at times and have adopted a policy of control, rather than a theology of agency, albeit in a more passive sense. Ruling by fear, guilt or an appeal to blind obedience equates to control in my mind. My soul feels this and is reactive to it.

Fear kills the soul. It stunts growth. it stalls progression...is there any other more concise definition of the word "damned" than that of blocked progress or personal access to God and our own sense or intuition?

What of slavery? What of Women’s Suffrage? Child labor? Gay rights?

The church brought itself under condemnation for its world view. It was persecuted by those it meant to subjugate. It created a banking system. It created a standing army bigger than the existing US army at the time. Its people attempted to squelch free speech and freedom of press through vandalism and violence. Its leader proclaimed himself king and aimed at the presidency of the fledgling nation that was struggling for a sense of itself. Its leaders proposed a nation, Deseret, be created just outside of US boundaries that constituted an area almost equal in size to the existing country.

The early church was not persecuted for its righteousness, but for the very real danger it presented to national cohesion.

The BoM persecutions weren’t about doctrine either, they were an outgrowth of an attitude of entitlement, condescension, fine twined linen syndrome, equation of prosperity with spirituality, etc. If you read it again, it is an admonition for the members to keep humble and submissive to their leadership in order to secure a collective financial / economic base for that particular society. There were no rich or poor among them. They had all things in common. The problems arose when the leaders, individuals, etc began to keep the profits for themselves and did not take care of each other. The dissention was created by a sense of entitlement to the fruits of one’s own labor and a tendency to amass wealth instead of keeping it in common.

Equality was, in the ideal, the basis for that society. It isn’t the same now, and the church is naturally going to have dissention. Are there poor among us? Are there wealthy? Are we standing on the ramiumptum telling each other that we are blessed with wealth because we are righteous? Are we equal in all things? Do you know that a GA makes close to $90,000 a year from the church coffers? That’s three times what I make. Three times. If the church practiced the BoM religion, there would be no discrepancies between us. They would all live in 1965 duplexes like me and drive a truck that occasionally craps out. They would dip into title loans and pawn their valuables to make ends meet.

Wouldn’t it???

Measuring Truth

Truth is subjective as a process of mythos, which is where the Church, and all religions, sits firmly. No logos, just mythos. Truth, in the universe of logos, is always a personal, intimate, experiential process. It takes place in the individual mind and soul of the perceiver. Truth means different things to everyone, as does smell, visual perception, sound, etc. Warmth, to some, may be heat. It may be coolness to others depending upon their own physiological makeup. It is, like spiritual truth and testimony, a subjective experience. Percentages are from the world of logos, a measurable, empirically observable and scientifically measurable experience. Truth cannot be measured, yet. One day we may discover that it is really a specific frequency, or a trace mineral, or a magnetic resonance capable of detection, but for now, truth remains in the mythos camp. As such, it remains, for now, completely immeasurable…

Saint in Public, Rascal in the Sack

The attraction to the bad boy???

It could be a function of genetics and hundreds of thousands of years of evolution...wealth and the accumulation of wealth have only been a factor in the human mating ritual for a couple odd thousand years. The advent of structured, civilized society has changed the game. It is entirely possible that, prior to the introduction of recent societal structure, the bad boy posed a more logical choice and risk taking behavior equated to a more developed ability to adapt in a world without universal systems for governing individual safety and survival. Modern society has changed the focus, but not the basic instincts. The self focused, aggressive, quasi antisocial traits inherent to bad boys bring them into conflict with imposed structure, while the altruistic, self effacing, deference based traits inherent to good boys are more suited to a rigid format and cooperation with peers.

Society has evolved rapidly with the introduction of technology, especially in the last three hundred years. Genetic predisposition and instinct that have evolved to effectively safeguard the existence of the human race for hundreds of thousands of years may be lagging behind a bit. (Give it time, society is cyclical….zombie apocalypse may be around the very next corner and render this discussion mute in more chaotic situations.)

I think this dual, asynchronous evolution has presented us with a dissonant set of needs/desires; the resolution of which sounds like”Play with the bad boy, marry the good boy.” Seems, to me, like a very natural adaptation to changing environmental factors in the face of inherent instinctual drives...

We may be in a transition here. Maybe we will eventually catch up with ourselves.

War in Heaven, Battle of the Symbolic

Now let me see if I understand this concept…

1. Satan sinned in origin because he refused to go along with the cultural majority and pronounced a mythos in direct opposition to that of the majority consensus. He didn’t fornicate, rape, pillage, maim, steal, or generally molest anyone…he just said “I have another plan”. He had a different opinion.
Never mind that we have anthropomorphized the forced of chaos and order and see them literally instead of as archetypal…
Darn, that brings up the whole “now which represents chaos and which represents order” thing…

God the father was pretty neutral about the whole affair and was willing to let the brothers duke it out. Like Lovecraft, Aristotle and Socrates, God was preoccupied with thinking about thinking, an archetypal reference to a cosmos at perpetual-rest-in-motion indicative of a vibrant, albeit predictable and constant, state of energy.

Enter the forces of good and evil, attraction and repulsion…

Satan, arguably the archetype of attraction due to his provisions regarding the imposition of tight, controlling structure upon his siblings, confronts Jesus, the archetypal force of chaos. Yea, that’s right. Chaos. His plan was “do what you will and face your own consequences”.

The stage is set, the dance of positive and negative energy ensues and the force of attraction is “thrown down to the earth” and becomes dense matter, essentially that which governs the realm of the material. Satan became the archetype of Gravity, Electromagnetic force, molecular transferences of energy, etc that bind and hold matter intact. Jesus remains in the heavens as transcendent bits of free matter. He is the lord of spirits, the archetypal force of repulsion and the antithesis of matter.

Somewhere along the lines we took this story very literally. It was a simple science experiment, and we went and made a religion out of it. Damn.

Overcoming Borrowed Light

Not to be a troll, but I just gotta say something.

Maybe the Doctrine of the Three Degrees of Glory isn't what it seems...

In 1784 Emanuel Swedenborg wrote a book about his visions of the afterlife titled “Heaven and Hell and its Wonders”.

Swedenborg insisted: "There are three heavens," described as "entirely distinct from each other." He called the highest heaven "the Celestial Kingdom," and stated that the inhabitants of the three heavens corresponded to the "sun, moon and stars."

By Joseph Smith's own statements, he was familiar with Swedenborg's writings. Smith told a convert by the name of Edward Hunter that "Emanuel Swedenborg had a view of the world to come, but for daily food he perished."

In other words, Smith liked Swedenborg's concepts of the afterlife, but criticized him for not profiting from them.

The book describes the three Mormon degrees of glory to the tee, along with many other concepts including "the veil," "sprit prison," "celestial marriage," and more.

Polygamy is natural for primates and most mammals. Monogamy is usually the domain of birds... but this is kinda misleading. Could the propensity for polygamy, like our residual tail and other vestigial parts, actually hearken back through evolution to a primate ancestor??? If that is the case, wouldn't it be natural that we would rationalize that propensity and include it in our world view and our spirituality?

So, what I am asking here is “Does our belief in polygamy and celestial marriage actually support and present evidence for evolution? AND, if it does, could it be a function of evolution and our attempts to explain and rationalize the behavior rather than acknowledge it as such and dismiss it as a function of less evolved states of existence?

It makes sense that our genetic memory would be incorporated into our memes and beliefs as we reached sentience, doesn’t it?

SOOOOOOOOOOOOO

IF the concept of the Three Degrees of Glory and Celestial Marriage was borrowed from Emanuel Swedenborg who wrote a book in 1784 about his visions of the afterlife titled “Heaven and its Wonders and Hell”…

AND the Doctrine of Plural Marriage was borrowed from the Cochranites that introduced the concept to Oliver Cowdery while passing through the town of Scarborough, New Hampshire as a missionary in February of 1817…

AND a conference was held by the leaders of the LDS Church in center of the Cochranites in 1834 and 1835…

AND Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon condemned the practice in 1844, after it had been received as a revelation in 1843 as an admonition to Emma Smith who claimed that the very first time she ever became aware of the 1843 polygamy revelation was when she read about it in Orson Pratt’s booklet The Seer in 1853….

AND was condemned by Wilford Woodruff in 1890…

AND was condemned and called “not doctrinal” by Gordon Hinckley in 1998….


THEN

WHY ARE WE STILL DEBATING AS TO ITS DOCTERINAL VALIDITY???

I’m just sayin…

Maybe it was just a phase, or a social glitch. Shouldn’t we just get over it, like Pres Hinckley says?
Is it that important anymore, really? Unless your testimony is based on early doctrine an the infallibility of the brethren…then you have a problem…

Feminists Behaving Badly

I argue that those inborn genetic aspects of manliness that predispose us for aggression, boorishness and a drive to procreate also drive us to become good providers and protectors of those we love.

These awful, awful drives make it easier for us to sit through multiple viewings of "The Notebook" and "Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood", host Mary Kay parties, stand as assistant purse holders on extended perfect-boot excursions, double date with your best friend and her boring-to-absolute-tears sports fanatic fiancé, stop every thirty minutes for a pee break on a twelve hour drive while enduring the overpowering smell of nail polish within a closed vehicle, keep alert during rambling who-said-who-to-who-and-why discourses, find a quiet, happy center in a world colored by monthly mood swings aimed to blame even the slightest hint of impropriety squarely at our heads in the form of a flying Jane Austin novel, walk the line between liking your friends and appearing to like them too much, answer questions based on sensitivity to situational perception as opposed to absolutes, staying calm while you are responding to urgent “OMG this date is a total nightmare” texts from your friends while actively engaging in our rare, scheduled monthly “adult fun night”, find Zen while looking at banged up fenders and calmly watching high speed multitasking from the passenger seat....

That's a short list. As much as you want to hate it, you need some of that in your lives. We are like dogs, sure, but dogs are loyal and don't require a lot of maintenance. We need food, love and a place to sleep. We need to be scratched between our ears from time to time. When we are happy, we will fight for you. We will break our bodies and minds to provide for you and we will die for you if you ask it of us. We are built that way on purpose because we are, sadly, kinda disposable. We aren’t that bad. Really. I promise.

The infidelity part is a bit more complicated unless viewed from a purely simian viewpoint. We are monkeys, albeit slightly more evolved, and our social structure is pretty much similar. Infidelity stems from boredom and lack of connection on an emotional level. For men, sadly, that often equates to the physical aspects of a relationship. For women, emotional and safety / security issues are often the precursor.
If sex and intimacy stop in marriage, eyes wander toward availability. If security and safety are compromised, hearts and minds reach for more sure prospects. That is simplified and can manifest in many complex ways within the relationship dynamic.
But we are still monkeys and we still have inherent drives and traits that evolved to ensure the survival of our species. An awareness of the unique makeup of male and female, and a sentient approach to accommodating this intrinsic makeup within modern, acceptable social norms will go a long way toward alleviating the perceived differences in our sexes. We are not the same, but we are obligated to ensure that we are treated as equals and are respected as such.

This is no excuse for violations of your rights or illegal/ irresponsible behavior. Look at that little boy you are raising and imagine him as a grown adult. How do you want him to be treated? How will you train him to treat his future spouse? He isn’t evil or stupid or a waste of genetic material. He is a person that loves, hurts, fears and hopes…just like you.

Some of you are damn lucky we aren’t more evolved. I’m just sayin. Some of you devout feminist need a swift kick in the pants if you think that emasculating a man makes him a good feminist. Feminism is about equality and respect, not creating a single sex/gender. I am a feminist and I am a boorish, opinionated, hot blood, randy, hairy, focused, passionate man. I say stupid things and I do stupid stuff from time to time. So do you, I’m sure.

Its equality we are striving for as feminists, not castration. Remember that.

Papa Has a Job

I do believe in the Sacred Cow theory and am the first to agree that no idea, meme, theology etc is beyond scrutiny or immune from critique. I’m an anarchist and a fervent advocate of personal empowerment and limited external intervention. “Internal locus of control” is my mantra, actually, and I agree with you on the “Give me liberty or give me death” bit.

Slaying Sacred Cows is a fascination for me, regardless of the origin. Science. Religion. Personal belief. We are machines for codification and classification of manifest material phenomenon. Our brains are constructed around matrixing. We automatically sort all observable data into neat little piles, that’s what makes us so advanced and, inversely, so damn obstinate in the face of changing facts.

Facts, at any level, are a matter of observation and are always subject to the interpretation of the observer. Quantum physics is rife with prime examples of observational bias, as is astrophysics…(at least science is open to reinterpretation as new observations are made).
Facts are generally supported by consensus of direct observation before they are considered viable. Many eyes. Many minds. This is still consensus based on an analysis of variance between subjective interpretations of the repeatability of a specific set of empirical tests applied to a given observable phenomenon. As you are no doubt aware, the instruments of analysis are also constructs of consensus and observability and are far from comprehensive in their creation or scope. They were created by finite minds according to finite principles and, as such, are finite in their ability to measure any given phenomenon.

Look at the SETI folks, or NASA. They recently had to redefine what alien life may be based on a terrestrial discovery of life that exists outside of their present paradigm. It needs to be noted that they were more than happy to adjust that paradigm and create a means for measuring it that did not exists prior. Science has a way of adjusting…

It is infinitely easier to believe when ones focus is smaller, or more egocentric. It’s easier to have faith when ones view of the universe revolves around life on this planet, or in this state, or inside of this body. Faith, I believe, stems from fear of ones insignificance within the limitless cosmos. None of us are immune to it. Even scientists 

I am not a believer in absolute truth by any means and seem to have been endowed (cursed) with a restless brain incapable of allowing any of theses data piles to sit comfortably for long without picking through them or outright kicking them into chaos. My tendency toward matrixing appears to be reversed, or just plain damaged…It’s my job, I guess. That’s what I am here for. Some people build and create. I am more suited to assisting in the positive disillusion of structure. Makes for an ambiguous philosophical outlook for sure, but it does have its uses. Chaos and creation are two sides of the same coin.

Sexy-time and the TBM

Allow me to make my point.

Pornography, nudity, sexuality are not the enemy here.
They are a natural part of the human experience, like eating, sleeping, using the bathroom, etc. Sexual drives were created by god, if you believe the creationist line, for a reason. Sexual drives serve to facilitate pair bonding between mating couples. It works that way in nature and it works that way in humans. Straight up.
Attempting to repress any of them completely will only intensify their expression.
I am not advocating complete hedonism, but I do believe in healthy expression.

Humans have an added dimension. We are sentient. We recognize ourselves in a mirror and we are capable of pondering the nature of our own existence. However, we are hardwired in a certain way and DO act according to that hard wiring whether we know it or not.

We cannot live a compartmentalized existence. In order to be a complete, well rounded, well adjusted human being, we must allow expression of natural inclinations within prescribed boundaries. I have noticed, over the years, a very strange tendency on the part of LDS and recovering LDS members to shift into complete hedonism the minute the shackles of religious oppression are remove. When they begin drinking, they drink to excess. When they start having sex, they are promiscuous. When they begin to question divine authority, they turn rabid and angry. This settles down eventually and reaches a more moderate stage where none of these acts actually holds power over them anymore. Most people that I associate with not of the LDS persuasion do not show this tendency, but approach life with a degree of moderation.

I believe it is in response to the years of repression behind the inherent drives. Pornography is no different. What of overeating? Is that really a different expression?
What about hyper-religiosity?

Repression gives rise to excess and deviation.
Healthy expression gives rise to moderation.

There is a marker tendency in the LDS faith toward deification of the human male. Look at the folklore that surrounds its founder, its leaders and its priesthood holders. They pressure to become a demi-god or transcend some imaginary state referred to as “the natural man” has created a real conundrum. Too much is expected. Way too much.

The LDS faith creates unnatural, oddly delineated, unrealistic roles and expectation for man and woman. Joseph Smith himself was very active sexually with multiple partners in, and out, of the bonds of marriage, yet he is revered as a perfected man. What are we really saying here? Maybe suppressed sexuality is key to the kingdom, with its promise of sister wives and endless sexual union with perfected bodies on self styled planets.
Brigham Young advocated plural marriage as THE cure for promiscuity, whoredomes and masturbation. Do you understand the implications of that statement? He was advocating expression of sexuality, not repression. He was teaching that repression leads to excess and deviation. Could the drive toward satiation of sexual drive through the seeking of novelty in multiple partners actually be something that is taught, indirectly, in the quorums of the LDS church? Does any TBM male not, at sometime in their church career, fantasize about servicing multiple wives? It is in the history. It is in the doctrine. The last time I looked, polygamy was required to reach the CK.

Section 132 is still there…Doubt that? Read the history. These men were not as saintly as they would have you believe. If you are struggling with your man just looking at naked pictures of women he doesn’t have any kind of contact with or connection to, how will you handle it when he has thousands of readily available, emotionally attached spouses that he is engaging with sexually on a regular basis. What if he has children with them?

I’m not making this stuff up. It’s in the doctrine. It is part of the whole paradigm. It is possible, sisters, that the LDS faith actually promotes a tendency to express sexual novelty in its male members just as it encourages subservience, obedience and repression of sexual expression for its female members. That kinda fits that paradigm. How do you think Joseph’s wife felt when he was sleeping with Fanny Alger or any one of the 30+ documented plural wives? Is that kinda like you felt when you caught your priesthood holder looking at pornography? Maybe you should spend some serious time thinking about that. Enough said.

Meanwhile, out in the real world…

Sex isn’t evil. It isn’t dark. It doesn’t come from Satan or devils. It is part of all of us. Male sex drives, sisters may want to take note of this one, allows us, as men, to completely forget about all of the petty, little annoyances that we deal with in relationships. Sex is the great reset button, the equalizer, they comforter in a committed relationship whether you want to see that or not. Ask your husbands and boyfriends.
Observe them. When are they the happiest? When are they the most agreeable?
Say what you want, this is a fact.

You have a great deal of power here. You can make things horrible, or you can make things run smoothly with that power. I would go as far as to suggest a blanket refusal to acknowledge the power of female sexuality and the outright refusal to engage it in interpersonal relationships is at the core of all pornography issues. We are all drawn, men and women alike, to sexual power and virility. The expressions and external manifestations differ slightly according to the sexes, but the draw is there none the less.

Why do you fear that power? What is it about women that embody and celebrate it that really disturbs you? Is it your husband’s attention to the power of other women that disturbs you, or the total inability to embody it yourselves? It really is more than naked pictures. You are powerful beyond belief in a man’s world when you own your own sexuality. That is why you are urged not to. That kind of power has always threatened the patriarchy and their tenuous seat of authority. What are you so afraid of?

Honest, open, loving, committed relationships that have a great degree of sexual expression in a safe, non judgmental setting are amazing and healing experiences. What could be more rewarding, more fulfilling then spending intimate time with someone you love and trust completely, exploring, without guilt or shame, every aspect of one another. Pleasing and touching. Holding each other naked and close, striving, mutually, to give each other as much pleasure as you possibly can. Communicating wants and desires without fear or embarrassment. That is real beauty. That is real love. That is real intimacy.

In the absence of this safety, there will always be resentment and guilt. In the absence of safe, loving expression, there will always be a search for novelty outside of the relationship. Pornography doesn’t judge or belittle. It doesn’t get a headache or act repulsed when touched. It doesn’t pressure you to be more than is humanly possible. It is a lot like donuts. It loves you regardless….

Childlike Faith

Ceremony in religious practice is intended to initiate a state of ego dissociation and provide an avenue for belief, faith and a direct interface with deity. It effectively cross references the hemispheres of the brain and allows the mystical experience to become “real”.

I think it is necessary, at least in the beginning stages. Which is why most mystery schools within traditional religious structure are centered around rules, laws and commandments. This is the initiatory stage. Once the processes have become internalized and the mind is able to switch on the god module, they are no longer requisite to the actual process.
Mythos demands a disconnect from the logic centers in order for experiential learning to occur. Ceremony can provide that. The sense of silliness, embarrassment, awe, shock etc in conjunction with participation in any given spiritual ceremony is indicative of the imaginative centers coming on line and the logic centers or ego fighting to maintain a foothold in perceived reality.

That is why Christ exhorted us to become as children if we are to enter the kingdom of god. Especially if the kingdom is within us. Disconnect from the ego and freefall into ourselves to see the face of god reflected in our own structure. I feel that is what he was teaching.
Let go and let be. Be still and know that I am God. These are concepts, in my thinking, dealing with the necessity of surrender to the creative centers as a prerequisite to experiencing and interfacing the Creator.

Letter to a Young Lady

At the risk of sounding too secular (boring and all science-like), I feel I need to give a few words of advice.

I am an old guy. A retired bad ass. I have raised kids, hell, I was even fourteen myself once back in the stone age. I think I have an idea of your viewpoint, of the heaviness of having to deal with adult situations without the benefit of adult experience…that sucks. It’s hard and scary and full of sinking, icky feelings and confusing boundaries.

Here’s some boring stuff I learned somewhere….

Lesson number one.
Adults are confused too. Sometimes they make very, very stupid mistakes and they only think about themselves. Its part of living way out here on the edge of the universe. We all screw up and we all make terrible choices from time to time. Sometimes kids make wiser decisions than their parents.

Lesson number two.
“No” is a complete sentence. It doesn’t need to be explained, or justified. There is no shame attached to it. No means no.

Lesson number three.
Guilt is like a thermometer, it rises with discomfort. If you feel bad about what is happening, then stop doing it. The damage isn’t permanent and it is just a learning situation. You aren’t broken, dirty or ruined in any way…just a bit smarter and aware of your own personal boundaries. Now you know where your discomfort is and you can make better choices about it in the future. You learned. That’s good.

Lesson number four.
Sex is complicated. It always will be. Fourteen is way too young to try and jump into that pool of crazy right now. Hell, forty seems kinda young!!! Enjoy being a kid for awhile and forget about all the adult stuff until you actually have to deal with it. Bad boys can wait. If he wants to leave, let him go. They are in endless supply.

Lesson number five.
A real man, a good man, will not push you or pressure you to do anything that makes you uncomfortable or feel bad. A good man will wait for you to make your own choices.

God loves you and wants you to be happy. He’s probably overjoyed that you are aware enough to want to make serious choices. You sound pretty smart. You sound like you are headed in the right direction by asking for advice from the powerful, super-intelligent, spiritual women that frequent this forum. Stick with them as role models and you will be mopping the floor with bas ass boys in no time.

Get tough and keep your boundaries. Don’t despair and remember to give thanks for the lessons, even if they are hard ones. It’ll be ok. I promise

Making the Naked Journey

A Crowley referred to the process as "stepping into the abyss". In order to do so, one had to pass the Watcher at the Edge... (Some differing opinions exist as to the next step so I will interject mine). The Watcher grabs the initiate by the scruff of the neck and tears off the entire hide in one, clean motion, and then pushes the skinned individual into the abyss.

The initiate squirms about there in the void for an undetermined amount of time until he/she is able to hear the voice of God. The initiate then returns, claims and wears the skinned hide and becomes a voice for the cosmos...a Magus.

This is a lot like Joseph Campbell’s Heroes Journey.
The hero leaves home and sets off in search o the grail, golden fleece, dragon scales etc. The hero encounters paradigm smashing giants, monsters, horrors and is transformed and strengthened by them. The hero claims the prize and is welcomed home by the tribe. The heroes prize is used to enhance and edify the tribe.

It’s an archetypal representation of what we are all here to do. We are here to find our own truth by tearing away our preconceived ideas, facing our monsters real and imagined and finding our own voice and means of transmitting the voice of God through us into material reality. Existential crisis is part of the process. An important, amazing part that cannot be circumvented. Can we choose to stay home and not journey out? Yes, most do just that. I think the journey, though damn difficult and tiresome, is worth the effort. I allows us to define our own existence in the face of something massive. It makes us stronger, if we survive it 

Mystical Godheads and Magik Peepstones

I am now forced to admit that Joseph Smith was indeed inspired, and very misunderstood. I believe I have come full circle from wanting to burn him at the stake to admiring him for his role as a Magus and Shaman. I am now in the unenviable position of eating humble pie and attempting to retract some of the harsh judgments I levied on him and his channeled works. There is something deeper there. Much deeper.

The implications, however, are somewhat unsettling. The organization adheres to the basic tenants, as they have been interpreted, but often attempts to distance themselves from the early doctrine…

Adam / God theory is a basic teaching of Gnosticism, as is plurality of gods, worlds, the concept of an eternal round (reincarnation on increasingly elevated spheres of existence), stratified post existence, the concept of “atonement” (possibly in reference to the original frequency of the creator vis. LOVE and CHARITY), alchemical references such as dross and refiners fire as related to personal transformative processes, sacred signs and symbols, sacred investments and garments, etc. The similarities are substantial. Even sacramental, ritualized cannibalism in order to embody the qualities of a god…

Even the relationship between the Void (zero) The Heaven Father (I) and the Mother of Souls (II) has become literal as opposed to archetypal in the present belief system.

“And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”

(Zero) In the beginning there was the void.

(I)The void contemplated itself, and the Word echoed forth. “I am”
This is the masculine energy attributed to the SUN, or sheer force of will.

(II) In recognizing itself, it created an outside awareness of itself that existed from a detached aspect ~ In the esoteric mindset, The Spirit of God moving upon the face of the water is the Mother of souls… or the Moon. This references wisdom of the womb.
It refers to self awareness or sentience.

That’s the first triad….the Godhead…

According to this triad, and some early teachings of the church, the Holy Ghost is Mother in Heaven. I think Joseph Smith got that… brother Brigham kinda tweaked it IMO.

It is taught this process exists on fractal levels and extends from the vastness of the unknowable cosmos to the process of cellular division in human reproduction…and beyond. Now THAT’S gospel and pleasantly scientific. If interpreted in the archetypal, the gospel is kinder, gentler and vastly more complex and empirical than presently understood. I believe that is what Joseph Smith intended.

As above so below or

“On earth as it is in Heaven”…

Flow Going

What the hell are we doing here?

I think the answer, at least in my Cosmology, lies in the absolute random, dumb luck of existence and sentience. Each is a statistical miracle in and of itself, but especially the part that screams “I am” as it recognizes itself reflected in a shiny surface.

Maybe we think too much. Maybe we were better off when our processes were simpler and more limbic. Sentience is a curse, especially when coupled with the annoying physiological/neurological predispositions toward matrixing and Gestalt formation.

We look at things and try and sort them into piles that make sense. Then we sort the piles into more specific piles, then start sorting those piles ad infinum….makes us kinda look nuts if seen from a macro perspective, no? Are we squirrels? Are we ants? Are we some kind of crazy algae or fungus? Bacteria? Probably. But in a fractal universe, one person’s bacteria are another’s deities.

I don’t know why good people suffer and crack heads don’t sometimes. I don’t know why my friend and his wife, both social workers and both amazing, liberal, intelligent, kind people are having to deal with a possible molar pregnancy and consequent chemotherapy after years of being told they can’t conceive and a seventeen year old meth addict/prostitute is having her third child removed from her custody by DCFS….I don’t know why that is.

Maybe there is no “why”. Maybe there is only “is”. We’re all just blips, anomalies, transient spikes in the Universal Transmission. We are fragile. We are sensate experience incarnate, temporary, beautiful, fleeting pieces of the God Fractal moving from existence to existence along the infinite continuum. Wooo Woooo. Total crazy train right? Just because it’s crazy don’t make it less possible.

Maybe our job is to feel and experience. Just that. Nothing more. Feel, experience, make piles. Feel some more. Experience some more. Make smaller, more ordered piles. Then shut off and take our knowledge back to the Creator. Sounds kinda peaceful to me.

A Lakota Hyoka Chief once told me “Brother we are all going to flow down stream with the current. Can’t stop that from happening. You just have to decide if you are going to spend your time in the stream fighting and kicking to get back up stream, or if you are going to learn to float with the current, open your eyes and take in the sights along the way. Either way, you will arrive at exactly the same time and place”.

Heathens in the Missionary Position

Wow, very timely.

Yesterday morning I woke to a beautiful spring-like day. I sat on the stoop drinking the perfect cup of coffee, soaking in the rare, early sun. My SO was stirring in the other room.

I watched the people in the local ward heading into the church building just across the street from my apartment; they were dressed in suits and ties and layered dresses with leggings. Each wore a solemn, blank expression. Some ventured a look of pity as I greeted them in shorts, a-shirt and a steaming cup at my lips. One after another they wandered past me and into the building.

One young woman turned to her male companion and said “I wish I didn’t have to go in there on such a beautiful morning”. “Were doing the right thing” he said shooting me a sideways glance. For a second I thought she would bolt…

I felt an overwhelming sense of claustrophobia. I could almost feel the knot of a tie against my Adams apple. I could smell sweaty, warm polyester and feel the stiffness of a starched cotton shirt rough against my skin. I felt my stomach sink and a sense of dismay creep over me at the thought of slinking into the bowels of a dark building on such a glorious morning. I wanted to yell “Look up! Look around! Can’t you see God? Don’t go in there. Stay here in the sun!” But I didn’t. I was lost in a cup of perfect coffee. Lost in a perfect ray of sun.

My SO emerged and said “what a beautiful morning, I can’t wait to go to church”.

My reaction was visceral. My meditation shattered. I couldn’t stay any longer. I dressed quickly, mumbled some excuse and headed out into the glorious sunlight. I found myself in a public park with beautiful fountains and ancient cottonwoods. It was bubbling with people lounging like lizards in the sun, reading, laughing, loving, and enjoying the radiance of nature and creation. A stream babbled and gushed. Birds were busy searching for crumbs. Dogs were sniffing about busily. Latin music played off in the distance lending carnival energy to the soft, warm breeze. People were happy, radiant, content. Their eyes greeted me with expressive welcome. Nods were exchanged. Understanding without words. Time disappeared into a single, prolonged, perfect moment.

I closed my eyes and turned my face to the sun. It was warm and comforting on my skin. I could feel God. God was everywhere. I was basking in it. The symphony of sounds around me melded with the creator in a very tangible, organic, animated sense of collective consciousness. I was part of this. I was not alone, could never be alone. I was filled with love for everyone around me. I WAS ONE with everyone around me. AT ONE MENT.

We sat and worshipped together. We reveled in creation.
We understood, if only on a subconscious level, the cycle of life and death as graphically displayed in this rare, warm anomalous morning forcing itself out between months of cold, dark and damp. Rebirth. Resurrection. Eternal life…beautifully and powerfully conveyed through creation itself. The voice of God speaking directly to our souls through warm limbs and grass-tickled flesh. God is here. Now. With us. We are swimming in it.

After several hours, I worked my way back to the apartment. My SO was home. She spoke about her church meeting, about the talks, the messages, the after mingle…her words alluded to vague, canonized concepts and descriptions of experiences conveyed from a pulpit in carefully practiced phrases. Joy, Fullness, Truth, Gospel, Testimony, Witness, Spirit….abstracts describing, in logos, the mythos of my earlier sacrament with deity but lacking the visceral, intimate interface.

I felt sorry for her. Sorry that she had missed the forest for the trees. Sorry that she had elected to seek the God of all nature in a manmade structure. Sorry that she had passed by and ignored the living, breathing, pulsing voice of God for a recording. Like electing to watch a movie about how one should best live instead of actually living. Sorry that her experience was intellectualized instead of interfaced. Sorry that she considered my experience as somehow less spiritual or less appropriate in the eyes of her God because, in her words, God requires a sacrifice and some discomfort, humility and lowliness as a prerequisite for receiving blessings…. Silly me. I had assumed the only requirements were appreciation and recognition that these blessings are all around us all of the time for the basking.

She ended her discourse with “I’m glad I have the gospel. I wish I could go to the park and tell all of those unfortunate people there about it.” At least she has the Gospel. At least she has a cohesive group to settle in to. At least she has that.

I chose to remain silent. I pictured her there among the nature worshipping masses, in their cathedral beneath the cottonwoods, basking in God…. maybe next time she will come and see what worship really means. Maybe not. Maybe some things are better kept sacred. Best kept safe.

At least I have that.

Blaring Testimony

Truth will always stand up to scrutiny and doesn't need to be hidden.

My concern is that we are no longer seeing the architects of the LDS church as men, fallible and prone to excess at times, men with limited education and insight... we have actually begun to deify them (as evidenced by the increasing trend toward beautification of Joseph Smith in church art, literature and media).

We should be able to see them, and their creation, in the harsh light of day and still be able to express our belief in them. If we shy away from the details of their humanity and the circumstances surrounding the birth of this church, how can we say, in good faith, that we know what they represent is the truth?

If we have to rationalize their lives, decisions, writings, opinions etc in order to accept them then are we really in agreement with them? Might not the tendency to rationalize conceal a deeper disquiet regarding the absolute correctness of their processes as it pricks our moral compasses? History is clear and quite evident if we wish to seek the details.

The Glory of God is Intelligence…I read that somewhere…

I do not think it ethical or prudent to profess belief in a process that one has limited knowledge of.

Godlike Bling

I think God honors our decisions to augment our bodies as we see fit through piercings, tattoos, botox, implants....whatever we choose. Seems to me that such changes are part of the temporal realm, like glasses, artificial hearts, fillings etc. Just upgrades or repairs on the machine really. I think we have a very Puritanical relationship with our bodies. They are supposed to be sacred, yet we are ashamed to display them. We are given guidelines for their proper care and feeding, yet we are hung up on vanity issues associated with them. The whole mythos surrounding bodies is terrible conflicted and incongruent. We are drawn to visions of healthy, thirty-something perfected bodies but we shun the idea of the pursuit of physical perfection in the flesh. What’s up with that? Sex seems so taboo here, yet is the primary function in the CK. Sex. Lots of sex with perfected thirty-something bodies. Making spirit kids until, well, forever.

I often wonder at the imbalance presented in a theological approach to spiritual perfection that leaves out the same pursuit for the physical…. Mind, body and spirit are all integral.

What if we loved our bodies, wanted to maintain them and decorate them as a celebration of the gift that they really are instead of wanting to hide them beneath clothing, keep them secret, sacred and safe from sight…? Wouldn’t that be better? Tattoos are a celebration, piercings are a celebration, exercise, tanning, toning, lotioning, proper diet, passionate physical movement including satisfying sexual interaction are all excellent tributes to the miracle of our bodies. Our bodies are organs of sensate experience; they are the interface between the Creator and the physical, material world.

Why, I ask, in a church that believes in a God that has a physical body are we so at odds with our own at times?

I Plege Allegiance to....ME

I have been the "victim" of infidelity in marriage, THREE TIMES with two different wives. I was beginning to take it personally. The first time was the biggest shock and I went into get-sexy and make-more-money mode because I owned her choice to look outside the relationship for fulfillment. I mean, I must be lacking somehow right?

Sooo after getting buffed, redoubling my efforts around the house, initiating date night, making more money…she had another affair with someone twenty years older that looked like Gorge Castanza with a bad tan and Jersey chains (no offense).

She has, over the years, had multiple affairs on George. They are now divorced and she is on to new and more exciting new men. Always a lot of them it seems. I call them “fun boys”, you know, the outdoor adventure guys that never want to commit, just want to hang out and climb stuff. Nice bunch. Until they mess up a marriage and shrug the whole thing off as “her choice”. Beware the fun boys. I’m serious……it starts out innocently enough.

Second wife hooked up with an ex two weeks after we were married while she was attending a new age conference in Marina Del Ray. I didn’t have the BS tolerance that time and I called it quits pretty quick.

After that, the tables took a strange turn. I was unavailable, pissed and aloof by choice for many years afterward. I hated the very concept of marriage, relationships etc. This new, hard attitude began to attract married women. I was appalled. What were they thinking, exactly? I couldn’t stomach the idea of being the other man, since I had just been through infidelity myself and had witnessed the total emotional black hole it creates. I identified heavily with their husbands and even actively befriended a few of them. I lost faith in the institution and I began to realize that “everyone cheats” on one level or another. It’s a miracle that marriage even exists really. No one could be trusted, it seemed.

It was at the bottom of this emotional/ spiritual crisis that I reached an epiphany.

Fidelity can only be absolute and perfect within us. It cannot exist with any degree of security outside of our own, direct sphere of control, outside of our own internal moral processes. No one can cheat on me; they can only cheat on themselves.

With that bolt, peace filled me and I was truly free from the ramifications of ex’s actions. I was able to forgive and to forget. This insight helped me stay faithful to myself as I drove my mid life crisis out as an OTR trucker for the next two years. I watched the horrible human tragedy of sex, drugs and depravity play itself out over and over at truck stops all across America and never felt the need to participate. I was free. I was faithful to me.

That’s all that counts. Really. With this sense of internal fidelity came a pride, a strength that I hadn’t experienced before. It has served me well since then and has provided great, powerful boundaries that define and delineate all subsequent relationships. I am finally whole and strong. I like it that way.

Is your spouse gonna cheat? Maybe. Does that have to destroy your marriage and your family? No, it doesn’t. It’s a choice. Would I allow a cheating spouse to stay in my bed? No. Definitely not. Fidelity is in the marriage contract, and violation brings nullification. Straight up.

You are not responsible for your spouse. Just yourself. (And your kids till they are able to make decisions on their own.) If you stay faithful to YOU, you will always be able to sleep at night and to look your kids in the eye, regardless of the outcome for your family.

Digital Devils

I don't think things are getting worse...I just think that we are getting better at reporting and recognizing the "evil" aspects of ourselves and our society. The internet is far from the cause. I would argue to the contrary, that it has created a consensus reality on a global scale that makes us more acutely aware of inequalities and travesties that exist universally and allows us to take action. Pornography has always existed, but access to it was slightly more difficult. Sexual violence used to be damn near expected in society as women were sometimes considered property or spoils of war. Violence has always bee a part of human existence, more so it the past then now actually. We experience it as a sanitized version whereas our ancestors were often direct participants. How many of us have killed and prepped our own meat? How many of us have buried relatives with our own hands? Sawn off a diseased limb? Birthed a baby in the bedroom?

I think things are better now.

I remember growing up in a farm community just thirty years ago. It seems, at a glance, pastoral and innocent…I am finding out after all of these years that many of my friends experience horrific sexual and physical abuse at the hands of their parents, neighbors and church leaders. This would never fly now, but the lack of access to laws, reporting procedures, knowledge; etc regarding the practice was not in place even three decades ago. You just didn’t talk about it back then. Some of the abuse was generational and had become family culture.

Yea, were talking good, rural, Mormon communities here… I know. I grew up there. I saw it. I am shocked in retrospect to realize the gravity of what we had to navigate as children in those isolated, pastoral, ideal communities. These people would be in jail if they tried to live that way now. Some of them are, finally. Some of their children and grandchildren are seeking help and healing now. Options that were unavailable, and even unimaginable, just thirty years ago.

Technology and knowledge as a bringer of evil???

Here’s my opinion: Technology, like alcohol, enhances and disinhibits tendencies within an individual as opposed to instilling theses tendencies. If someone is predisposed toward seeking pornography and vicarious sexual gratification, he will find it regardless of ease of access. Maybe he will buy it at the corner store, drive to Wendover, cruise North Temple or create his own. It will require more effort, but it will be acquired regardless of the degree of access available.

Violence is another issue altogether. Video games of a violent nature, according to recent study, actually satiate the drive toward violence. They fill an evolutionary niche.

It boils down to locus of control really. Internal VS external. The Christ archetype VS The Lucifer archetype. Are we gonna govern ourselves, or do we require governing?

Annul Me

I'm not so sure the LDS church needs to keep “us”, or that we need to keep the church. Maybe that is the core concept that I have finally come to see.... I have been exorcising my church demons and am feeling a lot better about life. I am at peace these days. The only time the internal struggle is even present is when I try and rectify my beliefs with those of the church. I'm not doing that so much anymore and the gospel has become as energetically charged, to me, as Buddhist theology or a book on ancient Mesopotamian culture. It has ceased to even register on my radar these days.

I am happy for that. Life exists outside of this particular maelstrom. Peaceful life. A good life. I am thankful for that. I personally don't feel that beating my head against the giant Mormon Theology stone is even a realistic, or desirable, option for me anymore. There is so much beauty and wonder outside of that paradigm that I have decided matters more and has more bearing on my spiritual progression. I don’t feel like the church fills that for me anymore.

Maybe I have fallen from grace. Or maybe I have evolved beyond the need for an external savior. I dunno. But there is peace and purpose to my life that I was unable to find within the limited confined of LDS theology and culture. I don’t miss the dissonance. I don’t miss the internal unrest and struggle. I don’t miss the narrow definitions and stifling ethical definitions. I am alright with my life. I’m alright with my connection to deity. I am no longer waiting for someone to save my soul, or allowing someone to step in and assume responsibility for the direction of my life. I am assuming that role myself. It is beautifully empowering.

The church doesn’t need me harping ad nauseum about its history, its theology or its cultural practices and I certainly wasn’t benefitting in any real way from any of those things. So, like a bad marriage, I have elected to dissolve the ties that bind. AND, like a bad marriage, both of us are better off without the company of the other.

I have been participating less and less here over the last few months. I need it less. I am feeling connected and grounded and feel I may have actually purged the bile that was building up inside of me over the last few decades. I no longer hate the church. I no longer feel the need to pull people from it or even discuss the things I have studied about it. I feel like I can close the book and file it away on a shelf somewhere, never to explore it in this way again. I am free now

I Sing the Body Electric

I love my body like I love my cars...all the while meticulously keeping the scheduled maintenance and cursing the unscheduled repairs and tune ups. It’s a machine, albeit a bio-electric pulse engine interface-device, and does require a great deal of tweaking in order to keep it “in tune” and humming along. It responds to scientific principle, even in its malfunctions. I notice variations in its performance when I decide to fill it with low test fuel, drive it too hard, and refuse to check the vital fluids or haul too much in the trunk.

The hard miles, wear and tear, misuse and negligence show up with time. That’s for sure. Would I trade it? Nope. I have grown accustomed to it, like the clunky 62 Chevy in the driveway. Its not new and shiny, but it has some definite sentimental value and still has a bit of chrome. It’s retro-sexy for sure.

Most importantly… it’s not me. Just a conveyance I am using until I am relieved of duty here in the material world. So, I top off the fluids, tune it up each spring, keep good fuel in it, listen with real attention to the squeaks, rattles and sputters and thank the Maker each and everyday that it didn’t break down West of the tracks at 3AM.

Reprogramming the Cosmic Walkie Talkie

Everyone is entitled and programmed for direct communication with the Creator, but we have to undo a great deal of interference created by false programming first.
I feel that the biggest impediment to direct communication is a personal definition of self worth based on adherence to external, prescribed memes and beliefs.

C’mon, we ALL know the whole “I’m not worthy” mantra that permeates the whole man-god communication issue…maybe even bought into it from time to time ourselves. I believe that this kind of externalized validation leads to a complete communication blackout. It shuts off the transceiver…US.

“Worthiness” is the elusive, subjective, intimate tuner that makes or breaks the transmission of spiritual data back and forth between us and our Creator. Only the individual can know if he/she is “in tune”. Only the individual can determine with any degree of certainty if the communication is taking place. No one but the individual can observe and judge either the “worthiness” of the individual or the quality of the communication taking place within the individual soul. No one. Not even a GA or Bishop. Period.

Strangely enough, I experienced YEARS of communication blackout while still active and a TBM. Absolute blackout, like my questions and pleadings were not even making it outside of my own skull. I was able to overcome this when I finally decided to look beyond the parameters of proper prayer etiquette prescribed by my LDS up bringing.

First of all, I let go of the concept of personal unworthiness. I stumbled, dumbfounded, upon a life changing concept while browsing the digital archives of a popular occult website. Our bodies are intended to be an interface with material reality and are designed as bioelectric pulse engines that TRANSMIT electrical frequency… transmission implies two way communication. Our bodies, then, are literally VESSELS, INSTRUMENTS, and TOOLS that vibrate IN HARMONY with a specific set of frequencies. We communicate through our bodies. Drugs, excessive food, bad nutrition, lack of sleep…anything that affects our instrument will affect the nature and effectiveness of our transmission. Even too much church, especially if it instills a sense of dread, fear or inadequacy. It muddles the transmission.

The channel is always open and is always accessible, we just modulate in and out of frequency according to our physiological state of flux at any given time. I feel that is a fundamental reason why we are herd animals, so that as we “dream together” we are able to pretty much guarantee constant communication with the forces of creation despite individual flux.

If prayers aren’t being answered, tune the channel. Change your diet, exercise, meditate, dispel fear, get a sense of “worthiness” consistent with logic instead of ambiguous feeling… you have a body and are equipped to use it as a tool. Demand and expect communication. NEVER, never, never say “Thy will be done” as this is the cosmic equivalent of saying “whatever” and broadcasting an aloof, uninvested attitude toward actual communication. Ask for and expect an answer in real time.

Learn to identify somatic responses within your instrument that coincide with analog Yes and No verbal responses. I feel a Yes answer just behind my left eye as a warm pressure. A No answer registers behind my right ear as a void. It works every single time. It just took a great deal of time to actually unlearn the programmed response and identify the means of communication. It is important not to limit the expression of the things you ask for if they represent actual material states…money, love, money, health, money… because limiting the manifestation to tight parameters will take longer and you may not actually receive what is best for you. It’s important to delimit manifestation especially in regards to religious expectation if you want to be open to accepting the answers in a broader perspective.

Hope that clarifies

A side note regarding prayer practices that I think can be related to feminism…

Esoteric Occult philosophy teaches of two paths, two approaches to spellwork (prayer) that an adept can choose to follow. They are referred to as The Left hand Path and The Right Hand Path. The LHP is the archetypal masculine and is accomplished by demanding and forcing one’s will on the cosmos with full expectation of immediate results. The RHP is the archetypal feminine and is accomplished through pleading and nurturing and leaves the result up to the chaotic forces of the cosmos. The LHP produces a sorcerer, the RHP produces a magi. Dark Side / Light Side stuff fer sure, but not in reference to ethical or moral definition. Just locus of control and application of personal will. Neither is inherently good nor evil and the outcome and focus of each path is determined by the adept. In other words, there are Good Sorcerers and Evil Magi and vice versa. Neither is defined by sex, sexual orientation despite the masculine / feminine archetypes invoked.

Historically, one chooses the method that suits one’s tastes, sensibilities and outlook. If one does not work, the other might. LHP and RHP are also geared along a spectrum and no two approaches are exactly alike. LHP develops a sense of self empowerment and a strong internal locus of control. RHP develops a deep sense of interconnectedness and an external locus of control. Some practitioners move between the paths as dictated by the situation.

If pleading for an answer doesn’t work, you might try demanding one…