Clarifying Infinity and The Impossible

There are two myths commonly believed among LDS Church members regard infinity and impossible.
God can do anything and he has infinite creations, right?
Yes and no.
God's creations are infinite to us, but they are numbered to him!
God can do anything that's possible and right, but not just anything.
"For behold there are many worlds that has passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them." (Moses 1:35).
This likely means that man could not count God's creations during a lifetime, they have a set number still and are not infinite in the true sense, though they will continue to expand forever.
God can do the impossible to us, heal, restore life, etc. However, despite what Mark 9:23 says about all things being possible to God, or he who believes, that verse was not translated correctly.
Joseph Smith's Inspired Version restored that verse in Mark to say that we can do anything God says we can do. Not that God or we can do anything and everything.
God doesn't and can't create something from nothing. He reorganizes existing material; works within his perfect understanding of natural law -- but can't break those laws himself.
God also won't force us to obey his laws or do anything contrary to the Gospel principles.
I don't want to bring God down to our level. He certainly can do things we consider impossible. He's light years advanced of man, but God himself was once a man like we are now and therein lies our hope of slowly advancing, precept by precept to be more like him.

Is It a Sin to Visit The Las Vegas Strip?

Is it OK for LDS church members to visit the Las Vegas Strip?
Preference is up to the individual, but I think it can be OK, as long as you do not gamble, go to risqué shows and don’t lose hold of church standards.
One of my children hates the Vegas Strip because of all the people trying to hand you pornographic cards. Me, I guess I am always so locked onto all the "eye candy" kind of buildings and attractions you can spot, I look past the porn.
But even he, now into architecture, has to admit Vegas is great for appreciation of the architectural parameter. …
Las Vegas had a real "family attraction" kind of accent in the late 1990s, but now it wants to shed that image.
So, kids can't just run loose in Vegas and be OK. The "Pirate Show" in now Rated R.
The Bellagio water fountain show is rated G. So is a ride up the Stratosphere, unless you are afraid of heights.
There are plenty of family friendly places here. There's a Temple in Vegas too.
Vegas is like the Internet. It has the best and worst the world has to offer.
Las Vegas has also become a hub for all kinds of outdoor opportunities in the area.
I'd reminded too that I took two different German foreign exchange students in two separate spring breaks on a whirlwind, three-day trip of the Great Southwest.
Both saw the Grand Canyon, Arches National Park, Monument Valley and more. What did both like seeing the most? Las Vegas.
Their opinions may be the worldly point of view, but Vegas is certainly a "must see," something to visit at least once before you decide or make judgments.

I've attended wards in Las Vegas over the years,including one just off the Strip, and the members living there seem to be rock solid and have a regular temple attending attitude that can put Wasatch Front members to shame.

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Wickedest Earth vs. "Other" Earths

Read Moses chapter 7 and you realize there are other earths out there, maybe even some in a similar existence of mortal probation like our earth right now.
Our earth is the wickedest of all earths (Moses 7:36), but what would these other, less wicked earths be like?
Intriguing possibilities for thought and perhaps the basis for a good LDS novel some day.
I would suspect these other earths are much more boring in many respects than ours.
They may have never had a world war, invented nuclear weapons or have a preoccupation with TV shows and movies either.
If our earth really contains both the wickedest and the most righteous souls of all, as a balance, then are these other earths more average?
Our earth is certainly a low end telestial world these days and yet I would suspect these other earths are more terrestrial level status.
They may have had more scientific development than we have in some areas, not opting to go weapons development crazy. Murder might be rare on these other earths.
Also, church members might be the norm there, at least as widespread as Catholicism is on our earth. That could perhaps foster a kind of Utah "zion curtain" kind of atmosphere globally on these other earths.
How would it feel as Saints, to be the majority and not minority?
Here are some other thoughts on what these other earths might be like:
1. I doubt there would be a Las Vegas on other earths, or much gambling.
2. There are probably no X-rated movies or much porn on the Internet.
3. There's likely a continual prohibition of alcohol drinking and to consume it there is probably in the league of cocaine usage on our earth.
4. Men likely far out number women in the workforce. Many more women are housewives, and as such, there is less unemployment.
5. Travel may be powered by something other than fossil fuel. People on other earths are likely far more proactive in regards to pollution and have less accent on economic gain. Homes are generally smaller and more modest.
Jesus Christ was crucified on our earth and these other earths logically must know that and of our existence, because only here were there wicked enough people to kill him.

In all, they probably lack some of the extremes our earth has. These other earths aren't perfect, but a full step up from our earth. Something to ponder ....

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

The Book "Mormon Doctrine" Has Arrived

I'll admit that I was a great admirer/user of Elder Bruce R. McConkie's "Mormon Doctrine" book since I first read it in 1973.

The book's first edition caused a huge stir among the General Authorities of the Church when it was first published back in 1958. In fact, the brethren of the day listed hundreds of points of controvery in the book.
The second edition, which included some changes which Elder McConkie, said were wise to make, came out in 1966.
The dictionary style, almost 900-page book, was shunned by many (and probably still is).
However, I noticed that by the time the 21st Century arrived, "Mormon Doctrine" began to be quoted by some official church manuals.
It took almost half a century and after McComkie's passing, but I believe this, his best book, has finally arrived and earned official worth in church member libraries.


NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Time, Relativity and The Gospel

I know little of the mathematical nature of Einstein's theory of relativity, but I believe to God much of it is not a theory, it is practical way God does important things.
For example, my head spins when I try to comprehend the time and space inversion component of the theory of relativity. However, I see that component clearly in God's realm.
For example, look at Facsimile No. 2, the Figure one explanation from the Book of Abraham and you find this startling material: "Kolob, signifying the first creation, nearest to the Celestial, or the residence of God. First in government, the last pertaining to the measurement of time.The measurement according to celestial time, which CELESTIAL TIME SIGNIFIES ONE DAY TO A CUBIT. One day in Kolob is equal to a thousand years, according to the measurement of this earth ..."
Interchanging a day (time) with a cubit (physical measurement)  is time/space inversion. (And this scripture was written long before Einstein came alone.)
To God then, does time becomes a short physical measurement -- one step or less?
Perhaps.
Also, the above verse states one day in Kolob equals a thousand years on earth.
Does that mean that the theory of relativity's time dilation effect is used by God to better serve his purposes? Does it mean that no one in the Pre-Earth life waits more more than a week to be born, because time is moving faster on Earth?
If so, I perhaps waited just over 30 minutes in the Celestial realm to be born after my mother was born.

If Kolob is traveling near the speed of light, time moves much more slowly there than on Earth. Thus, our earthly test can be done in a fraction of time and it is not just h
--Now I'm certainly not the first LDS Church member, or leader to touch on relativity and the gospel, just one of the more passionate on the subject.
The book, "Science and Mormonism" did.
Also, the church's last general patriarch, Emeritus Patriarch Eldred G. Smith, talked about time dilation and and our time in mortality in his April 1966 General Conference talk, "Can You Abide Two Hours?" (Improvement Era, June 1966, pp. 512-513.
-If you would like to read Patriarch Smith's talk, go to:
http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1461
(-NOTE: This kind of material in the Book of Abraham --plus its feel of being "scripture" -- make any dispute/debate on the Book of Abraham's origin meaningless to myself. The proof of divinity is in its content!)

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

When A Return Missionary Talk is Pointless ...

                               A missionary knocks on a door in Bath England, in 1973.

When is a sacrament meeting talk by a just returned missionary NOT a missionary speech?
When he never mentions the word mission or any missionary experiences whatsoever.
Twice in the past couple of years I have listened to two returned missionaries in their home wards giving their "homecoming talk" and neither elder never mentioned his mission in any way.
It was just all about the assigned subject and sadly boring too for the 20 minutes.
All I can say is the pendulum has swung too far the other way now.
Maybe before some policy changes, such talks were too "homecoming" oriented before, with family members even talking. Perhaps there were a few too many jokes made before about various cultures.
However, there was certainly not a young man in the audience of the two talks I am referring to who was any more excited about serving a mission after hearing these pointless talks than he was the day before!
I don't fault the missionaries.
I believe returned missionaries DO NOT need an assigned subject.
Why would they?
They just spent two years, 24/7 serving the Lord. If they can't be trusted, then who can be?
They can and should be talking ONLY about their mission - especially their most spiritual experiences.
All they need is a time limit.
If church leaders want more potential full-time missionaries, they need to get young men excited about missions and the current assigned subject policy for returned missionary talks isn't helping that to happen.
UPDATE: April 28, 2013: I hear another returned missionary talk. Again, he seems too concerned about his assigned subject and only mentions 2 missionary experiences in 15 minutes. I know he had more experiences to tell that that.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Oct. 18, 2015: Another returned missionary talk in my home ward. All about the assigned subject, nothing about his mission. Boring.

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.

Church Members Before 1950s: Crosses OK?

I found many old vintage photographs that I had never seen before in my mother's endless scrapbook collection.
One picture in particular (and reproduced here) was dated 1946 and showed her entire family -- the Ray and Lida Rigby Family from Grace, Idaho.
What caught my eye the most was that my future Aunt Maurine, in the lower right of the picture, is wearing a large cross.
This confirms what I had already suspected: Mormons wearing crosses before the 1950s was OK and not frowned upon.
It was the late 1950s when apparently both wearing crosses and having facial hair began to be shunned in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
(We're talking church policy here, not necessarily doctrine, in both practices.)
Wearing a cross in the LDS Church today is practically viewed as evil. Church leaders, and in some stakes even just an ordinary church member, having facial hair today is frowned on.
However, realize that it wasn't always that way for both practices.
Realize that a cross symbol is NOT evil. It is mentioned a lot in the Bible as a symbol of the Saints back then.
Even the hymn, "Onward, Christian Soldiers," page 246 in the LDS Hymn book states the "Cross of Jesus."
Also, in the early 20th Century the LDS Church wanted to erect a large cross on the top of Ensign Peak, north of Salt Lake City, to show that Church members are Christians. (This never happened as there too many debates over the plan.)

-Now, I'm not recommending that Mormons wear crosses. And, it wouldn't be my symbol of choice either. If I could create it, I'd personally chose to wear an empty sepulchure (tomb), instead of a cross, to celebrate the resurrection and an empty grave, instead of just the death of Jesus Christ.

I doubt Joseph Smith ever saw a cross on a church in his day, as Protestant churches didn't adopt the cross as a symbol until the decades after his death. Initially, Protestant churches viewed the cross as purely Catholic, something they wanted to stay away from.
-President Joseph Fielding Smith discussed crosses and LDS Church members in the March 1961 Improvement Era (forerunner to today's Ensign Magazine).
"Because our Savior died on the cross, the wearing of crosses is to most Latter-day Saints in very poor taste and inconsistent to our worship," President Smith wrote.
Later in the article he stated: "We may be definitely sure that if our Lord had been killed with a dagger or with a sword, it would have been very strange indeed if religious people of this day would have graced such a weapon by wearing it and adorning it because it was by such a means that our Lord was put to death."
President Smith stressed having a humble, contrite spirit and a sincere prayer of gratitude is a far better means of worship for our Savior's sacrifice and atonement that to adorn the cross.
He also said Church member do not question the sincerity of other religions who wear crosses, but it is simply a custom that does not appeal to LDS Church members.
-That's especially true because LDS Doctrine teaches that by far the most suffering of Christ took place in the Garden of Gethsemane and NOT on the cross, since the Garden is where the Savior took upon himself the sins of the world.
-There's also some "lip" service to the cross in the LDS Church. For example, the Christian song in the LDS Hymn book, page, 250, "We are all Enlisted," states in its second verse: "Rally round the standard of the cross."

NOTE: This article and all of the NighUntoKolob blog are NOT an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. They are the author's conclusions and opinions only.