There has been a lot of talk about inequality lately.   If we are going to discuss this subject, we need to define our terms.  Equality of result is an extremely controversial subject and is not relevant to the discussion of this post.  Equality of opportunity is.

What do we mean by “equality of opportunity?”  We mean a fair playing field where people have equal opportunities to do what they want with their lives without interference.

I think a great example is our wonderful 14th amendment to the Constitution, which calls on all states to provide citizens with “equal protection” of the law.  This same amendment points out that it is the purpose of government to protect the natural rights of “life, liberty and property.”  It is easy to see what this amendment is calling for:  people should be able to live in harmony with each other, competing as they may wish in terms of business enterprises, but left alone to pursue their own goals as long as they do not harm others and try to take away their life, liberty and property.

The story of how the 14th amendment was subverted by mostly southern judges in the closing decades of the 19th century is one of judicial activism.  The result were the Jim Crow laws, segregation and many other evils of the pre-civil rights era.  But note, like most interference with equality of opportunity, it was government that ushered in the evil and protected certain groups at the expense of others.  In fact, it is government that is the biggest obstacle to creating a truly free society where people have equal chances to pursue their chosen paths.

Continue reading →

As a Ron Paul supporter, I have become more comfortable lately with Mitt Romney as the candidate who appears likely to win the Republican nomination.  Although anything can happen of course, intrade has Romney winning by a wide margin.  Romney has made some serious proposals on entitlement reform in the last two weeks, and this helped me overcome his milquetoast 59-point plan.  I have always worried about Romney’s bellicose foreign policy, however, and the presidential candidate proved me right on Friday.

Romney published an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal that makes the following points:

• Obama’s “engagement” policy is a failure.
• Obama fumbled the “Green Revolution” opportunity of tumbling the ayatollahs in 2009.
• Iran is about to become a nuclear power.
• Romney’s policy will be to “prepare for war” to achieve peace.
• Romney as president will send new carrier groups to the Persian Gulf.
• Romney will increase military assistance to Israel.
• Iran will not be allowed to get a nuclear weapon.

Continue reading →

This is one of those posts where I would love to get input from the collective knowledge of the Mormon blog world.  What is the latest scholarly opinion on who wrote “Hebrews?”

It is worth noting that the LDS Bible Dictionary says Paul was the author, although the controversy of authorship is mentioned.

Epistle to the Hebrews was written to Jewish members of the Church to persuade them that significant aspects of the law of Moses, as a forerunner, had been fulfilled in Christ, and that the higher gospel law of Christ had replaced it. When Paul returned to Jerusalem at the end of his third mission (about A.D. 60), he found that many thousands of Jewish members of the Church were still “zealous of the law” of Moses (Acts 21:20). This was at least ten years after the conference at Jerusalem had determined that certain ordinances of the law of Moses were not necessary for the salvation of gentile Christians, but had not settled the matter for Jewish Christians. It appears that soon thereafter, Paul wrote the epistle to the Hebrews to show them by their own scripture and by sound reason why they should no longer practice the law of Moses. The epistle is built on a carefully worked-out plan. Some have felt that the literary style is different from that of Paul’s other letters. However, the ideas are certainly Paul’s.

 

I think it’s safe to say that the vast majority of New Testament scholars do not agree with the analysis that we know that Paul wrote “Hebrews,” however.  

Continue reading →

President Uchtdorf’s talk during the most recent conference Priesthood session is, it seems to me, extraordinarily important for understanding how we can truly help the poor.  Make no mistake about it:  if you are not helping your fellow man and participating in helping the poor, you are on the wrong road.   To quote President Uchtdorf:  “our spiritual progress is inseparably bound together with the temporal service we give to others.”  Pres. Uchtdorf said you will be “in torment” if you don’t help the poor.

But Pres. Uchtdorf makes it clear that there are well-intentioned welfare systems that don’t work, and then there is the “Lord’s way.”  The true systems include the following aspects:

• They promote self-reliance (to drive home this point, Pres. Uchtdorf used the words “self-reliance” and “self-help” eleven times in the talk).
• They involve personal activity on the part of the giver.  It clearly is not enough to just write a check (and in fact, Pres. Uchtdorf says just writing a check in the wrong way to do it.)
• Personal activity and love for your neighbor will promote unity in the church, drawing people together in a common cause to promote the Lord’s will.

And, most importantly, Pres. Uchtdorf points out the crucial difference between welfare systems that don’t work and the ones that promote the “Lord’s way.”

There are many good people and organizations in the world that are trying to meet the pressing needs of the poor and needy everywhere. We are grateful for this, but the Lord’s way of caring for the needy is different from the world’s way. The Lord has said, “It must needs be done in mine own way.”⁹ He is not only interested in our immediate needs; He is also concerned about our eternal progression. For this reason, the Lord’s way has always included self-reliance and service to our neighbor in addition to caring for the poor.

Continue reading →

We had a great experience in Young Men’s today that I wanted to share.  As anybody who has taught just about anything in the Church has learned, catching the audience’s attention is often difficult.  Well, with young men, it is always difficult.  The teacher was trying to help the young men understand the power of the priesthood.

One of our Young Men’s leaders is an engineer who has his own engineering business.  All of the young men have seen his shop, which is filled with complex equipment for making precise machinery.  The engineer recently bought some new, extremely complex CNC equipment, which is, apparently, an incredibly powerful tool that makes extremely precise equipment and has a myriad of uses.

“It took me a year just to learn how to use the most basic functions on this equipment,” the engineer said. “And I only know part of the what this machinery can do.  It will take me years of study to figure out exactly what this machinery can do.”

The lesson really hit home for the young men in our ward:  the priesthood is like an extremely powerful tool.  It takes you years to learn how to use it, and even then you don’t know all of its functions. 

We brought the lesson home by reminding them that it was through the priesthood that the worlds were created.  Jesus held the priesthood, and it was through the priesthood that he was able to raise Lazarus from the dead, walk on water and heal people.  We reminded them of the stories of many people who performed miracles because they were able to learn how to use the priesthood.

For whatever reason, comparing the priesthood to an incredibly complex tool seemed to bring things home for the young men (and me, by the way).   I am convinced the young men went home from church today feeling like they had a deeper understanding of what a powerful force they have in holding the priesthood of God.