Category Archives: Main

Evolution: a complex systems perspective

Belief systems, Environment, LDS Doctrine, Main, Science

The best way to build a large, complex system that works is to evolve it from a small, simple system that works.
— Information technology maxim (cf. Gall’s Law)

The most complex and difficult intellectual work performed by humans to date is the design, development, testing and deployment of large-scale information technology (IT) systems. Such systems can have literally astronomical numbers of discrete internal states, changing through hundreds, thousands, or even millions of such states per second. As such, many such development efforts end in failure [PDF], and the ones that do get deployed always have defects, sometimes very large numbers of defects (think Windows Vista). I know, because this is what I deal with on a professional basis — both helping to rescue large troubled IT projects and acting as an expert witness in lawsuits that involve failed or disputed IT projects. And prior to that, I helped to develop and architect large, complex IT systems.

As such, I have no problem with the concept that God would use various evolutionary mechanisms (including, yes, natural selection, geological time-scales, and random mutations) in preparing a world for us to live in. For me, such as approach is more efficient, less difficult, and less error-prone than an ex nihilo creation of the (quite literally, at least for us) incomprehensibly complex biological/ecological/physical environment in which we live. (In fact, one very fascinating area of computer science uses evolutionary concepts for creating more efficient software and hardware.)

I’m not necessarily arguing for a “fire-and-forget” model (where God kick-starts things and then comes back later when the planet is ready), though I don’t rule it out, either; since God has created “worlds without number“, one would suspect He’s got the process pretty much down pat. Still, I think the creation account found in Abraham, which describes “the Gods” as preparing the earth and the seas to bring forth life at certain stages is as good a description as any in which the creation is shepherded towards a desired end, viz., an environment that is biologically, chemically, environmentally, and genetically compatible with the soon-to-be-mortal bodies of Adam and Eve. And, yes, that would include introducing human-compatible DNA (or that which would evolve into it) into the biological mix as early as necessary.

This is, in fact, why I not only have no problems with the varieties of hominid species in the fossil record, up to and including the emergence of Homo sapiens, but I would expect it. Why? Because a world that actually evolved Homo sapiens would be guaranteed to be 100% compatible with the mortal bodies of Adam and Eve. I could also make the argument (dismissed in some quarters, but still valid I believe) that without such an evolutionary track record, the ‘veil’ over our pre-existence memories would be less effective, since it would be so blindingly clear that we had come from somewhere else. (SF author J. P. Hogan explored this concept a bit — on behalf of an alien race — in his “Giants” series of novels.)

Now, this raises the issue of the “pre-Adamites” that B. H. Roberts and others explored during the first few decades of the 20th Century (and that Joseph Fielding Smith, and later Bruce R. McConkie, fought so hard against). For me, it’s not much of an issue. As Hugh Nibley points out (in “Before Adam“, a BYU talk given in 1980), we as Mormons believe in eternal life for a wide range of animal life — why would we deny it to intelligent, evolved hominids, however much they look like us? As Nibley also points out, the “story” — a written history, a record — doesn’t really start until Adam appears on the scene:

Do not begrudge existence to creatures that looked like men long, long ago, nor deny them a place in God’s affection or even a right to exaltation—for our scriptures allow them such. Nor am I overly concerned as to just when they might have lived, for their world is not our world. They have all gone away long before our people ever appeared. God assigned them their proper times and functions, as he has given me mine—a full-time job that admonishes me to remember his words to the overly eager Moses: “For mine own purpose have I made these things. Here is wisdom and it remaineth in me.” (Moses 1:31.) It is Adam as my own parent who concerns me. When he walks onto the stage, then and only then the play begins. He opens a book and starts calling out names. They are the sons of Adam, who also qualify as sons of God, Adam himself being a son of God. This is the book of remembrance from which many have been blotted out. They have fallen away, refused to choose God as their father, and by so doing were registered in Satan’s camp. “Satan shall be their father, and misery shall be their doom.” (Moses 7:37.) Can we call them sons of Adam, bene-Adam, human beings proper? The representative Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans, to name only the classic civilizations of old, each fancied themselves to be beings of a higher nature, nearer to gods than others who inhabited the land with them (and before them), or who dwelt in other lands. And yet they did not deny humanity to them.

Now we get to the issue of Adam and Eve’s bodies themselves — how were they created, what was their ‘pre-fall’ condition, and how did they transition into mortality? Frankly, the simplest explanation for me would be something equivalent to a combination of cloning (from evolved Homo sapiens bodies) and genetic engineering to induce the ‘pre-mortal’ (anti-aging, infertile, intellectually innnocent) state. The ‘tree of knowledge of good and evil’ could itself be genetically engineered to provide, if you will, genetic therapy that would transition Adam and Eve to a mortal, fertile, and intellectually enhanced state.

Which brings me to another issue. I’ve just described a hypothetical mechanism for the creation and fall of Adam and Eve using concepts and technology not that far removed from what we can currently achieve as humans. God, on the other hand, is a being Who created, comprehends, and perceived this entire universe and all that’s in it. I think it’s pretty arrogant for any of us humans — wherever we sit in the creation/evolution debate — to state categorically what God could or could not have done in creating this earth and placing us on it. My own posting here is not to state what God must have done, but what He could have done, and in particular why an evolutionary approach would make a lot of sense.

For exampe, intellectual honesty — and my own belief in God’s power — compels me to also admit that God could well have the cosmic equivalent of a Xerox machine (or, for fellow object-oriented development geeks, a Factory pattern) that He can use to stamp out new copies or instances of worlds — with whatever variations He chooses — at will, working from one or more pre-created ‘template’ worlds (that were indeed evolved). Indeed, I think that a lot of our post-mortal education will consist of unlearning many of our cherished personal beliefs and assumptions, accompanied by a lot of forehead-slapping (“I never even thought of that…”).

In sum, I think we in the Church set up for ourselves some unnecessary dichotomies and dilemmas, particularly on issues for which we have relatively little scriptural information — other than the most critical, namely that “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” ..bruce..

Churches of anticipation (pt. 2): baptism [revised]

Book of Mormon, Main

[UPDATED 03/16/08 — made some corrections and significant additions]

In my earlier posting on “churches of anticipation”, I pointed out some parallels between Alma1 and John the Baptist, noting in particular that while Nephi1 spoke of baptism and his brother Jacob preached it to the Nephites, there is no record after that point in the Book of Mormon of baptism actually being practiced until Alma1 reintroduces it.

Today, while preparing a program for a convert baptism in our ward this afternoon, I re-read Alma1‘s famous introduction of baptism in Mosiah 18. We tend to read it in light of an established church and the covenants we make when we join. Alma1, however, was talking to a group of Nephites who lived under the Mosiac law (however poorly they might have been following it; cf. Abinadi’s rebuke to Noah and his priests) but who had become convinced of the relatively imminent birth of the Messiah back in a ‘homeland’ half a world away and half a millennium removed.

Read what Alma1 has to say while keeping in mind that these people apparently did not practice baptism but instead (if anything) lived under the law of Moses:

And it came to pass that [Alma] said unto them:

Behold, here are the waters of Mormon (for thus they were called)
and now, as ye are desirous to come into the fold of God,
and to be called his people,
and are willing to bear one another’s burdens that they may be light;
yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn;
yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort,
and to stand as witness of God at all times and in all things,
and in all place that ye may be in,
even until death,
that ye may be redeemed of God,
and be numbered with those of the first resurrection,
that ye may have eternal life —

Now, I say unto you,
if this be the desire of your hearts,
what have you against being baptized in the name of the Lord,
as a witness before him
that ye have entered into a covenant with him,
that ye will serve him and keep his commandments,
that he may pour out his Spirit more abundantly upon you?

And now when the people had heard these words,
they clapped their hands for joy,
and exclaimed:

This is the desire of our hearts. (Mosiah 18:8-11)

In all of scriptural history, we only have six (6) places where baptism is specifically introduced and practiced:

  • at the time of Adam (see Moses 6:64-68), though it’s unclear how extensively it was practiced (due to apostasy) until the time of Enoch;
  • at the time of Enoch (see Moses 7:10-12);
  • by Nephi and Jacob in the New World, around 560 BC, though there is no record of any follow-up after that point;
  • by Alma1 in the New World, around 121 BC;
  • by John the Baptist, in the Old World, around roughly 30 AD;
  • and in our own day, with the appearance of John the Baptist to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery in May 1829 (D&C 13; JS:H 1:68-72).

In fact, throughout most of scriptural history, lack of baptism as we understand it appears to be the norm. While under Mosaic law total immersion for ritual cleansing was used for Gentiles converting to Judaism, as well as for Jewish women and men suffering from certain ritual uncleanness, there was no indication that it was used as a covenant-making act, particularly among those born Jewish.

In the last three instances above (Alma1, John, Joseph), baptism appears to be introduced — or adapted — specifically in preparation of the advent of the Savior, either during His mortal ministry or for his Second Coming. Furthermore, I think that Enoch’s call by the Lord to preach repentance and baptism is in anticipation of the great winnowing that will result in (a) the establishment and translation of the city of Enoch, (b) the on-going translation of those who accepted the Gospel after the city of Enoch was taken from the earth (cf. Moses 7:27), and (c) the purging of the wicked from the earth (the Flood).

In fact, one could argue that baptism is specifically introduced and stressed by the Lord in advance of great destruction, to wit:

  • in Enoch’s time, in advance of the Flood;
  • in the time of Alma1 and Alma2 (and going forward from there), in advance of the destruction that came upon the Nephites and Lamanites at the time of Christ’s crucifixion;
  • in John the Baptist’s time, in advance of the destruction that came upon the Jews (~70 AD);
  • in Joseph Smith’s time, in advance of the destruction preceding the Second Coming.

The churches of anticipation, then, could also be considered to be anticipation of judgment and destruction in this life, not just in the life to come. This is reflected in the messages preached by each of them:

Enoch: “And the Lord said unto me: Go to this people, and say unto them — Repent, lest I come out and smite them with a curse, and they die.” (Moses 7:10)

Alma2: “Behold, now I say unto you that he commandeth you to repent; and except ye repent, ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. But behold, this is not all — he has commanded you to repent, or he will utterly destroy you from off the face of the earth; yea, he will visit you in his anger, and in his fierce anger he will not turn away.” (Alma 9:12)

John the Baptist: “But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” (Matthew 3:7)

Joseph Smith: “Yea, verily, to seal them up unto the day when the wrath of God shall be poured out upon the wicked without measure — unto the day when the Lord shall come to recompense unto every man according to the measure which he has measured unto his fellow man.” (D&C 1:9-10)

One last question. The Savior Himself was very clear on the universal application and requirement of baptism (cf. John 3:5, Mark 16:16), and that is echoed in the experiences of Adam, Nephi (2 Ne 31:, Paul (1 Cor 15:29) and Joseph Smith (D&C 39:20, 68:8-9, and sections 127 & 128). We have built over 100 temples — and we’re likely to build hundreds more — in order to apply retroactively what throughout history has only been practiced in some very limited circumstances and some very limited portions of the world.

My question is: why? Any thoughts? ..bruce..

Imago Dei

Belief systems, LDS Society, Main

I wrote nearly a year ago about how US-based Latter-day Saints — unlike members of other major religious groups — tend to be more devout the higher their level of education. In other words, US Mormons with a college degree tend to be more active than those with just a high school degree, who in turn tend to be more active than those with no high school degree.

Now comes another interesting study out of BYU that says that US-based LDS women attending college tend to be more satisfied with their body image and less prone to eating disorders than non-LDS women attending college:

An associate professor of psychology at Brigham Young University, Spangler has spent a lot of time considering the relationship between religious doctrine and the body. In her talk last week at a University of Utah symposium on body image, she reported on research showing that Mormon college students have significantly better “body satisfaction” than students from other religions or from no religion.

Her thesis: Mormon theological doctrine about the body in general is what leads those LDS students to be happy with their own bodies in particular.

That’s not to say that most men and women who are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints like everything about their bodies. Spangler herself does research on eating disorders, and some of the women in treatment are from BYU. Like most Americans — 80 percent of women and 60 percent of men, according to one national study — many LDS women look in the mirror and are at least mildly unhappy. Still, Mormons are more satisfied than most, she says. . . .

Two of the studies, conducted by Jody Oomen-Early at Texas Women’s University, surveyed women age 18 to 30 about a related issue — eating disorders. Oomen-Early, who did her graduate work in health sciences at BYU, wondered if religious devoutness was correlated with increased eating disorder behaviors, a question that first occurred to her when an anorexic student at TWU told her that she felt she was “good” when she denied herself, and sinful when she ate.

Oomen-Early’s research found that the more devout a Baptist or Methodist woman, the more likely she was to have eating disorder behaviors. But — and this surprised her — more devout LDS women were less prone to eating disorder symptoms. “Religious devoutness seemed to be a protective factor in LDS women,” says Oomen-Early.

As one of the researches notes, correlation is not causation. Still, one could reasonably conclude that, for US-based Latter-day Saint women, the more educated you are, the happier you’ll be. Food (ahem) for thought; read the whole thing. ..bruce..

The Brotherhood of the Beard

LDS Society, Main

[UPDATED 3/12/08: Check out this corresponding post over at The Posts of My House: The Sisterhood of the Slacks. I must confess some real sympathy for the sisters who would rather wear dress slacks than skirts.]

We had stake conference the Sunday before last. I attended all sessions (except the youth session), including both of the Sunday main sessions, largely because I was in the Stake choir. And I was amused to find that my eyes were drawn to every other bearded male I saw during all those sessions — and I saw a few them eyeballing me as well. No, we’re all straight (well, at least I can vouch for myself) — but bearded Mormons tend to check each other out, not out of competition but out of a sense of “well, at least I’m not the only guy with a beard here.”

OK, there’s some mental competition as well (“Y’know, if he would just trim up his beard right there, it would look so much better…”), but it’s minor and secondary.

I’ve had a beard most of my adult life. I started growing my first beard during my very last week at BYU (1978) — not so much as an act of defiance than as an act of convenience, since I spent that last week sleeping in my office in the Talmage Building while trying to finish my CS 480 final project (a multi-tasking kernel running on a Nova minicomputer). I alternated between bearded and clean-shaven for several years (including a mustache for a while), was clean-shaven during my two years of teaching at BYU (1985-87) and remained clean-shaven until we had a “Days of ’47” beard-growing contest in our ward in Santa Cruz (no, seriously) in 1988. The bishopric was reorganized during that contest, and the two of us who were called as counselors both had grown beards, which really gave the ward that pioneer feeling. I kept mine after the contest, and have had it pretty much ever since.

Every few years since then I shave it off, usually out of boredom or curiosity, or from a desire to somehow motivate myself. What I usually get is people (including — nay, especially — members of the Church) finding polite or roundabout ways of telling me how much better I looked with the beard. When I shaved it off a few years back while we were living in DC, my dog Deacon barked at me when I walked out of the bathroom, not recognizing me. The same thing pretty much happened at church (though the members, for the most part, refrained from barking at me). The real clincher, though, was when the Washington DC North Mission President told me that I “just didn’t look the same” without the beard. When a mission president hints that you looked better with the beard — and this while I was serving as the branch mission leader, within his mission — then the beard isn’t going to stay away for long.

Besides, my sweet wife Sandra really loves the beard (she says I kiss better when I have one; I know, TMI, but there you go). She’s always very sweet and supportive and stiff-upper-lippish when I shave it off, but is always so relieved when I grow it back. As am I.

I have this recurring fantasy that at some point the Church leadership will look back at all the bearded and mustachioed General Authorities (including every President from Brigham Young through Heber J. Grant) who served faithfully up through the middle of the 20th Century and decide that maybe facial hair isn’t all that bad. But I suspect that won’t happen until we get far enough into the Last Days that the general destruction and upheaval disrupts the razors-and-shaving-cream supply chain. At that point, we’ll all have more important things to worry about.

Which I guess is the point. ..bruce..

D&D at BYU (1976)

BYU, Games, LDS Society, Main

With the passing this week of Dungeons & Dragons co-inventor Gary Gygax — and was there ever a more perfect name for the inventor of role-playing games? — I’ve reflected a bit on my own introduction to the game and the fact that I set up what I suspect was the first club ever at BYU that hosted D&D games.

For Christmas 1975, my (now-former) wife Marla had bought me the SPI science fiction wargame StarForce: Alpha Centauri, which I had been eying for some months in ads in the back of Analog. Of course, now that I had the game, I had to have someone to play it with. So I organized a club on campus — I was an BYU undergrad at the time, studying computer science — which I called, “The Strategy & Tactics Group”. I recruited a few people into it, most notably my friend Terry, a co-worker at the BYU Translation Sciences Institute, and also put up some signs around campus. The meetings, held every few weeks, were pretty casual — people (never a lot) showed up and paired off to play various map-and-chit wargames and the like.

At about the 3rd or 4th meeting, I noticed a group of four guys over at one table who were talking a lot and rolling dice. However, rather than having a preprinted map and cardboard chits in front of them, they had some little beige books and a few sheets of paper. I wandered over to see what was going on — and thus was introduced into the world of role-playing games in general, and Dungeons & Dragons in particular.

It was quite a revelation. I had been playing board games (Monopoly, Clue, Scrabble) and card games (Hearts mostly, though some War, Poker, and Blackjack) since childhood. In high school, my good friend Andrew Bos — who had previously introduced me to the Church — had subsequently introduced me to historical wargames, at which he always soundly thrashed me. And, of course, StarForce had intrigued me because of its science fiction setting, which was played out on a 3-D starmap of actual systems within 50 or so light years of Earth.

But D&D was like none of the above, nor like anything else I had ever played. Most of the game was played out in our heads, pitting us against the dice, the dungeon master (DM), and the various roll tables and stats in the D&D books. It was compelling, fun, and addictive, and for quite some time I ended up spending more time playing D&D at the club meetings than playing the various wargames that I had originally intended it for. That ended when the DM had to drop out of BYU for personal reasons, but I picked up the slack a bit sometime later and ran (as the DM) a few campaigns of my own. That continued until I finally graduated from BYU in 1978; I have no idea what happened with the club beyond that point.

Afterword

My most intense D&D playing would wait until a year or so after I graduated from BYU. After spending a year with General Dynamics down in San Diego, I took a job with Link Simulations in Houston (Clear Lake City, actually) in mid-1979, working on the Space Shuttle flight simulators at NASA/Johnson Space Center. I became friends almost immediately with Bob Trammel, who had started with Ford, another contractor on the SS flight simulators, within a week or two of my starting at Link. We happened to be staying in the same motel while waiting to bring our families out — and we both happened to be LDS (and, once we found apartments, in the same ward). Bob had heard of D&D and was interested in it; he had some co-workers who were likewise interested. So I set up a rather detailed campaign, and we played 2-3 times per week over lunch for probably 4 months. I then changed jobs in February 1980, moving over the Lunar & Planetary Institute, and so was too far away from the others for the lunchtime sessions.

However, several months later, we decided to try to finish the campaign and so set up a Saturday marathon session that lasted from about 9 or 10 in the morning until after midnight. The campaigners, bless their hearts, figured out the final clues (including a partially scorched index card I had made that held the code as to how to use magical teleport booths scattered around the dungeon) and actually finished the campaign successfully, though Bob was getting increasingly unhappy phone calls from his wife Carol as the night wore on. We all had an absolutely wonderful time. I still have that burnt index card in my files.

I don’t know if that was the last time I ever played D&D, but if not, it was close to it. Most of my game playing after that reverted back to SF/F wargames, since it was easier to find one person to play with than half a dozen. I had a golden age of wargaming while working at Monitor Labs in 1981-82; the head of computer systems for the accounting department, Steven Davies-Morris, was a gamer as well, and we’d play at least once a week or so in my office. But once I left Monitor Labs, I found it hard to come up with even a single opponent, though that didn’t stop me from collecting the occasional game, something I still do. Altogether, I own somewhere from 50 to 70 wargames, mostly science fiction/fantasy, and mostly dating from the mid-70s to the mid-80s.

And I still have my little beige D&D books. ..bruce..

Rapture Index hits 168; film at 11:00

Belief systems, Main, World Religions

The Rapture Index is one of my guilty pleasures and has been on my bookmarks list for a few years now. Being a computer science geek with professional experience in simulation and modeling (not to mention computer game design), I’m fascinated by the idea of someone trying to judge our “end times” status by assigning values to 45 different factors (“False Christs”, “Occult”, “Unemployment”, “Inflation”, “Ecumenism”, etc.). As the author says:

The Rapture Index has two functions: one is to factor together a number of related end time components into a cohesive indicator, and the other is to standardize those components to eliminate the wide variance that currently exists with prophecy reporting.

The Rapture Index is by no means meant to predict the rapture, however, the index is designed to measure the type of activity that could act as a precursor to the rapture.

You could say the Rapture index is a Dow Jones Industrial Average of end time activity, but I think it would be better if you viewed it as prophetic speedometer. The higher the number, the faster we’re moving towards the occurrence of pre-tribulation rapture

  • Rapture Index of 100 and Below: Slow prophetic activity
  • Rapture Index of 100 to 130: Moderate prophetic activity
  • Rapture Index of 130 to 160: Heavy prophetic activity
  • Rapture Index above 160: Fasten your seat belts

I admire the author’s efforts at quantification of prophecy. Still, as a computer science geek with modeling and simulation experience, I could point out all the actual and potential flaws of such a model (selection of factors, weighting of factors, non-objective measurement of factors, applicability and predictive nature of model, presumptive biases, etc.), but then I’d end up also explaining why I remain a skeptic of most current claims regarding anthropogenic global warming (hint: for exactly the same reasons). ..bruce..

Modern-day polygamy…in Iraq

LDS History, Main, World Religions

A report from the frontlines:

Some of these guys are very active.  One old toothless sheik has a very young son from a very young new wife.  While I suspect it is possible that there might be more men on the job, nobody is particularly surprised by this.  A local mayor mentioned in passing that he had three wives and fourteen kids.  He also said, perfunctorily, that he was getting married next week.  When I pressed him on the fact that he didn’t seem that excited, he explained that he was just marrying his sister in law.  His brother had died and somebody had to take care of her.  He got the job to keep it all in the family. 

The extended family is one of the pillars of the polygamy.  We tend to project the system into the American context of a nuclear family just with a couple additional women.  That is not really how it works here.  It is more of a welfare system married (literally) to a system of tribal or dynastic alliances.  Tribal affiliation is the key to success for individuals.  You can be born into a tribe or you can marry into a tribe and if you are particularly clever you can marry into up to four tribes.   This both complicates and simplifies genealogy because after a few generations there are lots of overlaps, so you have fewer family lines but a lot more permutations among them.

Just out of curiosity, have there been any scholastic papers comparing and contrasting historical LDS polygamy with contemporary Islamic polygamy?  ..bruce..

The Trek rebooted

Main, The Trek

The Trek lives. I actually went out and walked 11 miles on Friday. I got tired of waiting for my various foot and tendon problems to go away, so I simply got out and did the walk. One of my worst times ever — 3:35 — and I’ve been hobbling around like an old person all weekend. I was thinking of walking again on Monday, but a blizzard blew through here today (Sunday), so I’ll give things a day or two to melt away. I’d like to get this done by this October; we’ll see.  ..bruce..

Managing Mormon meetings

LDS Organization, LDS Society, Main

“Brethren, there is no meeting in the Church so unimportant that it cannot begin on time, and there is no meeting in the Church so important that it cannot end on time.”

— J. Reuben Clark III, a counselor in my BYU Stake Presidency, to the priesthood leadership of my BYU ward, circa 1976

Pres. Clark (a BYU classics professor and the son of J. Reuben Clark Jr.) uttered those words in our BYU ward PEC meeting being held as part of our ward conference back when I was a BYU undergrad. The PEC meeting had been late in starting for reasons I don’t fully recall, but I certainly recall Pres. Clark’s rebuke once we did get started. I cited his remarks in the comments to this posting over at By Common Consent after seeing that the winner of the “Mormon happiness is…” poll was “…when church finishes 10 minutes early” (42%).

In the same comments, I talked about Lou Hampton, who became branch president of the District of Columbia Branch while Sandra and I were living there (and later bishop when the DC Branch became the Chevy Chase Ward). This was Lou’s third time as a bishop, and one of the changes he immediately instituted was that all meetings begin on time and ended on time, if not sooner. In fact, one of his first acts was to go through the entire chapel and ensure that the clocks were all synchronized and set to the correct time.

At the time that Lou became branch president, our schedule started with Priesthood and Relief Society meetings, and both meetings were well known for starting 10 to 20 minutes late. Lou worked diligently with both organizations to get them to start on time; as he did so, members started showing up on time as well.

Correspondingly, our meeting schedule ended with Sacrament meeting. Lou always took a minute with the speakers before the meeting started letting them know how much time they had and when he expected them to be done. He would do this with all the speakers in order to avoid the problem of an earlier speaker using up so much time that the later speakers had little left.

Lou always started Sacrament meeting on time, regardless of who might still be milling around in the pews; again, the members quickly learned to watch the clock and to sit down promptly. During the meeting itself, Lou would put a note on the pulpit or, should that fail to work, tap the current speaker on the back to indicate that it was time to wrap up. He would even do this with High Council speakers; as he rightly pointed out, he was still the presiding authority at the meeting, not the High Council representative. He did, however, forebear from interrupting any member of the District (and later Stake) Presidency.

Likewise, Lou would bring Fast & Testimony meeting to a close right on time, even if there were people still on the stand. That bothered me some at first, but I came to realize that Lou’s concern was for the congregation as a whole. It also gave us all an incentive to bear our testimonies sooner in the meeting, rather than later, and to keep our testimonies brief and to the point, so as to allow time for others. (One other thing: Lou always had a large printed sheet laying on the pulpit during Fast & Testimony meeting that said, “Please state your name.” This was a great help, particularly as the branch — and then ward — grew by leaps and bounds.)

On those occasions when the (regular) Sacrament meeting speakers ended early, Lou did not feel the need to fill up the remaining time, either by speaking himself or by calling upon others to speak. Instead, we simply ended Sacrament meeting (and thus our entire block) early. The members quickly caught on, and so again kept their remarks short and to the point. As a result, we regularly ended anywhere from 5 to 15 (and sometimes even 20) minutes early.

Lou kept the same discipline in the various leadership meetings (bishopric, PEC, ward council, etc.). We started on time, we moved quickly through the agenda, and we dismissed as soon as all pertinent issues had been covered. None of this indicated a lack of concern on Lou’s part for the branch/ward or its members; on the contrary, Lou did this precisely so that he could spend as much time as he could in personal ministry to the members. When I became one of his counselors, I quickly discovered that he delegated literally everything that he could to us for that same reason.

It is interesting to see the example set by the general Church leadership in General Conference, particularly under Pres. Hinckley. Of course, General Conference meetings always begin on time, but for the last several years, most sessions have ended several minutes early, particularly when Pres. Hinckley himself was the closing speaker.

I appreciated Lou’s example precisely because it reflected what I have tried to follow since hearing Pres. Clark’s rebuke some 30+ years ago. I’ve done my best to keep meetings on-time and brief both in my Church responsibilities as well as my professional life. I must confess that I have chafed some since moving to Colorado; our ward here is wonderful, but for most of the past 2.5 years that we’ve lived here, Sacrament has been both late starting and often late getting out (cutting into my time as Gospel Doctrine and now Gospel Essentials teacher), and my High Priest Group meetings are usually late ending as well.

I have recently been released as the Gospel Doctrine teacher and called as the ward mission leader. I’ve let the full-time and ward missionaries know that our missionary correlation meeting will be held right after the end of the block, and that I do not expect it to last more than 15 minutes. That was greeted with some joy and relief, as apparently the previous missionary correlation meetings were being held on a weeknight and regularly lasted a hour or more. I’ve been a ward mission leader several times before, and I’m pretty confident that we can cover what we need to in those 15 minutes; any follow-up discussions can be done one-on-one over the phone or in person. Our time is best spent in actual service to others, not hashing out details ad infinitum. I believe that’s true for all our meetings. ..bruce..

Churches of anticipation: Alma and John

Book of Mormon, Main

[Author’s note: Hugh Nibley first used the phrase “churches of anticipation” with regards to Alma et alis back in the 1950s. I had forgotten that until recently re-reading his writings on the Book of Mormon. 01/31/2012]

There is a curious religious transition that occurs among the Nephites about a century before the birth of Christ. Up until then, the Nephites appear to have been following the law of Moses, in spite of a clear and unprecedented Christology introduced by Lehi1, Nephi1 and Jacob in the 5th century BC and re-emphasized by King Benjamin around 124 BC just before he abdicated in favor of his son Mosiah2. And even though Nephi1 clearly indicated the need for baptism in following the Savior’s (future) example, there is no record of baptism being practiced for roughly half a millennium afterwards. Instead, the Nephite civilization during that time appears to be a continual kingship with prophets calling the people to repentance.

Those two traditions appear to merge with King Mosiah1, “being warned of the lord”, leading a Nephite exodus from the land of Nephi to the land of Zarahemla. Mosiah1 continues as a prophet/king, interpreting the Jaredite (stone) engravings “by the gift and power of God.” His son, King Benjamin, clearly continues as a prophet/king; as noted above, he has a significant vision of the coming Messiah and puts his people under covenant to take upon themselves the name of Christ — though still with no mention of baptism. Mosiah2 appears to continue that prophet/king tradition, though there is less indication of any revelation or prophecy on his part (however, see Mosiah 21:28).

Continue reading Churches of anticipation: Alma and John →