Saints Alive! Store

Saints Alive! Store
Saints Alive! Store. Click on the Starlight Doorway. Summer is coming, and whether you need a complete set of patio furniture, or just string for your weed cutter, we have it!

Monday, February 13, 2012

Apes or Astronauts: Who's Yo Daddy?

First off, let me be clear: the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints takes no position on Evolution. So to say "The Church believes..." or "Mormons believe.." is nonsense. What the Church and the membership does believe in is free agency. Each person uses whatever information is available to him to make up his own mind. So I choose to believe in Evolution. Scriptures tell us that God created us, but how He went about it or how much time it took is left for us to figure out on our own.

So there are two conflicting theories -- at least. One follows Genesis or Darwin or some combination thereof, and the other follows Erich Van Daniken and his fellows. This second group has several explanations for the appearance of mankind on Earth. 1) The Ancient Astronauts used the Earth as
a laboratory: man is the result of one of their experiments 2) The A.A.s had strong sexual needs, so they mated with animals, particularly chimpanzees, and man is the resultant hybrid 3) Man was created, through genetic engineering, to be a slave to take over the hard labor, such as mining, because the astronauts had grown tired of it.

Put a few relevant terms into your search engine, and you will find endless explanations of our origins and subsequent major events. If you are film-minded, go to www.history.com and look up the following: Ancient Aliens: Aliens and Evil Places Video Clip (44:13);  Ancient Aliens: Aliens and Deadly Weapons Video Clip (44:12); Ancient Aliens: Aliens and Lost Worlds Video Clip (44:12); Ancient Aliens: Aliens Plagues and Epidemics Video Clip (44:20); Ancient Aliens: Aliens and Ancient Engineers Video Clip (44:13).

                                     HOWARD PHILLIPS LOVECRAFT (1890-1937)

Howard Phillips Lovecraft
(1890-1936) may rightly be called the father of the current extraterrestrial movement. During his New England boyhood, he was fascinated by the adventure stories of Jules Verne, the worlds-in-conflict tales of H.G.Welles, and the horror stories of Edgar Allan Poe. His writing career took off in the heyday of the pulp magazines, long before actual space travel or moon landings. But if Jules Verne could take readers From the Earth to the Moon, and H.G. Welles could describe War of the Worlds, who could set limits on the ETs and their ways?


Lovecraft created Cthulhu, who led his people to Earth, where in time they either vanished under the oceans or returned to their home planet, from which they used telepathic powers to communicate with man. These people set up Atlantis and other ancient civilizations. He was the first to identify his fictional
characters with the ancient gods, using Egyptian, Sumerian and Greek mythology. He encouraged his fans to use his characters in their own writings, and there quickly grew up the "Cthulu Mythos," a term never used by Lovecraft himself. Soon, virtually everyone had heard of these Ancient Ones, even those who had never heard of Lovecraft.

New religions -- Scientology and the Raelian Revolution -- based consciously or not on Lovecraft's ideas, sprang up. Pseudoscience such as Worlds in Collision, by Immanuel Veilokovsky, Maps of the Ancient Sea Kings by Charles Hapgood, The Twelfth Planet by Zecharia Sicthin, and Erich Van
Daniken’s famous Chariots of the Gods (1968) are obvious outgrowths. 1976 saw the publication of The Sirius Mystery, in which author Robert Temple claimed that the Dogon tribe of western Africa had received knowledge of the two-in-one nature of Sirius from the ancient Egyptians.

It is clear that neither Lovecraft nor his followers ever expected anyone to actually believe a word of their writings. Lovecraft himself declared,  "This pooling of resources tends to build up quite a pseudo-convincing background of dark mythology, legendry, & bibiliography--though of course, none of us has the least wish to actually mislead readers." They were writing fiction, and having a lot of fun doing it. Who would have guessed that new religions, new ideas about space and alternative theories of science and history would come of it?

[All these books, and hundreds more, are available for purchase at our online store. Click on the Starlight Doorway, and put in a title, author or subject. Besides hardback editions, many are available in economical Dover paperbacks, online, and are even FREE in online editions.]
                                             Erik Von Daniken (1935--)

Däniken is a co-founder of the Archaeology, Astronautics and SETI Research Association (AAS RA), and designed the theme park Mystery Park in Interlaken, Switzerland, that first opened on 23 May 2003. Däniken's first book, Chariots of the Gods?, was an immediate best seller in the United States, Europe and India, with subsequent books [that] "according to von Däniken, have been translated into 32 languages and together have sold more than 63 million copies." Wikipedia
But how did Lovecraft get into the current UFO/ET craze? Von Daniken cites the German translation of Morning of the Magicians, (Aufbruch ins dritte Jahrtausend) as his basic source for Chariots of the Gods. "Morning" came about in this way: Besides the American pulp magazines, Lovecraft  was published regularly in the French magazine La Planete. In 1960, two editors there, Louis Pauwls and  Jacques Bergier, compiled his fictional concepts and presented them as reality in a book they called Le Matin des Magiciens (Morning of the Magicians). Thus did Lovecraft's make-believe construct enter the world of  pseudo-science. This citation is seldom noticed by American readers, probably because few read either French or German.  To this day,  Von Daniken keeps writing, appearing on TV, and making money from the gullibility of those who want to believe him, presenting the ideas he plagiarized from international jokesters.

We cannot doubt that Von Daniken knew what he was doing when he published Chariots of the Gods, and since. His conviction and jail-time served for embezzlement do not serve to make us confident of his honesty.

Even the History Channel (as previously noted) has been running a block of programs featuring Von Daniken and several other "experts" on the idea of ancient astronauts. Add to this Roswell, Area 51, chupacabras, Sasquatch, and the whole UFO scenario. Jason Colavito even wrote a book entitled The Cult of Alien Gods.

People's devotion to this idea is indeed cult-like.

It was actually a surprise to me to discover that it was Lovecraft’s imaginative horror stories that started the reading and writing public on the road that led to Chariots of the Gods, The Twelfth Planet and in time to The DaVinci Code.  If citations on the I-Net are any clue, Lovecraft is still a lot  more widely read than Van Daniken: while Van Daniken gets a listing of 34,500 sites, Lovecraft scores 1,790,000. Put him on my bucket list for reading.
  
But we must remember one thing: no one can prove a negative. If these writers can't prove that ETs have landed, we certainly can't prove that they haven't. One of my favorite phrases: the preponderance of evidence. I personally prefer ancient primates to ancient astronauts.



Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Romney's Mormonism -- Today's Absurdities

It's a sad state of affairs indeed when democratic government requires an informed populace, and instead must depend on those who don't have the capacity to tell the difference between what's real and what's just clever propaganda.  Linda K. Brown, Baltimore
 
Mitt Romney has just won the Florida primary
. This guarantees we will continue to be treated to a new batch of opinions, ranging from uninformed to misinformed to just plain vicious, from the other contenders and their supporters. Others make us suspect that columnists, bloggers and commentators (not to mention supposedly informed journalists), find it easier to write a few eye-catching lines than to actually check out the facts on anything.

For instance, we often see writers contend that Romney has no plans beyond winning the Presidency. Please, they say, tell us what you want to do. How will you handle job creation, tax reform, (fill in the blank?)

Well here's a clue, Sherlock. Romney's website www.mittromney.com  has more information than you can absorb in one sitting.

Or you can just go on wading in the Slough of Despond out there. Here are a few of the absurdities from just a few random sites this morning:

Comments on racism:
Washington Post 1-31-2012
The LDS church has neither formally apologized for the priesthood ban nor publicly repudiated many of the theories used to justify it for more than 125 years. . . . Perkins and other black Mormons say the church's silence not only irks many African-Americans, it could also become a loud distraction for the nation's most prominent Mormon: Mitt Romney, the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination.
John Aravosis, America blog 11/07/2011 and 1/13/2012
I knew about the racism. And keep in mind that the Mormons didn't change until they faced a boycott. I did not know, however, that the Mormons to this day - Romney included - refuse to fully expunge themselves of their racist past. As the article notes, this is an issue that's going to dog Romney for the campaign, at the very least with the black community, but really anyone who has an issue with racism.  (Of course, the Mormons are extremely homophobic as well.)
Mormon bishop says his church is responsible for gays’ emotional wounds. Good.  And he's right.  Sadly, we're still waiting for the leadership in Salt Lake City to understand that they're not just on the wrong side of history, they're on the wrong side of morality and the wrong side of smart politics.  And until they figure that out, we'll be holding them accountable more and more each day.  If Romney wins the nomination, I don't see how the Mormons avoid having a nationwide discussion about their religion, about the abduction of souls, the history of racism, and about their jihad against gays and lesbians.  And we probably ought to have a serious, and public, discussion about money too (just where it's coming from and where it's going). . . There's a reason that some people have issues with Mormons. It's because the Mormons have issues with us. The day the Mormon church stops being one of the largest purveyors of hate and bigotry in America today is the day the Mormons earn the right to complain about how they're treated by their own victims. Calling yourself a religion is not a get-out-of-jail free card to exonerate you from your own hateful actions. PS And I didn't even get to what the Mormons are still doing to Jews, and did do to African-Americans. 
The opposing view, posted by Moroni on January 31, 2012 at 11:42 PM in response to Time for Mormons to Come to Terms with Church History Post by Joanna Brooks
Just one story: I recently (in the past year) met the first converts from Jamaica (very Black); when they joined they knew they were not of the "tribe" that held the priesthood. The brother, active in another Christian church prior to his LDS conversion, knew the Bible well, and knew that in the Bible only one tribe could participate in the ancient priesthood. He simply couldn't fathom why some of his fellow Blacks thought the Church policy not allowing him to hold the priesthood as "racist." He was very grateful when the Church extended the blessings of the priesthood and the temple to his Tribe. What does "Come to Terms with" mean?

And on the Church's supposed homophobia:

Steven Wilson is a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who lives in the San Francisco Bay Area. He joined the LDS Church about 13 years ago and has served in various church callings, including as an ordinance worker in the Oakland California Temple. Wilson is also gay, and he has AIDS. ..."The church is not hostile toward people with same gender attraction," Densley said. "It simply teaches that sexual relations should only be shared between a man and woman who are married to each other. This law of chastity applies to homosexual and heterosexual people alike. Single members of the church are expected to abstain from sex regardless of their sexual orientation. And married people are expected to remain faithful to their spouses, even if they feel strong temptations toward people to whom they are not married. "The mere fact that we are tempted," Densley adds, "does not mean that we have no choice but to submit."
Romney is not concerned with the very poor:

Romney not concerned with the poor
John Hayward 02/01/2012

There’s one other wild card, and Romney slapped it down on the table during a CNN interview Wednesday morning, during a disastrous interview in which he said, “I’m not concerned about the very poor.”  There’s a bit more context to his remarks, but you won’t be hearing any of it during the next round of attack ads, and the media is already buzzing that it might have been a fatal mistake. The road ahead for Romney--February is Romney's to lose.
A "bit more context"
"I'm in this race because I care about Americans. I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I'll fix it," Romney said in an interview on CNN's "Starting Point."
"I'm not concerned about the very rich; they're doing just fine. I'm concerned about the very heart of America. The 90, 95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling," Romney said. When asked to explain by CNN host Soledad O’Brien why he wasn't concerned for the "very poor," Romney clarified that he believes the poorest Americans have a safety net, while the middle class faces more uncertainty.
"Magic Underwear" -- Again??

Jen Thames  College News Jan 31 2012
Now here is a conundrum: Why is the news media talking at length about Romney’s taxes and Newt’s big mouth when what they really should be discussing is the Republican presidental candidate's Secret Magical Underwear?
Yup, you read that right: secret magical underwear. Mitt Romney is Mormon. The sanest candidate running for the republican nomination, Jon Hunstman (he just dropped out) was also a wearer of the wonder whities. Yet not a whisper, not even a joke about the magical protective underwear that all Mormons are expected to wear as part of their faith. Now how can this be? Where is Barbara Walters when you need her? Why did it take the voters of South Carolina to point out that wonder whities are just a little freaky? .... Both Mitt and Ann Romney went to college at Brigham Young University. At Brigham Young is secret magical underwear on the list of mandatory college supplies?
Wait a minute. "Not a whisper?" "Not even a joke?" Makes you wonder what college students read online that they have missed this.

 "What the &*%$ is this supposed to mean?" [Sorry. I tried to think of a better category.]

BLH557 Comments How Romney won Florida by Tony Lee 01/31/2012 Daily Events
Tony rightly points out that having the history and people knowing and believing the history are equines of multiple light frequencies.

Well, enough nonsense for one day. If you have questions, ask your Mormon friends and neighbors. Or log in to lds.org or mormon.org   Hold on: this election cycle can't last forever.






Thursday, January 19, 2012

Lehi's Dream and the Tree of Life


Why you will never hear a complete explanation of Lehi's Dream in Sunday School.

Lehi would have been completely familiar with the Tree of Life. When God speaks to man, he uses language man understands. If he were to speak to me today, he would use English -- not the language of the heavens. It is no surprise, therefore, that he spoke to Lehi through the symbolism of the Tree of Life.

The Tree of Life is found in virtually all times and places of the earth. It takes its place alongside the cross, the spiral and the swastika as a truly universal symbol. Some have suggested that it is the second tree in the Garden of Eden.


The first tree undoubtedly represents the law -- not just the Law of Moses, as it is called, but the law of all human interaction. It may be called ethics, morality, Natural Law; but whatever it is called, it is clearly symbolized by the apple, the pomegranate, the fruit first sampled by Eve and then given to Adam.

The second tree was forbidden to Adam and Eve. It may be seen as the Cross; he who eats of the fruit of that tree will never die. More accurately, their spirits would never die; Christ brings us the Resurrection. The cross is truly the Tree of Life.

The Tree of Life is symbolized by the Jewish Menorah, with its lighted branches. For Christians, it comes to us in the form of the Christmas Tree. It may take a moment to make the connection; we tend to think of the Christmas tree as being of German or Scandinavian origin. But in The Golden Bough Sir James George Frazer (1854-1941) says
THE WORSHIP of the oak tree or of the oak god appears to have been shared by all the branches of  the Aryan stock...www.bartleby.com/196/26.html

In the Book of Mormon Jacob 5 and in the New Testament Romans 11:16-25, we read the parable of the olive tree. Joseph Smith called Doctine and Covenants 88 an

 "olive leaf . . . plucked from the Tree of Paradise, the Lord's message of peace to us." John 15:1-5: "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. ...I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing."
The sacred tree turns up just about everywhere. The Celts, the Basque, the Greeks and Romans, Asians, Mayans and Australian Aborigines. We speak of our family tree, and on a wider scale, the evolutionary tree.

It is easy to see the tree as a sacred symbol; drawing nourishment from the earth, its leaves and branches scattering its truths to the sky.

Books continue to be written on this subject. All I've given you here is hint, a nibble. Go on the Net and enter "tree of life" or "sacred tree" with almost any ethnic, cultural or geographic modifiers you can think of. Get a coke or a cuppa and sit down for many a long evening of fascinating research.

And that, boys and girls, is why you will never hear a complete explanation 
of Lehi's dream in Sunday School.


The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion: A New Abridgement from the Second and Third Editions (Oxford World's Classics) by Sir James George Frazer
Buy new: $12.26 / Used from: $9.98 Usually ships in 24 hours

http://astore.amazon.com/sain00-20/detail/B005W30TJW
Muhammad and the Golden Bough: Reconstructing Arabian Myth by Jaroslav Stetkevych
Buy new: $14.95 / Used from: $3.81 Usually ships in 24 hours 
http://astore.amazon.com/sain00-20/detail/0253214130
(You will find more than 25,000 titles on the subject in the Saints Alive! store)



Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Was There Really Ever a Prophet Named Lehi? And Where Did He Preach?


The Book of Mormon is the prescribed course of study for the year 2012. It opens with the Prophet Lehi, discouraged by the failure of the people to receive his teachings, taking his family into the wilderness; eventually they will cross the ocean to the precious land of promise.

So far we have had two classes. The teacher displayed the usual fanciful depiction of a man standing on a kind of raised stone dais, presumably shouting his message to the crowd at his feet. Someone in the class suggested that perhaps Lehi really spoke to small gatherings of his friends; no one raised the possibility of the city gates.

Now the city gate was more than just an opening in the wall. It was a large building, two or three stories high; most had two chambers on the left and two on the right. Solomon's gates (trust him to do everything bigger and better than anyone else) had three chambers on each side. The gate served for defense of the city in time of war. In peacetime, it was the center of the community, like the county courthouse or city hall in our day. Here the elders assembled, and here the people came to have disputes settled. Stephen was tried here and stoned "outside the gates."

Women, too, were acknowledged here. Proverbs 31 says "her husband is known in the gates. . . let her own works praise her in the gates." [italics added].

I suggest that Lehi, like most of the other prophets, delivered his message in the only plausible place: the city gates.


But was there actually a prophet named Lehi? 

A few years ago, I had the privilege of attending a lecture by Israeli archaeologist Dr. Joseph Ginat. Dr. Ginat told of his experiences in seeking a prophet named Lehi, apparently well known among Israeli archaeologists but not mentioned in the Jewish scriptures. On a trip to Salt Lake City in 1970, he was introduced to the Book of Mormon, and there on the very first page, he found his missing prophet. He further told of a place called Beit Lehi (House of Lehi), about 22 miles south of Jerusalem.

At that time, the only discovery had been an ancient oak tree near a well encircled by stones. Beduoins told him that the tree and the spring marked the spot where, long before Mohammed, a prophet named Lehi blessed the people of both Judah and Ishmael. About a quarter of a mile away is a cave with inscriptions dated to 600 B.C. and rock art depicting a man with raised arms. Another carving  depicts a sailboat.

Since then, a foundation has been established and archaeologists have uncovered a large multi-layered complex. The site was apparently inhabited from 600 B.C to the Mameluke period, around A.D. 1500. There are the remains of a Byzantine church, several columbaria, olive and wine presses.

Some have speculated that the cave here is the one in which Lehi's sons hid when fleeing the servants of Laban. I personally wonder whether this were not in fact Lehi's home in "the land of Jerusalem." 1 Nephi 3 mentions going "up" to the home of Laban, then "down to the land of our inheritance" to gather up their gold and silver and precious things. Obviously, their home was not in Jerusalem, but somewhere nearby.

Photos, site reports and videos may all be seen at beitlehifoundation.org

Yes, Virginia, there really was a Prophet Lehi.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Why Electors Instead of Popular Vote?


2012 is the year in which the United States chooses a President for the next four years. This is hardly news to many of you, but the Internet reaches everywhere in the world, and there are probably millions of people who do not know this (and possibly do not care).

Really, U.S. citizens may ask? Yes, really. Do you, for example know how our nearest neighbors, Canada and Mexico, choose their leaders? How about Afghanistan, Albania or Azerbaijan? And that's just three of those nations whose names begin with "A".

So understanding how chaotic our elections must appear to others, let's take a moment to sort of summarize this quadrennial raindance.

Like all good stories, it starts with "In the beginning."

In the beginning was the Declaration of Independence.

It is true that these were not new ideas; they reflect the views of John Locke, among others. Neither was rebellion agaist the English anything new. See any history of Ireland, Scotland or Wales. Jefferson brought them to life with his exalted and unforgettable words:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

There followed the American Revolution, and after much deliberation, and a few failed experiments, the Constitution of the United States.

N.B.: The Constitution was adopted by the consent of the delegates, not by the consent of the people at large, who were given no opportunity to vote on it.

Q. When did the United States government go into operation under the Constitution?
A. The Constitution became binding upon nine States by the ratification of the ninth State, New Hampshire, June 21, 1788. Notice of this ratification was received by Congress on July 2, 1788. On September 13, 1788, Congress adopted a resolution declaring that electors should be appointed in the ratifying States on the first Wednesday in January, 1789; that the electors vote for President on the first Wednesday in February, 1789 . . . On March 3, 1789, the old Confederation went out of existence and on March 4 the new government of the United States began legally to function . . . however, it had no practical existence until April 6, when first the presence of quorums in both Houses permitted organization of Congress. On April 30, 1789, George Washington was inaugurated as President of the United States . . . [emphases added]   www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution.html 
April 6th holds a special significance for Latter-day Saints; it was on April 6th, 1830, just 41 years later, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized. Mormons believe that without the nation, the Church could not have come into existence.

There is an order to all that God does, for He is not a God of confusion

We may ask ourselves, Would it not be more "fair" if the person with the majority of the popular vote won the election? Consider that the President is the President of the United States, and only by extension the President of the people. Note that the Constitution was adopted by the majority of the delegates. Thus today, the President is elected, as was George Washington, by the electors of each State.

The manner of choosing their electors is left to the States; most States choose by holding Primary Elections; some hold a caucus. Texas does both.

Nothing is said in the Constitution about political parties. In theory we could have not only three but twenty-three, if the people so desired, or in fact none at all. It would be hard to imagine an election if people could not group together somehow to make their wishes known.

The Church takes no position politically. That doesn't stop you or me from lectioneering all we want to. It is vitally important that we cast an informed vote. Our ballot is a precious heritage from centuries past, the product of sacrifice by men and women of good will. Don't waste it; don't be a spoilsport and stay home if your candidate doesn't win your party's nomination. Just make up your mind to work a little harder next time.



Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Was Jesus Born In a Caravanserai?

Christmas is coming! Christmas is coming! Rudolph is coming! Hear the Jingle Bells? This is the day we exchange gifts, put up trees, decorate our homes to an extent that would make the famous Las Vegas Strip seem austere.

We do all this because this is the day Jesus Christ was born in a manger (or a cave in the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem) because there was no room at the inn. The date? December 25, A.D. 1.

We know all this, have known it all our lives; or do we? As Will Rogers was fond of saying, 

It isn't what we don't know that gives us trouble. It's what we know that ain't so.

Sorry, but all this just ain't so.

The Date

In Luke 2:8 we read
 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
Why would the sheep be kept outdoors in the cold and rainy winter? Perhaps they had a shelter of some kind. And how about the people, traveling on sandaled feet on rough, and in winter often muddy, roads? Joseph and Mary are reported to be going to Bethlehem to be counted in the census. Surely the Roman Empire could have survived without a census until springtime. And it probably did.

It is part of Mormon mythology, widely accepted but never actually declared by the Church, that Jesus was born on April 6, A.D. 1.

But in the Mortal Messiah, by Bruce R. McConkie, we read,

We do not believe it is possible with the present state of our knowledge — including that which is known both in and out of the Church — to state with finality when the natal day of the Lord Jesus actually occurred. James E. Talmage takes the view that he was born on April 6, 1 b.c., basing his conclusions on D&C 20:1, which speaks of the day on which the Church was organized, saying it was "one thousand eight hundred and thirty years since the coming of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the flesh." April 6 is then named as the specific day for the formal organization. Elder Talmage notes the Book of Mormon chronology, which says that the Lord would be born 600 years after Lehi left Jerusalem. (Talmage, Jesus the Christ, pg 102-104.)Elder Hyrum M. Smith of the Council of the Twelve wrote in the Doctrine and Covenants Commentary: "The organization of the Church in the year 1830 is hardly to be regarded as giving divine authority to the commonly accepted calendar. There are reasons for believing that those who, a long time after our Savior's birth, tried to ascertain the correct time erred in their calculations, and that the Nativity occurred four years before our era, or in the year of Rome 750. All that this Revelation [D&C 20] means to say is that the Church was organized in the year commonly accepted as 1830, a.d." Rome 750 is equivalent, as indicated, to 4 b.c.
 The Place: No Room in the Inn

"Inn" at that time and place probably meant "caravanserai." These were the places where camel caravans stopped along the way; people stayed in rooms on the second floor, while the animals were housed at ground level. Note that Luke 2:7 says,
 
And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.
  Caravanserai -- water trough front and center.


The operative word here is room, not space.

All the rooms upstairs were taken, but there was still space on the ground floor among the animals and in the courtyard. Mangers (actually water troughs) would naturally have been where the animals could get to them
easily.





We might read the above as: [Mary] wrapped him in swaddling clother, and laid him in a watering trough; because all the rooms in the caravanserai were occupied.

I won't comment on the Christmas tree, the holly, the candles and all the accoutrements of Christmas in our day and time. Much has already been written, and is easy to find on the Net. Christmas is a day for prayer and thanksgiving, but it is also a day for the delight of children (and sometimes for the child within ourselves). So don't feel guilty about the gift-giving, or about the sweets we will all consume. Just enjoy. 
The exact date, especially considering the various changes in the calendar, is really of no importance.  As Joseph Smith wrote,
The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it. ( Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, sel. Joseph Fielding Smith [1976], 121).

Wishing everyone a slightly more realistic Merry Christmas!
 Beryl























Wednesday, December 14, 2011

"Christmas" Is About Christ


These are pictures I took in Jerusalem and the surrounding areas in 2003 and 2005.

The music is from Internet royalty free sites; the scriptures are KJV.

Merry Christmas to all!