LDS Infographics Again

The LDS church has added a few more infographics to add to my first and second list. Here's three more to add to it:

Africa Clean Water Project

The Mormon Church is involved in many humanitarian aid projects. One of them is bringing clean water to African communities. The best part of LDS Charities is that the Mormon Church pays for all the overhead so 100% of donations go to the cause.

< LDS Timeline of Christianity

The Mormon view is not always a unique one, but in the case of Christ's church it tends to differ from other religions. Especially in the case of how history has played out. This is not to say events did or did not happen, but more of how those events are interpreted. This infographic sums it up nicely.

A Global Christ Centered Faith >

Where are the LDS people? All over the world. This infographic covers how the Mormons are worldwide, where those people live, what languages they speak and other tidbits about how members are aware of the world around them. A very useful trait in the Global Information Age.

More Mormon Infographics

Wouldn't you know it, they released another interesting infographic.

General Conference

The LDS church has a conference for all 14 million of it's members plus anyone else that wants to tune in. This infographic shows some interesting statistics about General Conference. You can watch conference this Saturday and Sunday. Check on the General Conference website for more info.

Update 04/22/2012 - Man, them LDS folks are busy. They've made yet another infographic.

Mormon Lay Leadership

One of the things that sets Mormons apart from other religions is they have no paid clergy. In face, no leadership in the church is paid just for being a leader. This info graphic only covers two tiers of church leadership: The Congregation called a Ward and the Stake which is made up of several (approximately 7-15) Wards.

Be graphical.

Mormon Infographics

In recent years you have been seeing Mormons more and more in the media. The reports range from praise and honesty to rage and lies. To help clear things up some media outlets have gone to the trouble of putting facts into attractive and useful infographics to help us better understand them Mormon folk. I decided to compile some of them here:

Mormons In America

The Pew Forum put together a list of statistics showing how America views Mormons and how Mormons view america. There is no accompanying article for the infographic, but there is a considerable amount of text. Highlights include LDS opinions about the election.

Mormon Volunteerism

University of Pennsylvania professor Ram Cnaan and fellow researchers Van Evans and Daniel W. Curtis jointly published a study which producted this infographic. It talks about hours and dollars spent in and out of the LDS church. Highlights inlclude how prosocial Mormons are.

Mormonism 101: FAQ

The Mormon News Room put together an article answering common questions about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This is a sizeable article containing a lot of useful information about the church. It finishes with a handy infographic summing up some statistics about the church and its members. Highlights inlclude their christianity and attendance.

These handy, more palatable bits of data should help you and your friends know more about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons). My hope is that through good information we might dispel the misconceptions about the church. So if you found these useful, please share them with a friend. You can even use the social media buttons below.

The Definition of Marriage

I decided to look up the definition of marriage the other day. I was curious as to the exact wording that would be used. I was surprised to see what they had done.

All sources clearly state that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman. No surprise there, this definition has been clearly defined in nearly all societies in history. Though they might recognize other unions, genders or relationships, the clearly defined rules of marriage has always been assigned to a man and a woman.

The entymology of the word relates it both to a man and a woman. The latin matrem (meaning mother) and monium (meaning action, state, condition), together meaning a relationship where the female becomes a mother. This can only happen in a male-female relationship.

Imagine my surprise when some of the dictionaries included a secondary definition including same-sex marriages. The defining of words is a unpassionate discipline that does not bend to the whims of society. If a word falls into general use in society, it's definition needs to be established and subsequently published. If a word is used as slang by a small group and fails to gain such widespread usage or understanding it is not to be entered and called slang. But there it sits, begging the question why?

How about widespread usage? How many people in society use the word "ideal" to mean "idea" (ie. I have a good ideal)? Or how many say "I have more then you" when they mean than? Do you find those definitions in the dictionary? No. Well, what does society think?

Didn't same-sex marriage just become legal in several states? Not by the will of the peoople. In fact, not a single US state has voted in same sex marriage. Whenever the people have been asked to define marriage they have said again and again that it means a union between a man and a woman. Those states that currently allow same sex marriage only do so because millions of dollars were paid to lawyers to make it so. And serving a small group's interests does not a definition change.

Common use is where we derive definitions from and the common use for these alternatives to marriage requires modifiers to avoid confusion. When someone in the media or just a person on the street wants to tell you about the civil union of a homosexual couple they say phrases like "same-sex marriage," "gay marriage" and "homosexual marriage." There is a reason for this, when the general public hears the phrase "married couple" they know that means a man and a woman. Without the modifiers the word's meaning is clear and understood.

If I were to mention dry water an idea pops into your mind contrary to the word water. There are scientific publications that refer to a silica coated substance that is 95% water. It is dry to the touch and could be very useful in chemical applications. If that term were to gain widespread usage would dictionaries then add the "dry" definition to the word water? No, of course not.

By adding the same-sex entries definition of marriage, dictionaries have taken a political stance on the issue. As a percieved neutral source, this is a violation of the public trust in such institutions as dictionaries. I find this unconsionable, irresponsible and damaging. What other definitions can they be persuaded to change?

Be defined.

It's the end...again!

Here we go again. Another person has figured out when the end of the world is. I don't believe him, nor have I believed any of these other folks that sell destruction. Let us take a moment to ponder the reasons they say the world will end on x:

• The bible tells me so - There have been many to predict the end of the world. For example:
  • Charles Taze Russel predicted it would be in 1874 then successively in 1878, 1914, 1915, 1918 & 1925. In the end he said 1874 did happen, but it was symbolic.
  • Jim Jones predicted November 18, 1978. Unfortunately he committed suicide with 900 of his followers so he never found out he was wrong.
  • Michael Drosnin predicted December 2, 2006 using computers to read the "Bible Code."
  The funny thing about searching the Bible to prove when the world will end or the Second Coming of Christ is it says you can't: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." MAT 24:36 So the book they are looking to as an authority explicitly says that it can't help them.
• The [insert ancient culture] Knew - The most popular prediction these days is from the Mayan Calendar. People say the Calendar ends in 2012. They are correct: the Mayans made a Calendar and in the interest of planning ahead made future calendar dates extending to 2012. This wasn't because they said the world would end, they just didn't make more Calendar. Most Calendar companies have not printed 2013 yet, does that mean the world will end? No, someone will print them when we get sufficiently close just like the Mayans would have if their civilization continued long enough.
• Some Wise Man Said So - See the first entry. These are the same type of crazy folk, they just used other sources to come up with their faulty data:
  • Rabbi Sabbati Zevi predicted 1648AD & 1666AD. He later went crazy and joined Islam.
  • Nostradamus predicted July 1999 stating "The year 1999, seven months, From the sky will come a great King of Terror: To bring back to life the great King of the Mongols, Before and after Mars to reign by good luck."
  • Johannes Stöffler predicted February 1, 1524. He noticed that all the planets were going to line up and thought this would cause mass flooding.

So, we're still here and Harold Camping says that May 21^st, 2011 the rapture will happen. My first question is: What is the Rapture? I know what people say it is. It's been explained to me over and over. The reason I ask is that no one can tell me where they get this little doctrine from. Not ministers, not the internet, not even crazy fundies can tell me. They often refer to 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, but this doesn't give any clear information about a doctrine and requires a lot of wild interpretation to generate the entire doctrine of the rapture.

The Rapture, as I have heard, is when all the believers are taken to heaven right before God/Christ comes to destroy the surface of the Earth. You would think that something this important would have more than a few vague verses. Nope. They're nowhere to be found. According to the Bible there is nothing even resembling a rapture. So not only is Mr. Camping predicting something his source says he cant, he's predicting an event his source doesn't say will happen.

Be thorough.

Chandra Avenged?

The final sentencing for Ingmar Guandique was issued today. He is was convicted of killing Chandra Levy and sentenced to 60 years in prison. Good, evil doers should be dealt with especially when they've done evil.

Which he did, right?

I dunno. The evidence was sketchy at best. He was convicted based on two main criteria:

1. He told an inmate that he killed her.
2. He raped two women in the park where Chandra's body was found.

Wait, what?

Actual testimony stated that Ingmar told another inmate that he killed Chandra while trying to rob her. He was also afraid of violence against rapists in the prison. He was in prison for raping two women in the same park where they found Chandra. There is no DNA evidence, the polygraph was inconclusive and that's it. He's in for 60 years.

But the jury...the judge...?

In civil cases plaintiffs prove their point by a "preponderance of the evidence," that is they win if it is more likely than not. This is not a civil case, it's criminal. The standard for criminal cases is "beyond a shadow of doubt" or in other words if you doubt the evidence the criminal doesn't get convicted.

Ok...

When OJ Simpson was brought to trial the preponderance of the evidence pointed toward him killing his wife which was good enough for civil court (where he lost). In his criminal trial when all the facts were submitted there was enough doubt as to his guilt that he was found not guilty.

So what?

In this case the evidence against Ingmar is so circumstantial there can be nothing but doubt. This isn't a shadow of doubt this is an entire eclipse of doubt. No fingerprints, no DNA, no witnesses, no admission of guilt, no information pointing toward the incident at all except for one inmates testimony of what Ingmar said and that he has a history of violence. How many other people fit this profile? How many of them will be getting 60 years in jail?

Ack.

Ack is right. This is a major failure in our justice system. I am rather conservative when it comes to jailing folks who have done something wrong, but if you can't prove it, they didn't do it and that's it. I'm sad she's dead. She was two years behind me at Davis High. This is a sad way to remember the girl who wanted to get into government by falsely imprisoning an immigrant.

Be just.

Being at One

We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel. - Third Article of Faith, LDS

The atonement is the most talked about and most misunderstood part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

I covered a bit about sin in my blog about the Second Article of Faith. It was mostly about what sin is and how we can commit it. To recap it's to act knowingly or willingly against the will of God. We're imperfect and sometimes it seems a better idea to do the wrong thing rather than tough out the right. Guaranteed we've all done something.

Lemme diverge a bit and talk a little about God & Heaven. God knows how to be happy. I know, duh, but it needs to be said. He wants us to be happy and has prepared a place where we can achieve that forever. It doesn't mean that we get to do whatever we want because we will eventually step on someone's toes. The natural answer would be "don't hang around other people", but we're social beings and cannot spend eternity alone. So to boil it all down, some strict ground rules need to be set. For one you have to be capable of following the rules and be clean from trespasses altogether.

Now back to sin. If we have sin, we cannot go to this place. To fix sin you need to be able to reverse your actions or be punished. Reversing actions is impossible and punishment is more than we can bear with our mortal bodies. Eternal consequences and temporal bodies don't mix.

So now what? We sin, we can't be in heaven and God can't just forgive us. Why can't he forgive us? Justice. He is a just God and in so being he cannot be merciful or he contradicts himself. Since we can't pay the debt (being mortal and all) and God has to be just we need a third party to help us fix this.

Enter the Savior. There are a few requirements for this position:

1. Power Over Death - He needs to be able to withstand the punishment for sin without dying.
2. Mortal - If there's no risk there's no sacrifice and only morals have the risk of death.
3. Perfect - How can anyone be expected to give their entire eternal fate over to someone they can find fault with?
4. Infinite - If you atone for 1 quintillion sins what if there was one more. It is this "what if" that always requires atoning for one more sin. Hence, infinite.

We all know who fit the bill and did it willingly: Jesus Christ. His father was God, giving him power over death and the ability to avoid sin. His mother was Mary, giving him the ability to die and adding risk to this whole thing. He, by his very nature, is full of charity (the reason why he volunteered). Charity is love without limitation. Love without limitation is infinite and powerful enough to overcome infinite pain.

Now that all the criteria is met we need to look at the act. In the Garden of Gethsemane Christ suffered for all the sins of mankind. He had endured 40 days without food, the betrayal of his own people, Satan, hatred and many more things we do not know, but this single event scared him. He knew what needed to be done. His whole existence was spent preparing for this moment and when it arrived he asked if there was another way. This was a big deal and I'm glad he chose to do it.

Now for the second part of the Atonement. So that all could be raised in incorruption never to die again Christ needed to break the bonds of death, by dying. He died on the cross and two days later he rose. There is more to his life, ie. he set the example; He endured all things so he could succor us; He taught how we should be; and most importantly he gave us the conditions of his contract. All these things done because he knew we, his brothers and sisters, could not do it on our own and volunteered to help us out.

Now this deviates strongly from most other Christian faiths in a few ways:

1. Garden of Gethsemane - It is believed that Christ went to the Garden to negotiate with God about the Crucifixion the next day and provide a place so Judas could find him.
2. Crucifixion - It is also believed Christ paid for our sins by dying on the Cross.
3. Resurrection - This is tied to neither the garden or the Crucifixion. It is believed that ressurrection is just being saved from hell and that the dead rising would be the same as giving our bodies life again.

As stated above, we believe that Christ paid for our sins in the Garden. He died on the Cross so he could break the bonds of death so we all could be resurrected. We are resurrected with perfect bodies so we can live forever.

So now Christ had fulfilled his end of the contract. He had paid for our sins. So what does that mean for us? If we do what he says we can all shake off the sins that bind us down and be raised to incorruption. All the principals and ordinances of his gospel are found in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints as well as those people with the authority to administer them. With these handy tools we can enter into the kingdom of heaven and partake in eternal happiness. Goody for us.

Be One