If Only They had the Gift of the Holy Ghost

A few years ago I was serving as a ward mission leader. I was talking with one of the missionaries about one of their investigators. He was expressing a little frustration, among the issues that were discussed, the missionary observed that the investigator:

Was not reading anything in the Book of Mormon.
Was not praying about what they were being taught.
Was not willing to attend any meetings.
Was not keeping any of the regular commitments.
Etc., etc.


Then the missionary said something like, 'if only they had the Gift of the Holy Ghost, I know they would make a great member of the church'. I thought this was an odd thing to say. I have always felt that the Gift of the Holy Ghost was a blessing that was given to those who have done the things which lead to the receiving of the Holy Ghost. That if a person had faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repented of their sins, were baptized, lived righteously, etc., then they could enjoy the Gift of the Holy Ghost to influence their lives.

I have never felt that the Gift of the Holy Ghost itself really changed people. More that people who changed themselves in positive ways might enjoy the influence of the spirit. Of course the spirit needs to be felt to some level to motivate such change, but God is the judge of the sincerely of those who seek to know his will, and can bless peoples lives accordingly.

It seemed to me that this missionary might view the Holy Ghost as being something like a gorilla, who firmly grasps you by the neck and 'influences' you to do all the things that you should do. I tend to look at the Holy Ghost as being something more like a butterfly, and that if you do the things you should, and be in the right places, and say the right things, and do the right things, then it can gently influence you. Any harsh words or actions can chase the Holy Ghost away, and until we repent and change ourselves He may not come back.

There are however some examples of people who appeared to be somewhat compelled by the spirit to change. Paul and the Sons of Mosiah appear to be examples of this. These individuals appear to have been grasped firmly by the neck by the spiritual gorilla in a momentous event that they themselves did not appear to seek. In fact, these spiritual events appear to take place in the midst of a wicked life.

So I admit to being a little confused by this. Does the Holy Ghost change people sometimes, or do people that change themselves receive the Holy Ghost?

Read more!

Dammit Jim! I'm an Engineer, not a Theologian!

Some of you may recognize the title as a play on the familiar phrase that was frequently given by Doctor McCoy on the popular television show named Star Trek. This post is an attempt to draw some parallels between my career as an engineer, and my approach to living the gospel as a member of the church.


As an engineer I apply the laws of science and the language of mathematics to solve practical problems. This does not make me a mathematician or a physicist. I know and can apply algebra, trigonometry, calculus, and an occasional differential equation when I have to. But there are higher level mathematics that I have yet to learn or have a real need for in my career so far. As far as physics, give me Newton's laws. F=ma and its variations. I have little use for the theory of relativity or a unified theory of physics to get my daily tasks done.

As a member of the church I am familiar with the basics of the plan of salvation. I know about and have applied the first principles and ordinances of the gospel. I generally keep the commandments and hope to endure to the end. I have received the ordinances of the temple and hope to someday experience eternal life. This is not to say that I am an expert, or even well read in philosophy or theology. I do not have a good grasp on the jargon, or argument patterns in these fields. And I really don't feel that I personally have troubling questions that demand answers at the moment from a theological standpoint.

An engineer however, might come across a problem sometime when the regular mathematics and physics he uses are not sufficient to solve the problems he faces. He then would need to do more research, and stand on the shoulders of those who went before to gain some additional insight to his problem. It would be helpful for this engineer to be at least somewhat prepared to do this research. The better prepared he is with the laws of science and the language of mathematics the better he will be at gaining the additional knowledge he needs.

Does it not make sense then for the small and simple member of the church to seek to be somewhat familiar with the philosophical and theological thoughts of others so that if and when questions do come they are somewhat prepared for them?

I am considering obtaining an introductory book on philosophy, something on a freshman in college level, and perhaps buying McMurrin's 'Theological Foundations ...' book, and also perhaps Ostler's 'Mormon Thought ...' books. Is it a beneficial thing for a common member of the church to become familiar with this type of thing? Will it lead to better understanding and deeper faith?

I have made a similar post on Blogger of Jared here.

Read more!

Revelation for your Blog?

We sometimes speak of the right to receive revelation in the church. We believe that Gordon B. Hinkley is a prophet and has been called, sustained, and set-apart for this calling. We believe that he has received priesthood keys which allow him the privilege, right, responsibility and authority to receive revelation for the entire church. The First Presidency and Quorum of Twelve Apostles and other General Authorities have also been called, sustained, and set-apart for their callings. They either have, or act under the direction of those who have, priesthood keys and also have the privilege, right, responsibility and authority to receive revelation as the act in their calling.


On the local level, Stake Presidents are given priesthood keys, and are called, sustained, and set-apart for their callings. They therefore have the privilege, right, responsibility and authority to receive revelation as they serve in their callings locally. Likewise bishops are given priesthood keys, as are Elder Quorum Presidents, Teachers Quorum Presidents and Deacons Quorum Presidents. These individuals, their presidencies, auxiliary presidencies, officers and teachers who serve in the church, are all called, sustained, and set-apart in their callings. They act under the direction of those who hold priesthood keys and have the privilege, right, responsibility and authority to receive revelation as they serve in their callings.

Getting this so far? I know its a little repetitive, redundant, and repetitive. It's a literary style I am using to drive the point home. Effective isn't it?

Also individuals and families have the privilege, right, responsibility and authority to receive revelation for their own lives and the decisions they make. This is personal revelation, and it does not require priesthood keys or being called, sustained or set-apart. It just is. But it is intended to be personal.

So what about a Blog? As far as I know none of us have been given priesthood keys in regard to our blogs. We have not been called, sustained or set-apart for this. It is not a calling. So is it personal? Once we publish this on the Internet is it no longer completely personal. Do we have any claim on the privilege, right, responsibility and authority for revelation for our blogs?

I admit that I sometimes ponder and pray about my blog. Not always, but sometimes. I have at times felt inspired about what to write and how to right it in the vauge, general way the spirit often seems to work. Do I imagine this? Do I have any right to revelation for my blog that I publish without priesthood keys and without being called, sustained or set-apart?

Read more!

Missionary Practical Jokes

So Eric, were you ever convicted of a federal offense on your mission?

Convicted? No. Never convicted.

I was in the midst of training a new missionary, and one morning was taking a shower, minding my own business. All of a sudden my greeny came into the bathroom and dumped a large bowl of ice cubes into the tub. I was faced with a quick decision. Either jump out of the tub wet and naked to my companion's laughter, or stay in the tub like a martyr and finish my shower ankle deep in ice cubes. I took the martyr route.


As I finished my preparations for the morning I began wondering how I might get back at this whipper-snapper. I looked around, and saw his bottle of scope mouthwash sitting on a shelf right next to my bottle of Mennen after-shave. I observed that they were exactly the same color. Hmmmm. I dumped out a significant portion of his mouthwash and replaced it with the after shave. And waited.

Sure enough when he was about done getting ready the sure sign of gagging, yelling and spitting could be heard. Next to a golf ball hitting the bottom of the cup after a putt, or the net snapping after a jump shot, this was one of the sweetest sounds I have ever heard.

The game was on.

Over the next couple of weeks a practical joke war waged in our apartment. Most of them have since been forgotten. I am a little competitive, and I was determined not to lose. News of transfers came and I was going to be headed out. Then I got an idea. A wonderful idea. T terribly, horribly, wonderful idea. I would temporarily transfer his mail.

It was perfect. There was a stake missionary who lived not far away, I could forward it to him. I would just pick up two mail transfer forms. One for me and one for him. A forged signature, and victory would be mine. I admit to having a spiritually guilty feeling as I was doing this. Something like 'DON'T', or something. I don't know, it was to good not to go through with. So I did it.

Time went on, and I had mostly forgotten about the whole thing. A few months later I bumped into my trainee at a zone conference. I came up to him all smiles, 'hi, how ya doin?' He did not seem at all pleased to see me.

'You don't know how lucky you are Nielson', he said something in his expression - resentment or anger. 'What do you mean?' I asked, really not knowing what he was talking about.

He told me that I had forwarded his mail without telling anybody, and that it was a federal offense. When he went to the post office to get things straightened out they asked him if he wanted to press charges. Wouldn't that have been something? He could have 'won' big time. But he didn't.

I don't know what would have happened if he had pressed charges. Post office people tend to take this stuff seriously sometimes don't they? Could I have been sent home? Or to jail? A large fine? All three? Yikes. I consider this the dumbest thing I did on my mission. Elder Howell, if you are out there somewhere, I'm sorry for the whole mail thing. And thanks for not turning me in.

So if anyone asks me if I was ever convicted of a federal offense on my mission I can say:

Convicted? No. Never convicted.


There is another dumb missionary story about somebody else that I tell here.

Read more!

Friends

Right now I can break my life into two halves. One half being a youth, and one half being an adult. A few of the experiences that I have had lately have caused me to think about friendship, and how my ideas about friendship have changed in my life.


When I was young, friendship usually meant fun. My friends were the people that I had fun with. The people I played ball with (any ball), the people I would watch movies with, the people I would have over to play Risk and order pizza with, these were my friends. They were also people that had an unconditional acceptance of me. Even if I did or said something dumb or embarrassing, they would stand by me. If they laughed you could tell it was the 'laugh with' kind. There were also times, in awkward social situations (which for me is pretty much any social situation) my friends were people that I could stand by. It is amazing how having somebody to stand by makes such a difference.

There was an intensity to these friendships of my youth. And even though I don't keep touch with many of them as well as I should, I will always think of them with much fondness. I had quite a group of very good friends.

'When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. ' (1 Cor. 13:11)

As an adult life gets pretty busy. Most of every day is filled with responsibilities of some kind. Not much time for fun. I have my wife and my children, and there is a level of friendship in these relationships. But those relationships are of a different sort of which I am speaking, aren't they? Certainly one should be a friend with one's spouse. But is it not healthy to have friendships in addition to this relationship?

It seems the older I get the less friendships I have. And in comparison to the friendships of my youth, the bar has been significantly lowered. Not that the quality of the people are lower, but the quality of the friendship seems lower. Not the intensity of youth. Not the fun. I have co-workers now. Ward members. Neighbors. Sure we are friendly, but are we friends? Really friends? I find myself wanting to protect the word friend. I don't really give it freely. I have been spoiled with high expectations from my youth.

I love to golf. Most of the time I golf alone. I'm busy, everyone is. I'm a little old for 'can Joe come out and play'? I watch sports, often on TV. Usually alone. I'm not shedding tears - I'm not that emotional. It's just the way it is. It's more practical.

That brings me to the bloggernacle. Are we friends? Are we having fun together, doing something we enjoy. Do we stand by each other? Do we laugh 'with'. Are there people I can stand by when I feel awkward? Sometimes I think the 'friendships' I have here are about as real - maybe more - than the friendships I currently have in real life. Sometimes I think these 'friendships' are just one step away from having imaginary friends like a small child might have.

This is not a 'HELP!' This is a 'what do ya think?'

Read more!

Chess and the Gospel (by John Nielson)

Chess has often been used as a model for war and geopolitics. It has also been used as a broader model for life and practically everything in it. Thomas Henry Huxley made a remarkable statement that exemplifies the lengths to which this model has been stretched:


The chess-board is the world, the pieces are the phenomena of the universe, the rules of the game are what we call the laws of nature. The player on the other side is hidden from us. We know that his play is always fair, just and patient. But also we know, to our cost, that he never overlooks a mistake, or makes the smallest allowance for ignorance. . . . My metaphor will remind some of you of the famous picture in which Retzsch has depicted Satan playing at chess with man for his soul. Substitute for the mocking fiend in that picture a calm, strong angel who is playing for love, as we say, and would rather lose than win--and I should accept it as an image of human life(Huxley, 82).

Others have commented on the use of chess as a religious model. Larry Evans, an American International Grandmaster, says that “. . . some authorities believe it was meant to glorify God by reproducing a small-scale model of the universe”(Evans, 12).
There are some striking parallels between chess and the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. First, to win in either one, players must “endure to the end.” It takes much pondering, effort, repentance, and sacrifice to be successful in either. After playing beautifully through most of the game of life, or chess, it is still possible to fail near the end. Recall King David’s ghastly blunder following his exemplary youth in ancient Israel. After losing to an inferior player, Latvian chess master Nimzovich jumped up on the table and shouted in frustration, “Why must I lose to this idiot!”(Time, 7/31/72, 35).
If one pushes any analogy to extremes, it breaks down. This is true of the chess/gospel analogy as well. Chess is not life, nor is it the gospel. There are a few parallels but they do not touch at every point. The intense competitiveness of chess is, or should be, absent from the gospel. We do not play against each other in the gospel. We struggle against our own weaknesses and against temptation. But even imperfect analogies are useful if they focus our attention on aspects of things we might otherwise overlook.
As I develop the chess/gospel analogy, I ask the reader to make an adjustment. Rather than thinking of the game as played between two human opponents, I ask that, unless otherwise stated, you think of the game as between yourself and Satan. He is the adversary, the powerful opponent. He is the evil one who is trying to defeat you in the game of life. Fortunately, it is an unequal struggle--you have the Lord on your side, giving you advice on the best moves. Furthermore, the Lord is a Universal Grandmaster, a better chess player than Satan. He knows the end from the beginning. Even after the war in heaven, Satan still “knew not the mind of God” regarding the plan of salvation(Moses 4:6). Nevertheless, even though Satan is an inferior player, he can still beat us if we insist on making poor moves.
There is a fundamental truth common to both chess and the gospel life: Consistently good moves lead to victory, bad moves lead to defeat.
This law is inexorable, there is no escaping it. Good moves in the gospel life follow the “iron rod,” the laws and commandments of God; good moves in chess follow sound principles, powerful strategy, and winning tactics.
There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated---And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated (D&C 130:20-21).

Someone once asked Bobby Fischer, eccentric American World Champion in the early 1970's, if he used psychology to defeat his opponents. I have been unable to find an reliable reference but as I remember it, his reply was, “I don’t believe in psychology, I believe in strong moves.” Some of his opponents were made nervous and jittery(and therefore did not play well) by his presence, his persona, his antics. However, when they lost, they lost because their moves were not as good, not as strong.
Perhaps this is a reason chess(and the Church?) is not very popular in this world. It has no element of chance in it. You cannot win by a toss of the dice or a turn of the cards. One does not win by being lucky. Winning comes from playing well, better than your opponent. A strong opponent pounces on every error and exploits it. Chess is very unforgiving of mistakes and errors. If one makes a serious error in chess, one must quickly repent of it, gain some compensating advantage, or the game is lost.
The same is true in the gospel life. We are told in what is, until properly understood, the most chilling statement in all scripture, that “. . . the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance”(D&C 1:31). Further,
men . . . are . . . judged according to their works, according to the law and justice. For behold, justice exerciseth all his demands, and also mercy claimeth all which is her own; and thus, none but the truly penitent are saved. What, do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you Nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God(Alma 42:23-25).

There is no possibility of deceiving the Lord and somehow getting into heaven unworthily. Likewise, there is no possibility that an inferior player can conceal, throughout an extended series of games, his limited ability against a strong opponent in chess. While the Lord never blunders, strong chess players sometimes do. Therefore, they will sometimes lose single games against inferior players. But they will virtually never lose a whole series of games against weaker players.
O then, my beloved brethren, come unto the Lord, the Holy One. Remember that his paths are righteous. Behold, the way for man is narrow, but it lieth in a straight course before him, and the keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel; and he employeth no servant there; and there is none other way save it be by the gate; for he cannot be deceived, for the Lord God is his name(2 Nephi 9:41).

Of course, here is a major difference between chess and the gospel. In life we have a Savior, the atonement, forgiveness on conditions of repentance.
And thus he shall bring salvation to all those who shall believe on his name; this being the intent of this last sacrifice, to bring about the bowels of mercy, which overpowereth justice, and bringeth about means unto men that they may have faith unto repentance.
And thus mercy can satisfy the demands of justice, and encircles them in the arms of safety, while he that exercises no faith unto repentance is exposed to the whole law of the demands of justice; therefore only unto him that has faith unto repentance is brought about the great and eternal plan of redemption(Alma 34:15-16).

In chess, there is no savior. You cannot take back a move once it is made(you can on your next turn to move, but then it may be too late). Also, you must suffer the consequences yourself if it is a blunder. No one will pay for your sins for you. Even in the gospel life, as in chess, there is no forgiveness for unrepented sins. This, I believe, is the meaning and intent of the chilling statement quoted earlier. The Lord cannot look upon unrepented sin with the least degree of allowance. We cannot shoot, lie, smile, cheat, finesse, or beg our way into heaven. We can only get there, or gain a victory, by making good moves. Huxley, in his analogy between chess and the universe, placed god on the other side of the board as our chess opponent. Recall that he put the point this way: “The player on the other side (God) is hidden from us. We know that his play is always fair, just, and patient. But also we know, to our cost, that he never overlooks a mistake, or makes the smallest allowance for ignorance”(Huxley, 82).
We cannot pretend to be either a good chess player or a good Christian. It does no good to just go through the motions. Moroni said that “. . . if [a man] offereth a gift, or prayeth unto God, except he shall do it with real intent it profiteth him nothing. For behold, it is not counted unto him for righteousness. . . . for God receiveth none such”(Moroni 7:6-9).
There are many people who believe that God is so merciful and compassionate that he cannot bear to condemn the sinner. They believe he will, in the final judgement, forgive all, or punish very lightly. The Book of Mormon calls these ideas “false and vain and foolish doctrines” (2 Nephi 28:7-9)
As mentioned previously, chess is not a very popular game. This is especially true in the U.S. Perhaps because it demands such concentration, study, and effort to become a good player. Also because mistakes against a strong player, or a computer, are never overlooked. Most people learn the rudiments of the game, play a few times, get beaten badly, and give up, never to play again. New chess players apparently need as much fellowshipping, encouragement, instruction, and experience as do new church members if they are to stay with the game. Most new players do not get much encouragement and so most do not survive.
We seem to have a revolving door at the entrance to life in the Church. People enter through baptism but often understand the gospel imperfectly. The demands of activity, the many meetings, the new terminology, the steep learning curve with new volumes of scripture, may discourage many new members. Without a deep understanding of the gospel, they soon exit through the other side of the revolving door into the more comfortable world of inactivity. Worldwide, only about 50 percent of the membership is active. So, although there about 12 million members, only about 6 million are active. And for every member, worldwide, there are about 540 people who are not members.
There are also certain parallels between the qualities of a good chess player and the virtues of a good Latter-day Saint. This may strike you as surprising since chess players are often characterized as aggressive and ruthless--at least in their over-the-board play. Not everyone, however, approaches the game as a matter of cut-throat competition. Grandmaster David Bronstein says that in his philosophy of chess, having fun should be the object. He also characterizes chess as a game played with someone, not against them(Rostedt, 32).
However, there are some kinder and gentler virtues, common to chess players and Latter-day Saints. One is patience, to be able to wait until the end of mortal life, or the end of a long game, for the payoff. Another virtue held in common is empathy, the ability to see things from another’s point of view. Fred Reinfeld, a well-known American author of chess books, says he has leaned a great deal from chess: “. . . how to be patient, how to bide my time, how to see the other man’s point of view, how to persevere in unpromising situations, how to learn from my failures”(Reinfeld,v).
In the list of virtues in Section 4 of the Doctrine and Covenants, at least the following have some common application to Saints and chess players: “knowledge . . . patience . . . brotherly kindness . . . charity, humility, diligence”(verse 6).
Knowledge and patience, even diligence, are obviously good qualities for both, but what of the others? Brotherly kindness, charity and humility seem to be of little service to chess players. But in real chess games, when one’s opponent is another human being, and especially if one expects to play the same person more than once, there is a definite value to elementary chess courtesy. Learning how to both win and lose gracefully becomes a goal for most lifelong players. Kindly congratulating one’s opponent on a good game when losing, and humbly accepting victory without boasting, goes far towards smoothing a potentially tense conflict situation at the end of games. It makes the continued enjoyment of the game possible. Not every chess player or Church members, of course, really practices these virtues.
It is the precision and order of both chess and the plan of salvation that is most striking. In each there are rules, laws, rewards, punishments. If we learn the rules, obey the laws, make good moves, we will receive the rewards and avoid the punishments in both.
The rewards for good moves in chess and life are just as sure and certain as are the punishments for doing evil. Nephi states this as clearly as anyone.
The gate by which ye should enter is repentance and baptism by water; and then cometh a remission of your sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost. And then are ye in this strait and narrow path which leads to eternal life; yea, ye have entered in by the gate; ye have done according to the commandments of the Father and the Son; and ye have received the Holy ghost, which witnesses of the Father and the Son, unto the fulfilling of the promise which he hath made, that if ye entered in by the way ye should receive.
And now, my beloved brethren, after ye have gotten into this strait and narrow path, I would ask if all is done? Behold, I say unto you, Nay; for ye have not come thus far save it were by the word of Christ with unshaken faith in him, relying wholly upon the merits of him who is mighty to save.
Wherefore, ye must press forward with a steadfastness in Christ, having a perfect brightness of hope, and a love of God and of all men. Wherefore, if ye shall press forward, feasting upon the word of Christ, and endure to the end, behold thus saith the Father: Ye shall have eternal life (2 Nephi 31:17-20).

If we lose in chess, we cannot blame anyone else, though many will try. One grandmaster said, “I’ve never beaten a healthy man, they all claim to be suffering from something.” But despite this unfortunate human tendency to shift the blame to others for our chess defeats (or the dim lights, the unusually small board, the stuffy air, the poor sleep we had last night, the flu, etc.), we have lost because we made some poor moves.
At the 1992 chess rematch between Fischer and Spassky, chess journalist and Woman International Master, Cathy Forbes, asked Bobby Fischer if he would play a casual game with her. Surprisingly, he agreed to play a quick game and pulled out his pocket set. Following is her account of what happened.
Without, of course, wishing to make excuses, I can truthfully say that I almost never play on a pocket set. Not if I can help it, anyway. Overuse, moreover, had eroded the flat representations of this set, particularly the bishops, down to barely intelligible squiggles. “I’m at a disadvantage here,” I complained.
“Yeah, I’m used to this set,” he agreed. One the other hand, he did let me have White . . . but perhaps I should have taken a leaf from Bobby’s own book and insisted on perfect playing conditions for this important game?(Forbes, 26).

She blundered and had to resign on the twenty-seventh move. But her excuses had already softened the blow to her pride. Still, she lost, not because of the overused pocket set, or overworked bishops, but because she had blundered and Fischer had not.
The same is true in the gospel. If we do not gain exaltation we cannot blame our parents, our bishops, our neighbors, our friends, our enemies, or anyone else. We make our choices and we take the consequences. According to Samuel the Lamanite, “Whosoever perisheth, perisheth unto himself; and whosoever doeth iniquity, doeth it unto himself; for behold, ye are free; ye are permitted to act for yourselves; for behold, God hath given unto you a knowledge and he hath made you free”(Helaman 14:30).
Some people were born into broken homes, or they were molested or abused as children, or they were always very poor, or they did not get an education, or they were systematically discriminated against because of their ethnic background. While all of these unfortunate circumstances, or others, make life here on earth very unjust and unequal, they will all be overcome eventually in the moral economy of God. He has said that “. . . unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required; . . .(Luke 12:48).
The converse is no doubt true as well. Those who have suffered much injustice and deprivation in this life will be compensated(the Lord speaks of some being “recompensed at the resurrection of the just.”)[Luke 14:14] in the next until all have an equal opportunity to hear, accept, and live the gospel or reject it. Then, if we perish, we can blame no one but ourselves.
The analogy between chess and the gospel, and the scriptures quoted above, may make God seem harsh, judgmental, strict, unmerciful, wanting to condemn every sinner for the slightest infraction. This is not true. God does not want to condemn anyone. But many people condemn themselves. As Jesus said, “O Jerusalem . . . how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!” (Matt. 23:37).
God will forgive every repentant sinner, he has prepared a kingdom of salvation for everyone except the sons of perdition, his arms of mercy are extended to all. But he is a god of justice and cannot forgive unrepented sins.
It is more satisfying to play good chess with a worthy opponent, one who is just as strong, or stronger, than oneself. It is also more satisfying to serve a God who is unfailingly just, but merciful to the penitent. How unsatisfactory it would be to believe in an unstable God, who forgave capriciously, or one with no standards, who forgave everyone of everything. Actually, that kind of God is no God. If mercy were to rob justice, “God would cease to be God” (Alma 42:25).
Doing the right thing(or making the right move), at the right time, for the right reasons is what makes both chess and life beautiful and rewarding. Either, or both, can be frustrating and disappointing when we do the wrong thing(or make the wrong move) at any time.


Works Cited
Evans, Larry. Chess Catechism. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1970.
Forbes, Cathy. “Bobby Fischer, the Holy Grail--A Balkan Odyssey--”Chess Life, March, 1993, 26-27.

Huxley, Thomas H. Science and Education: Essays. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1896.

Reinfeld, Fred. The Complete Chessplayer. Greenwich, Connecticut: Fawcett Publications, Inc., 1953.

Rostedt, Charles. “Bronstein Visits Chess Palace,” Chess Life, March, 1993. 32.

Standard Works of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Read more!

Lost Temple Recommend

Some spiritual experiences I have had are a little to special or sacred to share publicly. Other experiences are of a lesser sort, and I am not completely certain that they are spiritual experiences. I made a post once on auras, one on bibliomancy, and one on fixing a game which turned out to be an answer to my child's prayer. Some may think these are coincidences or something else. I tend to look at these as spiritual experiences, but because they are not exactly part of my testimony I am glad to get comments on them, for better or worse.

This is another one, and probably the last, of these types of experiences. It involves losing a temple recommend.


We live about a three hour drive from the nearest temple. When you consider driving there, doing a session or two, getting something to eat, and driving back it can kick the heck out of a day. And when you consider what to do with small kids it can be a challenge to go often. We are hesitant to ask someone to baby sit all day for a chance to go, so we get a little creative once in a while.

We had arranged to go to the temple with another family who had kids about the same ages as ours. We were going to go together, and one couple would go in the morning when the other couple would take the kids somewhere for breakfast or something, and then we would switch for a second session. We would then drive home together.

We wanted to leave early and so were preparing the night before. My wife asked if I had my recommend at about 9 p.m.. I knew right where it was. There is a small bookcase in our bedroom, and on top is a dish that I put keys and change in. My temple recommend was in that dish right on top. I had seen it there several times in the last couple of days. I went to get it, but I could not see it. I looked very thoroughly because I knew it was there. But no luck.

My wife and I searched and searched. We eventually looked 'everywhere'. To try and be funny and ease my tension I even looked in the fridge, the freezer, the bathtub, the oven. This was getting very frustrating, and it was also getting late. During this time I went back to the dish on the bookcase over and over again. I was sure it was there, but could not find it.

In my frustration, I sat down on the kitchen floor, with my back against the wall, and my head in my hands. I was at the end of my hope of finding the recommend. The practical engineer in me started to think. It was to late to try to get another recommend. I did not know what the policy or resources were at the temple for people who show up from a long distance with no recommend. Just showing up without it is not my style ya know? What do I do? Baby sit all eight kids myself? In Chicago? yuck. Maybe I should just watch the kids at home, with the games and the TV. That made sense. I could cook them a couple of meals, watch some videos, go to the park. This way my wife and the other couple could go in one vehicle. Have a nice quiet trip with adult conversation. My wife would like that. That would be nice. Yeah, that's what I should do.

I called my wife who was still looking and told her what I was thinking. She was ready to give up looking also. When I was through explaining my plan she looked at me in that way and asked 'you sure?' I nodded. She helped me up off the floor and we walked together to the bedroom. We walked past the bookcase. And there, in the dish, right on top, in plain sight, was my recommend. Exactly where I knew it was but could not find it before.

My kids were all asleep, my wife is not at all the practical joke type. I have positively no explanation for this. The dish was shallow and mostly empty. The top of the bookcase was not cluttered. I have no idea how this could have happened. The spiritual romantic in me wants to think of this as a little test God put me through. Once I 'passed' I was allowed to find the recommend. Perhaps he had the recommend hidden from my view in some way. Perhaps he had it removed and then replaced. Perhaps I am an unobservant fool.

What do you think? Does stuff like this happen?

Read more!

Which Direction to Face

When we serve in a church calling, one way to look at that calling is that you are to represent the Lord to the people you are serving. Boyd K. Packer passed along this counsel in one of his famous (and some might say infamous) speeches.

Elder Lee had agreed to give me counsel and some direction. He didn't say much, nothing really in detail, but what he told me has saved me time and time again. "You must decide now which way you face," he said. "Either you represent the teachers and students and champion their causes or you represent the Brethren who appointed you. You need to decide now which way you face." Then he added, "Some of your predecessors faced the wrong way." It took some hard and painful lessons before I understood his counsel. In time, I did understand, and my resolve to face the right way became irreversible.

The entire talk can be found here.

This has caused me to think about 'leadership' and 'management' in the church. I had these thoughts again during President Hinkley's talk in the Priesthood session of conference. I have made a post about this on Blogger of Jared. You may read my post here.

Some do not like this talk by Elder Packer. I happen to think he is close to the mark.

Read more!