Satan uses a particular tool to incite war, conflict, and oppression: money.
He
immediately goes to work using this tool from the very beginning of
this Telestial sphere. Interestingly, warding off this attack has
nothing to do with money, but everything to do with one's internal
perspective about money.
Satan tries to make money feel scarce, like it needs to be fought
for and hoarded. God invites us to be grateful, wise, and generous with
our resources. Satan uses money to stir conflict among people; God uses
money to allow us, His children, to experience peace as we see each
other as His equally valued children.
Often when God
prospers His people, they slip into Satan's agenda of proud and warring
hearts. Yet, as they humble themselves, God will let them try again. I
believe He wants us to learn the great peace, nobility, and abundance
that can come with prosperity if we will simply choose Him.
Peaceful
prosperity is the antithesis of Satan's agenda; it is the Utopian
result of a God-like people (See 4 Nephi); it is the goal and vision of what we can obtain, both individually and as a society!
Thus we see that money is neither good nor bad,
but can be used as a tool for either. If money were evil then good people
could not be good in having it and every corner of the earth would be ruled with oppression, destruction, bloodshed, and
horror.
Inasmuch as people are
infused with peaceful prosperity, then love, kindness, gratitude, and
abundance will abound. In other words, peaceful prosperity in individual
hearts will generate outward peace and prosperity among a people.
I hope to inspire peaceful prosperity in the hearts of men, women, and children -- to foster a multi-generational tradition of opposing Satan because we prosper peacefully. This is the movement I stand for.
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
Some Thoughts about Wealth
"I know that relative poverty and hard work are not greater adversities than affluence and abundant free time. I also know that strength is forged in adversity and that faith is developed in a setting where we cannot see ahead." --Elder Oaks
Thankfully, affluence does not free us of adversity! God's plan for His children can not be thwarted by so light a triviality.
There is also no sense of greater virtue in poverty, as though a lack of resources is somehow a more worthy state. It has been said that monetary wealth only magnifies or makes visible that which is already in one's heart.
The question is not about what we have, but about who we become.
This leads to another question, are we more able to become, to grow and develop, when we have financial resources than when we do not?
At least in my life environment, I'm inclined to believe we are. One who can afford a mentor will be provided greater such opportunities than one who can not.
From the cycle seen in the Book of Mormon, it seems that as people keep His commandments, they are prospered financially, and shortly thereafter, they often cease keeping His commandments. It's almost like He would say "Okay, you passed level 1, now let's try level 2," and more often than not, the people failed at level 2 and had to go back to level 1. (This is a harsh scale -- it is not intended to be literal.)
I find nobility in passing levels line upon line, precept upon precept. Financial wealth brings greater blessings and greater requirement. With more resources, there are more avenues available for both righteousness and sin!
I believe that God wants us to progress and prosper, and that he wants us to succeed at taking on new challenges and maintain a virtuous life with abundance.
Thus we see the significance of passing on the lessons we have learned to our children. Starting them at higher level of financial blessings without having the lessons requisite for living with it is putting them atop a platform void of foundation, and it's only a matter of time before they fall.
All of this is not to say that having a reversal of financial fortune is due to unrighteous living, certainly not. But living according to sound financial principles can be done righteously, and unrighteousness will eventually lead to a reversal of financial fortune.
The only way to maintain wealth generationally is to learn, live, and pass on the lessons of financial, spiritual, and familial peace and prosperity.
Thankfully, affluence does not free us of adversity! God's plan for His children can not be thwarted by so light a triviality.
There is also no sense of greater virtue in poverty, as though a lack of resources is somehow a more worthy state. It has been said that monetary wealth only magnifies or makes visible that which is already in one's heart.
The question is not about what we have, but about who we become.
This leads to another question, are we more able to become, to grow and develop, when we have financial resources than when we do not?
At least in my life environment, I'm inclined to believe we are. One who can afford a mentor will be provided greater such opportunities than one who can not.
From the cycle seen in the Book of Mormon, it seems that as people keep His commandments, they are prospered financially, and shortly thereafter, they often cease keeping His commandments. It's almost like He would say "Okay, you passed level 1, now let's try level 2," and more often than not, the people failed at level 2 and had to go back to level 1. (This is a harsh scale -- it is not intended to be literal.)
I find nobility in passing levels line upon line, precept upon precept. Financial wealth brings greater blessings and greater requirement. With more resources, there are more avenues available for both righteousness and sin!
I believe that God wants us to progress and prosper, and that he wants us to succeed at taking on new challenges and maintain a virtuous life with abundance.
Thus we see the significance of passing on the lessons we have learned to our children. Starting them at higher level of financial blessings without having the lessons requisite for living with it is putting them atop a platform void of foundation, and it's only a matter of time before they fall.
All of this is not to say that having a reversal of financial fortune is due to unrighteous living, certainly not. But living according to sound financial principles can be done righteously, and unrighteousness will eventually lead to a reversal of financial fortune.
The only way to maintain wealth generationally is to learn, live, and pass on the lessons of financial, spiritual, and familial peace and prosperity.
Thursday, July 10, 2014
Agents unto Ourselves
While I was looking up in the scriptures about agents, I found an interesting concept in some of the verses.
And it is given unto them to know good from evil; wherefore they are agents unto themselves, and I have given unto you another law and commandment.
(Moses 6:56 - emphasis added)
Wherefore, verily I say unto you that all things unto me are spiritual, and not at any time have I given unto you a law which was temporal; neither any man, nor the children of men; neither Adam, your father, whom I created.
Behold, I gave unto him that he should be an agent unto himself; and I gave unto him commandment, but no temporal commandment gave I unto him, for my commandments are spiritual; they are not natural nor temporal, neither carnal nor sensual.
(D&C 29:34-35 - emphasis added)
For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.
Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness;
For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward.
(D&C 58:26-28 - emphasis added)
For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves.
(D&C 104:17 - emphasis added)
What is this about being agents unto ourselves? At first it seems simply that we have been given agency to make choices, and this is true enough, but perhaps that's incomplete. It's not just that we have choices, but to me there seems to be a sense that we have a work to do and, inasmuch as we do it, we will be blessed.
What that work is is for us to discover and pursue as agents unto ourselves, always within the guidelines and commandments of God. What our work is (within His commandments) may in fact be less important to Him than how we engage in it! Thus, we are free to choose, in all righteousness, that which we most enjoy, that which pleases us the most and provides us the most meaning! How great is that?!
Does that sound like being an agent unto oneself? To me it does. Being an agent unto oneself is to act in one's self interest, and the highest, most Godly form of that is to live in a self-servingly altruistic manner. This is how God lives, for His work and His glory is the supremely altruistic act of our immortality and eternal life, and yet our immortality and eternal life all contribute to His glory! Self-serving altruism is living in a way where you gain great meaning, enjoyment, and yes, even financial compensation as you bring to pass much righteousness.
But financial compensation? If we accept financial compensation now, then when we are judged, will we not be told we have already received our reward? (Matthew 6) I would respond similar to Alma and ask "Do ye suppose that ye cannot worship God save it be in your synagogues only?" (Alma 32:10) Or said another way do ye suppose that ye can do no noble, virtuous, or altruistic thing if it be compensated with money? Or yet another way, do ye suppose that providing for your family can only be brought to pass by ignominious means?
Altruism has been defined as "unselfishly concerned for or devoted to the welfare of others." This feels very noble, but it can also include the insidious. How so? By being blind to one's true concern and devotion. Mistaking the measure of one's sacrifice as the measure of one's service is not at all service, but selfishness and the seeking of one's own vain glory. It leads not to a heart of satisfaction but to a heart of resentment. It is a counterfeit altruism that creates a martyr or victim of its agent. Altruism in its truest form is unavoidably self-serving as well; it can not help but lift up the heart of the man that acts in it.
It is worth noting that asking for financial compensation for a good or service can, in and of itself, be altruistic. In the words of Thomas Paine, "what we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly." Requiring a financial sacrifice for a good or service can serve to bless the buyer. After all, even "heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods." (The American Crisis)
I am not here arguing that any and all services should be financially compensated. Heavens no! It is crucial for each of us to engage in service without any expectation of recompense, financial or otherwise! But we simply can not avoid recompense if we are acting out of true altruism. It is a divine principle that righteous action brings reward. (Mosiah 2:24)
And now, I have gone on a bit of a tangent. So coming back to the original question, what does it mean to be agents unto ourselves? While it indeed means that we are able to choose that which we think will be best for us, it is more. To magnify being agents unto ourselves suggests that we be obedient to God and engage diligently in causes or works that are meaningful to us! Some of these may provide financial compensation while others may not, but as we seek His glory through our own joy and fulfillment, we will be successful agents unto ourselves.
* It is also important that we allow others to serve us. It is important for the giver and the recipient, and I do not mean to diminish that in my comments, but to mention it inline above would have only distracted from the point at hand.
Saturday, July 5, 2014
Agency, Liberty, and Freedom
My post a couple days ago got me thinking about the meaning of a few similar yet different words. What is the difference between agency, liberty, and freedom? Or are they synonymous?
I believe they can express very distinct meanings, the differences of which are noteworthy. Now I am not saying that whenever someone else uses these words, they are using them according to the meanings I will give them here, nor say I that these definitions are correct or incorrect. I am simply stating how I, personally, think they could be used in an effective way to convey similar yet distinct meanings. ...and it may take me some practice to use them according to these meanings myself!
Agency
Agency is what no one can take away. It is a gift from God and no earthly force can remove it. That it can be given away, it is true, but unless beyond a point of no return or perhaps due to significant mental illness, it can always be taken back through its own power - the power of mental choice.
It is agency that Victor Frankl speaks of in his famous quote: "Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way." (Man's Search for Meaning)
Agency can be lost permanently. The only means I know of achieving this is through altering the physical brain so much, be it through drugs, a physical accident, or the onset of a significant mental illness, that the spiritual mind and the physical brain are no longer able to connect. (I believe it is in this connection where agency is granted.) It is at this point where one becomes a permanent slave to the physical formations and patterns set in one's brain, being incapable of any other choice.
Liberty
Liberty is another thing altogether. Liberty has to do with political influence. Greater liberty implies greater ability to pursue life, property, philosophy, religious belief, religious practice, meaning, purpose, and relationships, all without fear of repercussion or hindrance from a more physically powerful person or organization.
There is a direct correlation between the range of one's liberty and the abundance or range in which one can exercise agency. When all liberty is forcibly taken away, one's agency extends only to one's attitude. When vast liberties are granted, one's agency may extend to a vast array of possibilities.
Liberty, in and of itself, does not take into account responsibility. That said, it is a natural law that a people at liberty will see that liberty diminish when they do not proactively take responsibility for the consequences of their choices. Conversely, a people will see their liberty increase as they do take such proactive responsibility.
We see then that intelligence is crucial to greater liberty. By intelligence I mean the recognition and understanding of what consequences follow one's choices; responsibility requires intelligence. Inasmuch as such intelligence is limited, liberty will be diminished. This is why one purpose of education is, indeed, to preserve liberty. Limiting intelligence may be the quickest road to the loss of liberty.
Liberty builds on agency. On an individual level, liberty with out agency is moot and meaningless. On a macro level, liberty without agency is an impossibility as it is only through the agency of men that liberty of another is taken.
Freedom
Freedom is a consequence, either of circumstance or choice, by which the options available to one's agency are modified. Expanding the options available to one's agency creates greater freedom for the individual. The creation of sustained and ever increasing freedom requires the continual use of intelligence, agency, liberty, and responsibility. Responsibility is a core component of sustained freedom.
The easiest example of this, though not the most important, is financial freedom. Consider three people. One has a passive cash flow of $50,000 per month from investments, another has a job that provides $10,000 per month of income, and yet another has no income of any kind. They all have the same liberties available to them, but their degree of freedom is vastly different.
Another contrasting example could be a person with in excellent health and another who is ridden with physical ailments or disease. Their political liberty may be the same and yet the options available to their agency -- their freedom -- may be vastly different.
These are both physical examples, yet mental freedom is very similar. I was recently introduced to a video called "The Butterfly Circus." It is a very inspiring story of a man who is helped to break through his own mental prison.Yes, he has some circumstantial, physical limitations on his freedom, but they were nothing compared to the self-imposed mental limitations he placed on his freedom. I include it here -- it's a wonderful watch.
It is worthy of note that, as I have defined these terms here, freedom encompasses and includes liberty. Liberty is one circumstantial situation that enhances or limits the opportunities available to one's agency.
Victim-hood
It seems to be in the area of freedom where people most often call foul and take on victim-hood. It is true that our freedom is limited sometimes by our outer environment, that is, by circumstances or actors outside of our control. Yet are not those who inspire us those who lay claim on what freedom they may obtain, particularly when the circumstantial obstacles seem great? Is that not at the core of what makes the above video inspirational? Is that not what makes Viktor Frankl such an inspiring individual?
Allowing our self to be a victim feels justified at times, but it will not and indeed can not lead us to greater freedom. Victim-hood staunches progress toward freedom and if anything, turns us from it. (See The Anatomy of Peace by the Arbinger Institute, one of this world's best books in my humble opinion.)
Truth
"The truth shall set you free," spoke the Savior. (John 8:32) I feel the above context gives some clarity in one aspect of this much-abused statement's meaning. Choosing (a use of agency) to live according to True principles will bring us greater freedom no matter our circumstances, be it a physical or mental limitation, a swath or a lack of liberties, or what have you.
With his liberty crushed, Viktor Frankl yet found the little freedom he could in the selection of his attitude. Those who did not see this Truth were thus not free to consciously choose their attitude. The more we are able to recognize and align ourselves with Truth, the more free we become.
While a statement does not imply its converse, (i.e. "the truth shall set you free" does not imply that "if you have freedom, you are living by truth"), I believe seeking freedom can help us discover Truth. That which increases our freedom in a sustainable manner is likely closer to Truth than that which does not. That which increases our freedom in an unsustainable manner is likely a deception of Truth. Again, this can not be applied as a rule, but in my opinion it can be a general guide.
The best guides to judge Truth are, of course, those given by Moroni: "I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ. . .But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil." (Moroni 7:16-17) And also "And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things." (Moroni 10:5)
The Point
So... what's the point?
Well, for you, perhaps there isn't one, and reading this has been an utter waste of time for you.
For me, creating this semantic clarity helps me see things more clearly and recognize that there may be a difference. It helps me not work myself up as easily, but invites me to see others as people more readily. It also helps me distinguish freedom as a choice that I get to make and inspires me to pursue it.
Freedom begins in the mind; as long as we have even the slightest ability to exercise agency, we can choose freedom.
What does freedom look like for you?
I believe they can express very distinct meanings, the differences of which are noteworthy. Now I am not saying that whenever someone else uses these words, they are using them according to the meanings I will give them here, nor say I that these definitions are correct or incorrect. I am simply stating how I, personally, think they could be used in an effective way to convey similar yet distinct meanings. ...and it may take me some practice to use them according to these meanings myself!
Agency
Agency is what no one can take away. It is a gift from God and no earthly force can remove it. That it can be given away, it is true, but unless beyond a point of no return or perhaps due to significant mental illness, it can always be taken back through its own power - the power of mental choice.
It is agency that Victor Frankl speaks of in his famous quote: "Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way." (Man's Search for Meaning)
Agency can be lost permanently. The only means I know of achieving this is through altering the physical brain so much, be it through drugs, a physical accident, or the onset of a significant mental illness, that the spiritual mind and the physical brain are no longer able to connect. (I believe it is in this connection where agency is granted.) It is at this point where one becomes a permanent slave to the physical formations and patterns set in one's brain, being incapable of any other choice.
Liberty
Liberty is another thing altogether. Liberty has to do with political influence. Greater liberty implies greater ability to pursue life, property, philosophy, religious belief, religious practice, meaning, purpose, and relationships, all without fear of repercussion or hindrance from a more physically powerful person or organization.
There is a direct correlation between the range of one's liberty and the abundance or range in which one can exercise agency. When all liberty is forcibly taken away, one's agency extends only to one's attitude. When vast liberties are granted, one's agency may extend to a vast array of possibilities.
Liberty, in and of itself, does not take into account responsibility. That said, it is a natural law that a people at liberty will see that liberty diminish when they do not proactively take responsibility for the consequences of their choices. Conversely, a people will see their liberty increase as they do take such proactive responsibility.
We see then that intelligence is crucial to greater liberty. By intelligence I mean the recognition and understanding of what consequences follow one's choices; responsibility requires intelligence. Inasmuch as such intelligence is limited, liberty will be diminished. This is why one purpose of education is, indeed, to preserve liberty. Limiting intelligence may be the quickest road to the loss of liberty.
Liberty builds on agency. On an individual level, liberty with out agency is moot and meaningless. On a macro level, liberty without agency is an impossibility as it is only through the agency of men that liberty of another is taken.
Freedom
Freedom is a consequence, either of circumstance or choice, by which the options available to one's agency are modified. Expanding the options available to one's agency creates greater freedom for the individual. The creation of sustained and ever increasing freedom requires the continual use of intelligence, agency, liberty, and responsibility. Responsibility is a core component of sustained freedom.
The easiest example of this, though not the most important, is financial freedom. Consider three people. One has a passive cash flow of $50,000 per month from investments, another has a job that provides $10,000 per month of income, and yet another has no income of any kind. They all have the same liberties available to them, but their degree of freedom is vastly different.
Another contrasting example could be a person with in excellent health and another who is ridden with physical ailments or disease. Their political liberty may be the same and yet the options available to their agency -- their freedom -- may be vastly different.
These are both physical examples, yet mental freedom is very similar. I was recently introduced to a video called "The Butterfly Circus." It is a very inspiring story of a man who is helped to break through his own mental prison.Yes, he has some circumstantial, physical limitations on his freedom, but they were nothing compared to the self-imposed mental limitations he placed on his freedom. I include it here -- it's a wonderful watch.
It is worthy of note that, as I have defined these terms here, freedom encompasses and includes liberty. Liberty is one circumstantial situation that enhances or limits the opportunities available to one's agency.
Victim-hood
It seems to be in the area of freedom where people most often call foul and take on victim-hood. It is true that our freedom is limited sometimes by our outer environment, that is, by circumstances or actors outside of our control. Yet are not those who inspire us those who lay claim on what freedom they may obtain, particularly when the circumstantial obstacles seem great? Is that not at the core of what makes the above video inspirational? Is that not what makes Viktor Frankl such an inspiring individual?
Allowing our self to be a victim feels justified at times, but it will not and indeed can not lead us to greater freedom. Victim-hood staunches progress toward freedom and if anything, turns us from it. (See The Anatomy of Peace by the Arbinger Institute, one of this world's best books in my humble opinion.)
Truth
"The truth shall set you free," spoke the Savior. (John 8:32) I feel the above context gives some clarity in one aspect of this much-abused statement's meaning. Choosing (a use of agency) to live according to True principles will bring us greater freedom no matter our circumstances, be it a physical or mental limitation, a swath or a lack of liberties, or what have you.
With his liberty crushed, Viktor Frankl yet found the little freedom he could in the selection of his attitude. Those who did not see this Truth were thus not free to consciously choose their attitude. The more we are able to recognize and align ourselves with Truth, the more free we become.
While a statement does not imply its converse, (i.e. "the truth shall set you free" does not imply that "if you have freedom, you are living by truth"), I believe seeking freedom can help us discover Truth. That which increases our freedom in a sustainable manner is likely closer to Truth than that which does not. That which increases our freedom in an unsustainable manner is likely a deception of Truth. Again, this can not be applied as a rule, but in my opinion it can be a general guide.
The best guides to judge Truth are, of course, those given by Moroni: "I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ. . .But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil." (Moroni 7:16-17) And also "And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things." (Moroni 10:5)
The Point
So... what's the point?
Well, for you, perhaps there isn't one, and reading this has been an utter waste of time for you.
For me, creating this semantic clarity helps me see things more clearly and recognize that there may be a difference. It helps me not work myself up as easily, but invites me to see others as people more readily. It also helps me distinguish freedom as a choice that I get to make and inspires me to pursue it.
Freedom begins in the mind; as long as we have even the slightest ability to exercise agency, we can choose freedom.
What does freedom look like for you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)