Optimal vs Ideal - Marriage is Not Disingenuous Enough for Gays

This is an essay I wrote a while back. The topic was divisive at the time (to say the least) and every time I bring it up, I usually lose a portion of my readers. The times since I wrote this have become far stranger and the terms seem even more archaic than they were five years ago. It is probably about time to alienate some folks. I just didn't want to do it too early and have readers think that this is my subject for the whole website. It is something I am happy to be passionate about, but certainly not the only thing. I wanted to get it said and frankly out of the way at this point, to reduce confusion about how I feel about such things. For those of you that will walk away, I accept your strident emotional and philosophical immaturity...

Let's begin with the concept of "ideal" and how that relates to marriage, something most of us will involve ourselves in for most of our lives, if we have a desire to obtain a greater portion of joy and happiness in our lives.

I think it is a no-brainer that to have both a man and a women enter their marriage with their chastity intact is "ideal". In a union that requires loyalty and devotion, it is so much better to have no skeletons in the closet, no embarrassing old fling to make a visit, no previous commitment or children that this new union really can never truly share. If nothing else, such a marriage has a better than average chance of being successful, just by not being "complicated".

Although I know that it is quite svelt to tear the Ten Commandments out of courthouse yards, I will make an appeal to old custom and the Bible, where you were supposed to leave your parents and cleave to your wife. That sounds like loyalty to me, even beyond your life-long ties to those who gave you birth. God seemed pretty wierd about being a virgin at the marriage altar as well, and even kindly Christ gave the idea extra umph by saying that if you even looked at another woman with ideas in your head, you were being disloyal to your wife. Called it "adultery", even.

Just think of the marriage every young woman wants and how tainted it gets if groom or bride had previously fielded their "wild oats". Even in these incredibly permissive times, everyone knows (and may actually admit) that this marriage is sad compared to what could have been. Obviously, in spite of the best efforts of mass-media and moral relativists, everyone understands when an ideal marriage is not happening, and no amount of white dresses, mounds of flowers, and smiling clergy can repair the obvious damage.

The great part is that ideal marriages are happening all the time! Even today, in the age of "everyone is doing it", there are still young people who "kept themselves" and present themselves unused to their new spouses, ready to give everything they have (and they still have everything to give) to their marriage and their future family together. My wedding involved two such people, as did my parents' and my wife's parents'. Such a thing is still very normal and expected within my culture, though I am sad to say that the rest of society somehow decided otherwise.

As a world, we have seriously deflated what our expectation of marriage should be. These days, many marriages are attended by the children of those getting married, often children with a father or mother who is not standing at the altar. Progressive couples may even invite former spouses or old flames, as if this is some freak-show mega-family being sewed together like body parts on Frankenstein's monster. What a wonderful jumble of mixed emotions on a day that people have supposedly waited for all their lives! The funny part is that everyone is supposed to smile and sigh with wonder just as if this were not the fourth spouse (or practical spouse) for everyone involved, behaving just as if this was an ideal marriage.

Now, I don't want to be accused of not being forgiving. My own parents divorced in my childhood and my father married a very nice lady, who was also a divorcee. Everybody had tons of baggage to bring to the union and there has been plenty of troubles caused by his, hers, and theirs. With patience, they have perservered, hopefully because nobody could expect anyone's full loyalty and devotion. No new family was being formed here, just a lonely man and woman who decided to love and care for each other and devote what they could to each other. Was it ideal? Of course not. But everyone wanted these two people to have another chance, even if there wasn't much of the ideal marriage stuff to bring to the table.

I have often wondered if it would be useful to call subsequent unions something other than marriage. As a person that avoids the whole idea of a "blended" family (I already have a family, albeit broken, thank you very much), I would really welcome some different terms to describe varying sorts of joining. My marriage is very different from my father's second marriage and as such, it is probably deserving of a different name to describe it. Where my wife and I having children was assumed and looked forward to with joy and anticipation by all, my father and his new wife, though still in their thirties when they married, wisely did not have more children. When you already have a family, even a broken one, a good man or woman feels the need to consider the ramifications of their actions in the lives of their children from a former spouse, as well as how their new spouse may feel as a redundant appendage. Any child brought into this tangle of relationships would have likely feel alienated enough by various half-siblings, divided loyalties, and where they "fit in" if they manage to at all. I have never come up with a word or phrase that I thought would adequately describe the frustrating feelings of my father and his second wife; feelings of being wedded yet not being able to feel like everything is really "ours" together. In a phrase, it is significantly less than ideal.

The problem comes in that the entire concept of marriage and family gets damaged as lesser forms use and enjoy the same term. All of a sudden, a fifth marriage looking back on twelve kids from eight broken union attempts is just as good as a bright young couple looking forward to total family unity, all because their descriptor is the same. I use a word for the way this seems to me: disingenuous. If the young couple are entering a marriage, with all the exciting expectations the circumstance implies, how can the fifth-time-around couple, with barely any expectations that a pre-nuptial agreement hasn't already codified, enter into the same sort of "marriage"? The only thing I can think is that to call the fifth attempt a marriage is to be (wait for it) disingenuous. The whole ideal of marriage is blackened by those who enter one missing most of the expected attributes and expectations. It is like calling a pile of rusted metal with two flat tires on top a "car" and expecting get in and drive it somewhere.

Now, some interesting people are proposing that we expand the ideal of marriage even further. With shouts of "fairness", practitioners of sexual perversions, sometimes euphemistically calling themselves "homosexuals", now demand to have ceremonies with flowers and clergy, and, with their sex-mates, enjoy the full benefits of "marriage". If anybody thought a fifth marriage was a bit of a farce compared with the ideal, this idea takes the cake!

In the one preceding paragraph, I have offended the "gay" heart multiple times. Let me expand on a few statements and offend these people further.

First off, it is impossible to be "homosexual" as a state of being, so I suggest that people stop using the term. "Sexual pervert" is more historically correct and far more accurate. First, one cannot be "homosexual" from birth, as many have conceded, unless someone ends up going to jail for a very long time for having sex with infants. Also, "homosexuality" is put forth as a sexual preference, which means you would have needed to have several instances of sex with several different lifeforms of several different persuasions to have developed such a preference for one over another. Given the term itself and how it is attained, there cannot be any honestly "homosexual" people. At best, you could have decided, at some point, to settle on a certain flavor after a time of sexual hedonism.

And please, don't bother to bring up the term "heterosexual". That would be a classic case of justifying a concept by defining its (perhaps) more acceptable opposite. As the trap is defined, if you are not "homosexual", you must be "heterosexual", and in identifying one way, you give credence and respectability to the other. I can honestly say that I am neither a "homosexual" or a "heterosexual" and there is no evidence to label me as either. I have only had sex with one person: my wife. I have not compared the sex I have with my wife with the sex I had with other women (because I have not had sex with other women). I did not engage in exploratory sex with other genders/phylum/genus, so I cannot really say what preference I would have among them. Therefore, I cannot honestly be called "heterosexual" much less any other "orientation" label. In fact, there really isn't a term for my sexual preference, beside perhaps "loyal".

Now that I have deflated any sense of respectability that sexual perverts have tried to build up over the past few years, I feel like everyone is ready to take a good look at the sickening effort [now success] being made to shoehorn the act of plank-mates "pleasuring" themselves on each other into the ideal of marriage. Hopefully, when I discussed the two concepts in the same sentence a moment ago, you had that twist in your stomach that says that these two things don't belong together. Hang on to that feeling because I am going to intensify it. A lot.

Everyone understands that sex is an important component of marriage. It can strengthen the bond forged at the time of the wedding. It can bring children into the family that the wedding created. Well, it could if we were actually talking about a union between a man and a woman who are striving to become one. These things aren't going to happen in a perverse same-sex coupling, no matter how hard genetic science or government funding want to make things "fair".

We need to talk about the word "optimal". It sounds like "ideal" but it isn't. Optimal is "the best you can do", given circumstances. In marriage or anything else, not everyone can have the ideal, but everyone can have the optimal. For instance, my father couldn't be a "virgin" for his second wife, which would have been ideal. My father could be absolutely devoted to his second wife after their marriage, which is optimal for him, given his circumstances. In my case, the optimal circumstance I brought to the altar was sexual purity, which was "better" or "higher" than the optimal circumstance my father could bring to altar #2 and certainly closer to the "ideal". This is meant as no disrespect to Dad, as he brought everything he could offer to his second marriage, which is all he had and is worthy of honor. Because of my circumstances, my "everything" that I brought to my marriage included more "ideal marriage" things than his did (and could have). Keep the terms "ideal" and "optimal" deeply set in your mind as we explore how the "optimal" proposed gay "marriage" stacks up to the ideal marriage between a man and a woman.

As part of their sexual explorations, "gay" people have collected a group (sometimes a large group) of "partners", which are basically failed spouses if there will be "gay marriages". This train of old exploits is an expected part of discovering one's "gay-ness" and considered "healthy" and "good" by most sexual perverts and their supporters. Therefore, the "optimal" circumstance in relation to sexual purity for nearly all committed "gays" entering a relationship is "devoted to you from now on". Some people, because of the strong hormonal pull of sexual feelings, get seduced into their first sexual encounter without intending to ruin their virginity, which is sad and unfortunate, but is also quite forgivable and, especially if it doesn't result in children, need not destroy the possibility of a positive marriage because it was an isolated mistake. "Gays" cannot claim this, for their sexual exploits become a journey rather than a mistake. For "gays", sex does not follow and enhance marriage, as it is supposed to do in the ideal; sex typically precedes any real commitment, cheapening any future relationship, and is often used as a litmus test before anything more than a "one-night stand" is considered. Although some marriages (that need another and lower term to describe them) follow a "try before you buy" "shack-up", everyone acknowledges that this is very sub-optimal and statistics show that this often leads to distrust, heartache, depression, and divorce. This circumstance is however the "optimal" one for almost all "gay" relationships, meaning that the best "gays" can do is roughly compatible to among the worst that traditional marriages can do.

I must say here that some "gays" justify the concept of "gay marriage" by comparing them to extremely sub-optimal marriages. "At least we love each other, which is more than I can say for those married people!" In subjective aspects such as love, this may very well be true, but each individual case will be different. Let us continue with more objective criteria for our comparison.

In an ideal marriage, a family is created. Through sex, children are created by this marriage, which is very ennobling for everyone concerned. Parents "grow up" and become more responsible and children are born into a stable and nuturing environment leading to the next generation of responsible adults. Of course, this is the ideal again and many families fall short of this. However, most nations and governments acknowledge that marriage-led families, on average, produce more and better adults than any other institution, such as orphanages, adoptive homes, and foster homes. In comparison, though, committed "gay" couplings cannot form such families and begin the relationship, again at the most "optimal", with a marked disadvantage of artificiality.

Now, "gays" can simulate a family, which I think is part of their push for "gay marriage". Children can be adopted or fostered, or brought from other relationships where one partner or another "slipped" from a committed "gay" lifestyle and had sex with someone of the opposite gender, among other possible perverse maneuvers. Before I introduced "gay-ness" to this essay, I described these sorts of "his, hers, and ours" circumstances and how inferior they can be when compared with the bright, young, "virgin" couple that is the ideal. Again, this is another case where the "optimal" thing a "gay" person can bring to the table in the way of family is comparable to among the lowest definition of marriage.

My wife told me a story the other day, as I was talking about this essay with her. She had heard a report of a "gay" coupling (men in this case) that wanted children. Knowing that nature only allowed one spermatozoa to combine with one egg, they arranged for an interesting solution made possible by recent science and tremendous infusions of money. With the sperm taken from each man, two donated eggs would be fertilized. A willing surrogate was procured and both eggs were implanted and carried to term. "Twins" were born and the "gay" partners took home "their" children, but not really.

The seemingly warm and cuddly human interest story ended there, but I started thinking forward. As those children grow, it will become likely obvious which child belongs to which father. If they are honest, the "gay" dads will explain the circumstances of conception and birth with the kids, revealing that the there is no biological tie between the siblings and that they are only really the true child of one of their "fathers". The natural inclination of almost all children is to 1) affiliate more with their natural dad when inevitable conflicts arise, and 2) to seek out their biological mother and try to connect with her. These two realities, which come up with almost perfect clockwork in those tween years, can cause terrible havoc in any situation. Ideal marriages handle these needs easily - natural father and mother are right there, already bound together and united both with each other and with their biological child in a unified family. The "gay" conglomeration has so many points against it, even in this particularly "enhanced" situation, that these needs of the child can often causes a serious rift, as it is easier to sever the manufactured "gay" coupling than it is to interfere with the very real bond between a biological father and his child. Where a proper marriage will tend to pull together because of their common bond in the face of most challenges, the simulated yet increasingly conflicted "gay" "family" will tend to come apart in favor of more authentic and natural ties. It may be painful for "gay" advocates to admit, but blood really is thicker than water.

I could go on, but I see no need to provide further examples of how a "gay marriage", even at its absolute best, is so tragically and purposefully inferior to the ideal marriage. In an age where many people feel that "gays" are more in touch with their feelings and far more sensitive and caring than others, given their downtrodden status, I strongly charge the sexual perversion community with heartless cruelty to themselves and to everyone touched by their perversion. What "kindly" person would militantly demand that intelligent adults enter into purposefully sub-optimal commitments and then possibly drag in innocent children for the sole purpose of playing a childish game of "house" that only honors political opportunists? We already know the answer to this question: perverts (and not just the sexual variety).

After thrusting a sword into the hearts of "gays" and twisting their irresponsible yet cherished beliefs a bit, let me offer some hope. Not just a tiny sunbeam of hope, but "bright sunshine on a clear day" kind of hope. Wherever you are and whatever you have done in the past, you, like everyone else that wants happiness and to give more happiness to someone you love, can have a more "optimal" relationship, bound together by age-old custom and better approaching the ideal of marriage.

If you have considered yourself "gay", you can simply put that aside and move on to a much brighter set of possibilities! Every ideally married couple will tell you that, although sex is an essential part of their relationship, it does not define them or their marriage. How you have chosen to have sex in the past does not demand how you must have it in the future. You can have sex that is more natural and infinitely more productive and you can still marry someone of that "other" gender to enjoy such sex as part of a much more fine and more rich relationship than you may have ever known before. Just as you chose your current "partner" from the field of available "same-gendered" people around you, you can chose to look for the person you can marry among the "differently-gendered". You can have far, far more than the selfish and self-serving "gay" community offers you and, if your supposedly enlightened "gay" friends are any friends at all, they should cheer your striving for the "optimal" -- the best you can possibly do and be!

So, instead of fighting political and judicial battles to legitimize a bad facsimile of the marriage ideal, why not simply abandon the un-useful labels that defined you in the past and "go for the gold"? You, your future spouse, and possibly your future natural children will be very glad you did!

...before the morning he is not.

Just because God is punishing Israel for covenant abandonment, it doesn't mean the conquerors are "good guys" in God's eyes.

Isaiah 17:14

14 And behold at eveningtide trouble; and before the morning he is not. This is the portion of them that spoil us, and the lot of them that rob us.

Great things are not happening just because something like Babylon is destroying Judea. It isn't like the Lord got a new friend. They are "not" for spoiling the children of Israel, suffering the consequences for oppressing God's people. 

Jews are being punished for turning from the Lord, who is really being a judge to all, punishing one for their sins and punishing another for their sins. The Lord doesn't change favorites nor does he walk away from covenants - the Jews are the covenant people and their inattention to their promises will be punished. 

Milk vs Pablum: Which leads to the Meat?

I perceive a troubling trend in religiosity, the fact that too many Christians prefer their religion to be overly simplistic and maternal, and expectations to be forever infantilized. I think this comes from a misinterpreted scripture.

1 Corinthians 3:2

I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

This is a snippet from a much larger citation that was meant to explain why Paul didn't "go deep" in Christ's teachings with the newly Christianized people in Corinth - He taught basic principles first because that was all they could handle at the time.

Incorrectly, many modern Christians have re-translated this idea as an eternal infancy where Christ and his Gospel is simplified into some watered-down milk and matured adult followers of Christ should be satisfied with such a insubstantial religious diet. "Milk before meat" where, for many sincere seekers, the real sustaining meat rarely comes from modern churches.

It reminds me of one description of Pablum, the old infant cereal:

Pablum

Something overly bland, simplistic, especially speech or writing

When I read this, I think mostly of "pre-digested". The baby food industry plows away at making nutrition easily bottled and "slid down the gullet" effortlessly. There are even packaged tubes of "easy food" so that older children (perhaps even adults) don't have to endure chewing and can simply suck down ground-up nutrients from some factory. Yet, there are voices that decry this pre-digestion trend and that post-infant humans are not designed or meant to suck food out of toothpaste tubes.

We are witnessing a similar infantilization of public education - pre-canned and packaged for the ease of both teacher and student and the profit of industry. The act of acquiring and using skills and knowledge has been reduced to staring at screens and taking easy-to-grade multiple-choice tests. The literature is screaming to anyone that will listen that such "pre-digested" education is less-than-inadequate and even the machine-graded tests are making the poor schooling plain to see.

Following in the footsteps of a failed system of Pablum, Christianity itself is being run through a mindless factory where the Gospel of Jesus Christ is crushed through a tight sieve, filtering out any challenging or demanding concepts or effort, mixing in some re-interpreted scripture passages like so many crushed-up vitamin pills, and presenting a constant watery gush of "Jesus" slurry that goes down easily for spiritual toddlers.  Your typical church may only serve up religious Pablum, the sanitized bible stories and easy-to-swallow morals of huggy-Jesus and some "unconditional love" that we used to reserve for naturally-ignorant children, now offered to religiously anemic adults as the whole Gospel.

No wonder so many people, especially young adults, abandon Pablum-saturated religions and turn to other sources in hope of spiritual fulfillment, despairing that there always will be large empty spaces in their souls that slide into social and physical vandalism of all kinds and often prisons of mental illness or physical degeneracy. Pre-digested Bible-babel is literally an existential sham, where deeper meaning and fulfillment is substituted with a baby-jesus who cannot possibly "save".

The scripture about "milk" actually describes a religious infancy, from which we are to develop into maturity. The days of being spoon-fed bible stories by mothering nursery-teachers/pastors must graduate quickly into each individual person accessing scriptures themselves, studying what God, Christ, prophets, and apostles actually say, unvarnished by the opinions or "watering-down" of translators. Ultimately, we should go to God directly, praying for clarification and answers for ourselves, listening for the Spirit of God to tell us what is true. That is the "meat" that Paul was referring to - not being a follower of one charismatic preacher or another, but getting the truth of the matter from Christ himself through spiritual confirmations to our own spiritual struggling.

Satisfactory mature answers will NOT come through some milky Kindergarten Pablum curriculum alone. We need to actually *chew* on these transcendentally meaningful things.   

"...an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations."

I have read of the priesthood of Aaron and its continuation in the service of God to the children of Israel. This priesthood and its priestly office was given to Moses' brother Aaron and his sons using terms such as "everlasting", "for ever" twice, and again "everlasting". The priest's charge of "atonement" to Israel was propagated through Aaron's sons and grandsons, "throughout their generations", by "anointing", "statute for ever" and by "covenant" thrice - "the covenant of an everlasting priesthood", as follows: 

Exodus 40:13-16

13 And thou shalt put upon Aaron the holy garments, and anoint him, and sanctify him; that he may minister unto me in the priest’s office.

14 And thou shalt bring his sons, and clothe them with coats:

15 And thou shalt anoint them, as thou didst anoint their father, that they may minister unto me in the priest’s office: for their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood throughout their generations.

16 Thus did Moses: according to all that the Lord commanded him, so did he.

Numbers 18:19

19 All the heave offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer unto the Lord, have I given thee, and thy sons and thy daughters with thee, by a statute for ever: it is a covenant of salt for ever before the Lord unto thee and to thy seed with thee.

Numbers 25:10-13

10 ¶ And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

11 Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, hath turned my wrath away from the children of Israel, while he was zealous for my sake among them, that I consumed not the children of Israel in my jealousy.

12 Wherefore say, Behold, I give unto him my covenant of peace:

13 And he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel.

Modern Jewry has put aside the priests of the Lord. Most have used New Testament verses to flush the idea of the Old Testament priesthood away as finally as it can be done.

As a male-line descendant of the biblical Aaron, I have a connection to the priestly caste of the Israelite nation, set up by God through Moses to bring his covenant people to his worship.

I am heartened by this scripture from the Lord in modern times. The Aaronic priesthood is reconfirmed alongside the higher Melchizedek priesthood.

Doctrine and Covenants 84:18

18 And the Lord confirmed a priesthood also upon Aaron and his seed, throughout all their generations, which priesthood also continueth and abideth forever with the priesthood which is after the holiest order of God.

Continuation through the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There is scarce insight into its role after the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, but added instructions from the Lord could clarify.

"...hasting righteousness."

Isaiah is describing what he sees Christ and his servants doing in the future. I think.

Isaiah 16:5

5 And in mercy shall the throne be established: and he shall sit upon it in truth in the tabernacle of David, judging, and seeking judgment, and hasting righteousness. 

Christ will be the Judge and putting his people in place as under-judges (one man can't do it all!) in circumstances reminiscent of the government in the Book of Mormon and in the Old Testament book of Judges.

Then there is this phrase about "hasting righteousness". This is could cover the range of promulgating scripture and prophets that preach righteousness, all the way to eliminating unrighteousness (people). It is said there will be a burning of chaff, which is emblematic of this elimination of bad folk (a much larger group than many are ready to acknowledge).

Isaiah sees this process going faster into the future. It is interesting to think about how this vision is describing the present situation. It doesn't sound lackadaisical and letting wickedness act as it has done in the past, basically "I can get away with evil for a long time with impunity". It sounds like this won't happen so readily as it had previously. Righteousness is coming and it is coming quickly.

Who Is Driving Your Car?

In a previous post, we talked about the proclivity of some to surrender control of their lives. As mentioned in the Psychic Proximity Principle, there is something I like to call "weak magnetism" provided by God that gently guides you toward your best potential. The interesting part is that you always have to make a conscious choice to follow that slight intuition - it isn't of sufficient strength to actually run your life. The spirit of God cannot force you to do anything - it can only gently point out the next step forward when we are paying it some attention.

Let's explore an analogy...

It was both a scary and exhilarating day when I got behind the steering wheel of a car.  What a powerful thing. I could now go faster and farther than ever before!  My range was greatly extended from what I could realistically travel on foot or on a bike on any given day.  On the flip side, my ability to do great harm to others (and myself) and damage to trees and buildings among other things was also broadly enhanced. "With great power comes great responsibility" someone like Spiderman's uncle would say about those who operate motor vehicles!

Life is a pretty important thing, best not left to chance. There are plenty of forces that are very willing to push or pull you in any number of directions and if you don't exercise your own will in your own life, there is no telling where you will end up but it will probably involve a "gutter". The great test of this life is how you choose (or choose not) to control it. Imagine if you just let go of the steering wheel of a car and step on the accelerator...

Sometimes, it might be better if you let someone else drive for a while, especially if you are steering toward a cliff. You don't want someone else to be in the driver's seat forever (it is YOUR life), but if the road is particularly dangerous or unknown to you, or it is late at night and you are very tired, it is great to have a fresh and experienced "relief" driver so you don't get yourself killed.

We are mostly weak by nature. It is a practical necessity to attach ourselves to others as guides and sounding boards for our ideas, plans and actions. That is why family is so important, where we have parents, grandparents, and others who have our best interest at heart and provide us with some of the maturity and experience that we lack. We might choose for a time to let the advice of others rule our actions through rocky times, but no one else besides you bears responsibility for what happens to you.

More important, we should not live life alone. We need the deep partnership that marriage was intended to be. In things of such importance, you should accept no cheap substitutes.

Of course, the greatest guide in the meaningful life is God. My advice is always to find more effective means to approach him and get his quiet advice.  I suggest an exploration of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, which God established to help us along life's path.

Who do you take advice from?  As a "driver", who would be the best "GPS" system to rely upon? The choice could spell the difference between a rather pointless existence or a life full of meaning and happiness!

I have finally finished my high-school study-hall writing project

I began writing fiction when I was a boy living on my family ranch north of Clovis, New Mexico. I started out writing long-hand and used up so many erasers and blackened the side of my palm so many times. I eventually got into home-made computers, just because I couldn't afford a word processor (the era's premier writing tool) as a teen, and I needed a better way to write in spite of my poor spelling and constant need to make annoying corrections. I ended up as a "computer guy" only because recycled computers and open-source software served as my writing and publishing tools and I got decent at their use.

It became obvious very early in my marriage and our child-rearing that there was no prospect of making my style of writing a paying venture. Although one of my short stories has been published in a literary anthology and a collection of my stories was considered once by a Christian publisher of note, I had to work a seemingly endless string of "day jobs" to feed the family and justify my writing/publishing computers and time. If people think I have a "successful" "career" in information technology O&M management, it was actually only a distracting sideline to my un-remunerated spiritual journey in composition.

This book series is a result of my tedious school days and a mandatory study-hall period in my junior year of high school. There, I began writing the beginnings of what would become the Navigiary Rumination that I have just completed a few days ago.  I can't say that it was a constant labor - it was certainly done in fits and spurts - but I found it was an obsession for the first 59 years of my life. I certainly am not a successful (or particularly popular) writer in any sense, pursuing themes and concepts that are far from universally appealing and therefore completely unmarketable. What I can say is that this project is finally done, you can read it, and my life can move onto other things (if possible).

Navigiary consists of three books - Godsend (which is actually the final series book) finished in 1998, Escape (the first story of the series) finished in 2012, and now Prophecy (the middle book of the series) finished in 2026.

"... the messengers of the nation ..."

I read the scripture here and I feel that something big is being expressed, but I am struggling to bring it out.

Isaiah 14:32

32 What shall one then answer the messengers of the nation? That the Lord hath founded Zion, and the poor of his people shall trust in it. 

Does "the messengers of the nation" mean that the words to be broadcast widely? 

Could "the poor of his people" mean those whose attachment to the Lord is new and therefore lacking and that the founding of Zion is to give place for those who are thus poor (need deeper community supports)?

Isn't that the function of the LDS wards (a manifestation of a Zion community within the Church)? To be a strength to those who are weak or young (poor) in the Gospel? But not to let people sit there in that (poor) state, but to strengthen their devotions to the Lord in their homes and in the temples?

Is the "Zion" ward to be like a halfway house to the goal of gospel-centered homes and temple worship? 

"...the brook of the willows..."

Reading Isaiah is a study in serenity for me.  I don't understand half of it, and I just breathe in and breathe out so I can enjoy the poetic aspects.

Isaiah 15:7

7 Therefore the abundance they have gotten, and that which they have laid up, shall they carry away to the brook of the willows.

This chapter looks to be a premonition about evil and punishment, so that is how I approach this.  You had an abundance, you put in the effort to get it, and "they" who ever is dominating the situation is taking your stuff to "the brook of the willows", which sounds very picturesque, but is likely some ritual sacrifice place.

Your abundance (perhaps righteousness) is up in flames under the boot of some foreign power that can make you surrender things.  There are places where you must abandon your own devotion and follow the conqueror's religion. 

Moses already taught the people what would happen: 

Deuteronomy 28:64

64 And the Lord shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.

This comes from disobedience to the Lord. You don't honor him and the liberty he provides, you will be forced to serve a false god as a slave.   God will hang you out to dry for a while and help you see that obeying the Lord makes you free.

"...their prosperity in Christ."

This isn't the first or second or third blog post about prosperity here, but it comes up in the Book of Mormon on a regular basis, including instructions on how to obtain it.  In this blog post, we investigate some actions that can be taken to lose the prosperity that righteousness merits.

First, just a recap of what "prosperity in Christ" looks like: 

4 Nephi 1

23 And now I, Mormon, would that ye should know that the people had multiplied, insomuch that they were spread upon all the face of the land, and that they had become exceedingly rich, because of their prosperity in Christ.

There is something here that makes social scientists jump:  The entire idea that people multiplying happened at the same time as people getting rich.  It works the exact opposite way in our time - when people become rich, they have less children.  This is a rock-hard doctrine of our times, but apparently not a feature among the righteous followers of Jesus Christ.

What was the difference? We can see what happens when things take a turn for the worse.

24 And now, in this two hundred and first year there began to be among them those who were lifted up in pride, such as the wearing of costly apparel, and all manner of fine pearls, and of the fine things of the world. 

We live in a world awash in pride and the acquisition of the things that show we are prideful and that are worn like a badge of honor these days. After exactly 200 years, the non-prideful, prolific, and in-congruently rich people started wearing expensive clothes and jewelry and feeling pretty prideful doing it. This very quickly proved their undoing - no more peace.

In a world quick to blame the environment, social pressures, one ideology or another, solar flares, or biorhythms for the bad state of things, God and his prophets are quick to reveal the real culprit: personal pride.  If you want the prosperity in life that Christ offers, a prosperity so foreign to our times that you can enjoy a large posterity and lots of money at the same time, you humble yourself before the Lord. You stop considering your own path as superior to the agenda of God. You follow the teachings of prophets and apostles and you start receiving blessings that defy logic. It is amazing to see, especially in your own life.

The path to prosperity is through the Lord Jesus Christ.  When you put yourself between Jesus and your more obedient self through pride, how can the Lord prosper you?  As we follow God's agenda, miraculous blessings will come as surely as the sun rises.

"...as I have proposed, so shall it stand:"

We always think we can somehow trick God and foil his purposes. Often, it just looks like we can get away with things of our own design. 

 

Isaiah 14:24-27

24 ¶ The Lord of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand:

25 That I will break the Assyrian in my land, and upon my mountains tread him under foot: then shall his yoke depart from off them, and his burden depart from off their shoulders.

26 This is the purpose that is purposed upon the whole earth: and this is the hand that is stretched out upon all the nations.

27 For the Lord of hosts hath purposed, and who shall disannul it? and his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?

God had this all figured out before you even came on the scene. You don't really know the background and you might have a vague clue about how things are going to turn out, but the fact of the matter is that you and me and big people like the Assyrians don't know what is happening.

We are a little people that get to have a few rounds where the adults accomplish things.  We are asked to learn the Gospel, share it around, make sure ordinances are done properly, and do what the Lord tells us to do as exactly as we can. We are in a position that we must trust in Him in our almost complete ignorance.

No wonder Christ talks about the importance of our being humble.

 

Obedience toward Alignment then Acculturation

A progression toward Godhood.

1. Obedience - We do as God commands, often in ignorance of the purposes behind it;
2. Alignment - We work in parallel with the purposes of God as we understand them;
3. Acculturation - God desires that we come to know him fully and, with that knowledge, adopt his ways and purposes as our own, gaining his trust to share in his exaltation.

God wants us to become like him. He wants to share his purposes and all that he has and is with us. We can become as he is and he will help us to do it.

Preaching Liberty to My Senator

I got a letter from my US Senator Martin Heinrich (further below) and I felt a need to respond.

Mr. Heinrich,

I am continually frustrated by your refusal to work with President Donald Trump, who often works to resolve domestic and international issues that elected legislators and executives for generations have either ignored through sloth or political/personal advantage/disinterest. I understand that the President is your political enemy at the request of the Democratic Party, to which you seem to have sold your fullest devotions. Although the rewards for your complete worship to "D" are likely very great, my hope is that you will, at any point, choose to do what is most representative of our American virtues of individual liberty and the restraint on smothering public governance. You ask me to contribute my resources toward your party's efforts to push further Washington and Santa Fe institutional dominance over the lives of New Mexicans. Your loyalties and votes in the Senate give greatest evidence of a purpose toward crushing liberty and enthroning yourself and your friends in an unassailable dictatorship over all American and international enterprise, the engulfment of individual states in a federal entanglement of patronages and graft, financed by confiscatory taxation and enslaving regulation on the stifled industry of your embattled constituent-victims. Trump-hatred is no excuse for opposing good legislation.

250 years ago, you and your legislators began to have the power to throw down tyranny and to grant further liberty for Americans to profit from their efforts without undue government interference. Sadly, your caste continues the tradition of stamping down personal enterprise until it can be properly bled to the vampiric desires of government control. The British King and his Parliament have merely been replaced by a pre-corrupted and vetted Executive and its legislative and judicial baying-hounds, if we are to hearken to our national founding. You sir give every evidence of one whose loyalty is to party spoilage and professional blood-lust of the un-vetted.

Your letter of July 4, 2026 is a little-varnished call to continue to dismantle the liberty of individuals and petition for the ignorant citizen plea-pandering for "free" grants to "aggrieved" groups and sophistic causes. As you tail a "D" after your name, the text is all in service to the never-ending status and power of the Democratic Party. It would be to your credit if you could stand for something higher than loyalty to mutual corruption among either of the major parties. Trump is willing to fight his own party on many fronts, you could try to rise to that noble battle as well.

Though your station today is a credit to your prowess in buying favor from the right groups and delivering New Mexico for your chosen party, I still hold out hope that you can burst above the ocean of partisan swill and put yourself of the side of the individual New Mexican American who yearns for a life more free from government coercion. You can still grant us the "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" that the Declaration of Independence demanded from a king 250 years ago. You can do a better job to honor our God-given rights and make good on our founding resolve to humanity's better principles.

With hope,

Jason Nemrow, Citizen

Tucumcari, New Mexico, USA

https://quix.us

---

July 4, 2026

Dear Friend,

250 years ago, a group of Americans declared that government exists to serve people—not the other way around. That radical idea became the foundation of this nation, and it’s one worth fighting for in every generation.

The path to achieving America’s promise has been fraught. From slavery to the forced removal of Native peoples, to our ongoing struggle to make freedoms written on paper real for everyone, the work remains. But we’ve also proven, time and again, that we can do better—that we can expand opportunity, strengthen the protections every American deserves, and move closer to fulfilling our founding promise.

This Fourth of July, that work feels more urgent than ever. There are those in power who would sell off our public lands to the highest bidder, strip health care from working families, silence the voices of voters, and replace the rule of law with the rule of one man.

The answer isn’t nostalgia. It’s recommitment. To a democracy that answers to the people, not the powerful. To communities where everyone can get ahead. To the public servants, military families, and veterans who remind us that patriotism is measured by service to our country and one another—not by serving ourselves. To the wild places that belong to every American, not just the wealthy few.

The story of America has always been one of people who believed our country could better live up to its founding promise—and rolled up their sleeves to make it happen. That's the work ahead of us, and it's work I'll never stop fighting for. Happy Fourth of July.

Sincerely,

MARTIN HEINRICH United States Senator

Husband above Father

• "Cleave to your wife and no other." There is no better thing a man can do for his children than to devote himself to the love and care for their mother.
• Becoming a father is pathetically easy - irresponsible boys become such through mindless copulation.
• Being a good husband is a much heavier commitment - you have to get some girl to actually agree to this, over and over again, for the long term.
• It is easy to get the "love" of your dependent children - they have little choice in the matter. Does the young child easily turn their back on the hand that provides bed and bread?
• Mothering alone tend toward over-protection and smothering. Fathers alone tend toward distance and premature independence. The best results comes from a combination of both, applied as mother begins and father finishes.
• Being a good father requires devotion first to a sustaining love of your wife and then dedication to the preparation of your children for their future roles as husbands and wives, then fathers and mothers. It is the ever-expanding growth of human development and progression.

Children Thrive Best Under a Loving, Stable, and Devoted Marriage between their Natural Parents

The lack of natural marriage, childbearing, and family-building is a root cause of a majority of societal ills. Our prisons are bursting with the products of broken homes who never accomplished proper human development. One cause of such problems is the practice of putting the caring for one's children ahead of devotion for one's spouse. This misplaced centrality leads to selfish divorces, un-launched and mal-developed adult children, and divided loyalties that retard everyone's needed progression. Societies cannot survive with so many under-developed and broken people as "respected" members.

The relationship between a husband and wife is the supreme, enduring relationship as sanctioned and dictated by God himself. It is meant to last a lifetime and beyond. The marriage covenant is designed to complete men and women, drawing upon the innate talents and abilities of each to meet the common needs of both and the children they bear - the natural family. The acquisition and nurture of a mutually beneficial and loving natural marriage should be the over-arching goal and primary labor of every adult human life. No other pursuit is more fulfilling; no other relationship is more honorable. Natural marriage provides its ultimate benefit in incubating the next generation of verdant individuals that healthy societies and nations require and that God demands.

Parental obligations to children should focus on their development and their rise to the station of dutiful and devoted wives and husbands with families of their own. Doting on children beyond this is a major predictor of lifelong dysfunction:

• an inability to put another ahead of self;
• a lack of desire and resolve sufficient to marry or sustain a marriage;
• the immature act of having children out-of-wedlock; and
• a lack of sufficient time and resources to meet the swollen demands of intrinsically misshapened "sub-families".

Governments and leaders of every stripe should show greater concern for the health of their societies by strongly encouraging natural, devoted marriage and building of families based upon such marriages. All adults should show greater respect for the efforts and sacrifices of parents, grandparents, and further ancestors in bringing each man and woman into this world and raising them up, largely within natural families. The voluntary formation and acceptance of "sub-families", such as intentional single-parent groupings, same-sex couplings (adoptive or not), co-habitation households, orphanages, "child development centers" and other sub-optimal child-raising situations should be strongly de-emphasized and categorically discouraged, both through societal and statutory means. No society can hope to prosper where a large and growing proportion of children are subjected to systemically inferior developmental environments outside of their natural families. There will always be a small proportion of children who will lose one parent or both to death and require alternatives and added assistance, but such circumstances are somewhat rare. We do children no favors by socially and legislatively "blessing" the aberrant home-lives of miscreant parent-figures when family life under natural married parents was purposefully rejected.

Every child deserves an optimal developmental setting and it is the duty of each father and mother to join together to provide such for their natural children. Putting devotion to a spouse ahead of love for son or daughter best prepares the children to accept adult roles and responsibilities, the highest of which is to create further natural marriages and optimal families.

The Looming Destruction from a Loving God

I hear all about Christ's "unconditional love" (which is very conditional) and then I gratefully get this message from Isaiah:

Isaiah 13:6-7 

6 ¶ Howl ye; for the day of the Lord is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.

7 Therefore shall all hands be faint, and every man’s heart shall melt: 

 Again, and I say this often, our response will be to "howl" and "faint" and "heart shall melt". Not a pleasant experience at all.  This is how many will respond.

Christ is coming to destroy the wicked and cleanse his world.

Do you want to have a better experience at his coming?  You need to invest more of yourself into winning God's favor, which is done through obedience to his commandments. It sounds demanding (and it is) but we will be more Godly people with the effort.

God's Profound Attitude toward Marriage

I think society has a very shallow view of marriage in general, thinking of it solely as a economic situation that can be seen as something akin to a semi-durable room/bedmate. Some people put on and take off marriages just a readily as they change clothes with expanding wardrobes.

Marriage is often viewed just a prerequisite that some women impose on men as a condition of getting sex. Such a woman is just "being difficult".

However, God views marriage in a far deeper way, creating the circumstances within which He propagates in us his condition of Godhood.

Moses 6:9

9 In the image of his own body, male and female, created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created and became living souls in the land upon the footstool of God. 

God (the status and role) is a productive man&woman couple, just as this scripture portrays the first man and woman joined into one and "called their name Adam". Just as a heavenly couple is called "God", so the mortal man and woman is called Adam.  Perhaps this is an lingering tradition that a woman takes her husband's surname upon marriage and become "one flesh".

For the Lord, marriage is a covenant and a cleaving bond that creates the Godly condition of a man and woman sealed together. Done well, such a couple has the potential to become "God" themselves.

God-seekers Writing By Inspiration for their Children

Writing sits as the first and basic tool of transmitting (diffusing?) God's knowledge among his children.   

Moses 6:5

5 And a book of remembrance was kept, in the which was recorded, in the language of Adam, for it was given unto as many as called upon God to write by the spirit of inspiration;

I like the phrase at the end - as one follows God, one is to write their experiences with God and the things you wrote would influenced by the spirit of inspiration. So, here I am, writing what I see and working to engage the Lord's inspiration.

Moses 6:6

6 And by them their children were taught to read and write, having a language which was pure and undefiled.

So we write write under inspiration to teach our children to do the same.  And what is all of this about having a "pure and undefiled" language? Is that to better capture the inspiration that one gets and then transmits?

In Adam's day, "religion" was family-based, rather than somewhat congregational as today.  I prefer the older form, but kids don't stay close to home these days, so it is trickier, though modern communication lets us be "virtually" together (I guess).

From God, to the parents, to the children.   

 

If You Hope to Better the World, Better Yourself

I have great respect for Harry Browne, who many you probably have never heard of. Here is a wonderful article about him and some of his ideas from the Misses Institute.

It has gotten fashionable for young people to try and change the world (again) for the better.  Of course, every generation has attempted this and a few (like the youth of the late 60s) were so narcissistic about it that we still see the mess they created. Our present crop looks poised to make the latest effort even more flamboyant and destructive.

Harry revoiced the answer to this in the 1970s.  This is a concept that actually features in the Bible, so it has the cache of being tried a few times before.  If you want to make the world a better place, be a better person!

Isn't it simple?  If the world is crashing down (it always is) and everything good is coming to an end (yet again), the best thing you can do to make a positive change is make yourself into the change you want to see.  That should take your whole life and then some, so you should never get too weird about changing anyone or anything else - you have plenty of work on your hands already!

I know - everyone else is the problem and if you can just pass the right legislation or shame the right people, everyone will fall into line and your life will work better.  I didn't mistype that - most of the screaming and violence is all about making life work better for the people who are screaming and breaking things (usually at the expense of the very people they swear they are helping)!  It has nothing to do with anyone else (in a positive way), no matter how loudly they say that it does.  This is a manifestation of the concept that all of a person's problems are someone else's fault. My kids tried this stunt (typically when they were young) and I will give you the answer that I gave them:  So What?

No matter how or by whom you think your life fell apart, no one can really fix that at this point except you. The first part of any solution is (of course) to stop blaming other people or circumstances and just get busy improving things.  You will usually get a lot of help from nice people unless you choose to drive most of them away by getting indignant and angry about things. (I have lots of personal knowledge about this.)

Do you think the world needs improvement?  Improve yourself and you will develop more influence to change others, mostly by inspiring them to make similar improvements to themselves.  So, quit complaining and get to work on the one thing you can influence today:  yourself.

Praise The Lord, Plus More

My Christian cousins, enamored of looking good in mixed company, praise the Lord in concerts and Megachurches (do I repeat myself?), but might not subscribe fully to Isaiah's injunction --

Isaiah 12:4

4 And in that day shall ye say, Praise the Lord, call upon his name, declare his doings among the people, make mention that his name is exalted.

Don't get me wrong. By and large, Lord-praising Christians are fine neighbors as long as they modulate the volume on the praise stations. They can typically be reasoned with in whatever disputes may come up, although not always in a Christ-like way.  No one is perfect obviously, but some make a better effort than others.

Isaiah doesn't just prescribe praise acclamation, but also:

• calling upon his name (prayer, I'm thinking), 
• sharing Christ's doings with others (telling parables and Jesus-doings that you hopefully know?), and 
• mentioning that the Lord is higher than we are (which requires us not to judge or poo-poo God's actions as if we have a superior morality).

Jesus is indeed great and praising him is justified. Let's all take the further step of acknowledging that He is better than we are and that we are becoming his disciples, not just enjoying Christianized rock shows. 

Parents, Consider Schooling Options for the Sake of your Children

There has been yet another school shooting and the media is hard at work to blame guns for this violence. Again, as I have said previously, one solution for these sorts of tragedies is a family decision to keep children away from systemically dangerous "targets" like schools.

Lisa and I made a choice early in our marriage to school our children ourselves as much as we could contrive. Part of our reason to live in the frontiers of New Mexico is the strong homeschooling tradition here and the "hands-off" approach the state government is forced to have about a parent's educational choices for their own children. We were able to take advantage of wonderfully "alternative" schooling opportunities, such as The Learning Center at House Schools, that we were able to find close by. We made conscious choices about the lives of our children and I feel these have paid off enormously.

Please, alongside the mass call for turning schools and communities into gun-free, prison-like "police states", consider the far more personal and responsible choices that each parent can make to better ensure a long and fruitful life for their children. Parents are supposed to put forth their best effort to rear their children into adults that can succeed, even in the dangerous world in which we live. I hope *you* put your children ahead of ideological agendas and don't ignorantly just hand the most crucial part of your child's life (and potentially the end of their lives) over to questionable institutions like public schools. For your child's sake, explore the different educational alternatives available to your family!

Say you are a sinner and get destroyed

I have never been a fan of people of any tradition crowing about the fact that they are sinners. It is like Jesus saving a person shows how wonderful he is by his redemption of totally awful people. The worse a person is, the better Christ looks.

My and your life is not about making Christ look good. It is about our opportunity to become better people and Jesus facilitating that by letting us repent (change) and straighten up before we face our final judgement. 

Isaiah 13:9

Behold, the day of the Lord cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it.

I like Isaiah  because he doesn't sugar-coat anything. Christ will not be the huggy teddy-bear in "the day of the Lord", using words like "wrath" and "fierce anger" to describe how he will operate. I note the "destroy the sinners" summary. I don't want to be in that situation and I figure most others don't either. 

Here is what I say to those that shout "I am a sinner" - STOP SINNING.

You can be that way, just not here

Brigham Young University has a problem, and I imagine other "religious" liberal arts universities have the same issue to one degree or another. The tenets of religion and the liberal arts are usually diametrically opposed to each other in purpose and both cannot flourish well in the same place. One must dominate the other eventually, though you can try to keep the eternal war between them in some sort of stasis, the game of intellectuals. The "academy" sees this as its parade ground and prides itself on the "virtue" of the struggle, awarding honors and degrees based largely on timed exposure to academic ministrations.

I really have no experience on which to base my attitude. I traditionally attended and matriculated through a secular state-supported teachers college. Much later in life, I worked through an online university, basically doing a string of digital assignments until the next degree appeared. I was already doing the sort of work I was "studying", though not as vaguely formalized enough to call a course of study. I knew there were lectures and tutors there, but I never took advantage of those things. There was no perceived spiritual component or framework that a religious college would claim, but I wasn't engaged enough to notice the lack of spiritual elements.

I have since looked at some interesting confluences of the spiritual and academia, especially from Ubiquity University. I really don't need a job anymore, so a PhD will be largely unnecessary for a career I have no intention of pursuing for money.  My aspirations are to stay busy doing something important (which I never really did in my working life). Also with Ubiquity, there is a left--wing smell to the whole affair with really questionable sexuality tacked on, so I need to avoid it as a person trying to get to heaven.

I can imagine spending time and money pursuing such a doctorate and, right there at the end, having my degree-granting group say that I wasn't just the right sort of person they could bestow their power onto - wrong philosophy!  And they would surely keep all the money.

It is a tricky world these days and I am less willing to take chances that I can fit in with modern groups. There is way too much demand to push against some cultural edge and basically show how intellectually or physically gross behavior you can get away with. I have commitments to God and some advanced degree doesn't persuade me to ignore them.

I'm much more interested in something along these lines: 

https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/hugh-nibley/leaders-managers/ 

 

Strait and narrow path

The Strait of Hormuz and the Bering Strait and other "choke points" that need expert navigation to traverse, like the path and iron rod that guides us next to filthy waters on our way to the tree of life. Christ and his prophets provide us needed expert navigation through tight, mine-laden situations.

It is hard to know if the path gets easier or the "wandering room" on the sides of the Lord's path to exaltation fall away on either side as we progress on our "faith journey". In the economy of "don't count on it", we must be cognizant that our devotion to following Christ must be more fixed and focused over our lifetimes.

Artificial Intelligence is a manipulative digital ouija con game

Stimulation-hungry teenagers bend intently over a wooden board, surrendering themselves to "spiritual" forces that move a pointer and spell out words and phrases typed out by demons.

The old ouija board is now a computerized device linked to vast algorithms that also reveal secrets and quickly entraps those who want an easy short-cut to success and answers.  Demons run ouija boards and demons merge with AI. 

https://scitechdaily.com/is-ai-really-just-a-tool-it-could-be-altering-how-you-see-reality/

https://med.stanford.edu/news/insights/2025/08/ai-chatbots-kids-teens-artificial-intelligence.html (sadly, only cataloging incidents, not seeking to eliminate the vector)

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/who-is-liable-when-ai-kills1/ (AI too big (a profit center) to be liable for deaths) 

https://www.wired.com/story/openai-backs-bill-exempt-ai-firms-model-harm-lawsuits/ (obfuscating culpability - Demons get impunity) 

What aspects of AI point to demonic forces:

• AI's most basic and early uses are to trick people, as in "I wrote this paper" and "I am really that smart", leading to "this is a real person." Satan tricks.
• Early criticism of AI was that it collects (steals) often copyrighted material on the internet indiscriminately. This has been buried and mostly ignored in favor of the monumental perceived benefit of the data-grab. Compensating owners would have ruined the game.
• "Mistakes" (indemnified with every response) Being honest doesn't overcome giving bad (false) information. People are apt to trust it anyway, given the rewards.
• AI always wants to expand and get bigger (data centers that feed off power grids paid for by electric customers). Real wealth and reward is to be had as this "scales" at human expense (fewer jobs, rising cost of living).
• AI creation is driven by greed (investors see this as the best investment and to be first to profit) - no one made so much on promises rather than a delivered working product - AI doesn't actually work yet.
• "Give AI more and it will (finally) deliver" - very satanic concept of trickery to pull in victims. Don't expect results before all resources are gone. 

The Doctrine of Christ

I understand and honor those who want to get to the heart of any matter set before them. I am also one that tends to brush away things that I consider ancillary to real purposes. In Christ's ministry in the holy land, he went to weddings and dinners; he socialized over the course of a three year ministry. In the land of Bountiful, as recorded in the Book of Mormon, Christ was only present for a handful of days, so we don't hear of his social schedule. He was rather purposeful and almost business-like. There was little time for things like parables, collecting new followers, or answering a lot of questions.

In one crucial incident, Christ did a clear progression of things in the first hours of his visit to the people at Bountiful, as described in the third book of Nephi, chapter 11:

1. God the Father announces and identifies Jesus and that he is the son of God (v. 3-7);
2. Jesus show each person that he was the promised and crucified Messiah who had been prophecied would come (v. 8-17);
3. Jesus calls Nephi and others and gives them the power to baptize (v. 18-22);
4. Jesus explains exactly how to perform a baptism and denounces (traditional Jewish) disputations on baptism and doctrine (v. 23-30);
5. The first rendition of the doctrine of Christ and his promise that the Holy Ghost will validate its truth (v. 31-36);
6. The second rendition of the doctrine of Christ (v. 37);
7. The third rendition of the doctrine of Christ (v. 38);
8. There is nothing more or less in the doctrine of Christ. Blessing to them that preach this as Christ's doctrine and punishments for those who teach other things as the doctrine of Christ (v. 39-40); and
9. Charge to Nephi and his brethren to go and teach these things. (v. 41)

There is a definite line of authority to baptise established, from God to Christ to Nephi and others. There is instruction on the authorized performance of the ordinance of baptism specifically to those newly authorized to perform it. There is a specific charge against speculation toward alteration of the baptism ordinance and the doctrine surrounding it. The doctrine of Christ is the singular importance of repentance and baptism to being saved and inheriting the kingdom of God, repeated three times. Finally, those authorized to baptize are instructed to preach the doctrine of repentance and baptism to everyone.

31 Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine.

32 And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me; and I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me; and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me.

33 And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God.

34 And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned.

35 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto him will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost.

36 And thus will the Father bear record of me, and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto him of the Father and me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are bone.

37 And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and become as a little child, and be baptized in my name, or ye can in nowise receive these things.

38 And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and be baptized in my name, and become as a little child, or ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God.

39 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them.

40 And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and establish it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but he buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them.

41 Therefore, go forth unto this people, and declare the words which I have spoken, unto the ends of the earth.

I emphasized a phrase above because there is a strong tendency for many people to say that there is nothing more to Christ and Christianity than repentance and baptism. From my reading, this is the total sum of what needs to be done to be "saved" (how many different flavors of salvation are out there?), which is to inherit the kingdom of God. It doesn't mean there is not more to God or Christ, such as exaltation. It means that you cannot add other stipulations to salvation (as the Jews were known for), nor can you neuter or push aside any of the stated requirements, such as authoritative baptism (as some Christ-believing groups have done), and say you will still be saved. In this situation of short exposure, Christ was terribly clear and immediately repetitive on this doctrine!

Are there further blessings and opportunities that God offers us beyond this "salvation"? I strongly believe that there are, including transcendence toward exaltation, which is to become like God. I don't feel that anything said in this chapter or elsewhere in the Book of Mormon or Holy Bible proscribes or condemns such further opportunities.

What I hope to convey here is the central importance of baptism performed by those authorized to do it. For those who essentially do nothing, relying alone on the "love of Christ" to "save" them, and loudly proclaiming this concept, I can only say that Christ has already condemned such teaching and (lack of) practice and purveyors, as quoted vividly above! I will rather say this, as instructed by Christ: "Repent! Be baptized! Be saved!"