Musings from the Book of Revelation

So I just finished a New Testament class, and we got a great article given to us to help us understand the book of Revelation.  I've been very interested in the book and would love to understand it better.  In particular, there is a beast mentioned in one of the chapters that has a bunch of heads, and is really terrible.  The beast, representing an anti-christ, is "wounded unto death", but then returns later on, having recovered from his mortal wound.  Here's an artist's rendition of the beast:

Religious scholars have discussed and wondered aloud concerning the identity of this beast for longer than any of us need to know.  While some people think that our current president is this beast, other propositions are more credible, and therefore intriguing.  I've heard it suggested that the beast is communism—seemingly wounded to death at the end of the Cold War, but apparently will be revived.  I don't know how that will happen or if it will happen, but after reading the article we received in class, I got some additional insights into this possibility.

Roman Emperor Nero (ruled from A.D. 54-68) began the first persecutions against Christians, and they were horrible.  Nero was paranoid, murderous, capricious, and utterly selfish.  Christians feared Nero and the persecutions and killings he had sanctioned.  When Nero committed suicide, many Christians felt they could breathe a sigh of relief.  However, many feared that Nero, or a personality like Nero, would rise in the future, and would commit again all the same atrocities Nero had, or worse.

Domitian (Nero Redivivus), "Nero Revived"

Unfortunately for the Christians, such an emperor did arise—Domitian ruled from A.D. 81-96, which was about the time the Apostle John received and wrote down his Revelation.  Domitian was worse than Nero, bringing back all the old persecutions, and instituting a form of Emperor worship.  He too was cruel, murderous, and believed he was divine.  Anyone found resisting the state religion of emperor-worship would be accused of treason and blasphemy, and put to death.  Clearly, Nero and Domitian fit the description of the beast who was, then died, then came back again.

But we have a modern parallel to these Roman emperors, although I hope not too close a parallel, in North Korea.  Kim Jong-il is the ruler there, and he is often referred to as "Our Glorious Leader"  or the "Supreme Leader".  He apparently is eccentric, conspiring, and demanding of his people.  There are claims of human rights abuses and all kinds of economic and social deprivation occurring regularly throughout the country.  Instead of emperor worship, we have a personality cult around Jong-il, with his birthday being the biggest holiday in North Korea.

Now even though North Korea would be a great candidate for an explanation of the beast from Revelation, I'm not saying that Kim Jong-il is the anti-christ.  I don't know nearly enough about anything, I haven't studied the books, learned the history, or received any revelations.  We know that there's not necessarily any one personification of the anti-christ—there can be many groups, organizations, or people that all fall into that category.  All I want to do with this post is point out the similarities between the ancient Roman Empire and modern-day North Korea, and explain what I learned from reading that cool article.

Threescore and Nine Years Ago...

...the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.  December 7th, 1941, marked a turning point in America's involvement in World War II, and America's involvement in World affairs in general.  Over two thousand sailors and soldiers lost their lives that day.  The survivors continue to visit a monument erected over the wreckage of the USS Arizona every year to remember the event.  My dad's dad, my Grandpa, would have visited this year, perhaps, but he passed away in September.

Robert Hugh Matthews, 1920-2010, was in the United States Marine Corps, and was at Pearl Harbor when it was attacked.  The Marines he was with were assigned to the base on Pearl Harbor, and in some cases stayed on board the ships docked there.  Grandpa recounted the story to me once.  He was sitting on his bed, not yet dressed for the day, reading a copy of Life Magazine, when he heard an explosion.  He looked out the window of his quarters and saw the flames billowing up from the USS Arizona.  It had been hit with a bomb in the exact spot where it stored it's artillery.  The explosion was so devastating to the ship that it sunk in the harbor.

My Grandpa was on-board the USS Pennsylvania (the flagship of the fleet), which was in 'dry-dock' for repairs.  That means that it was not in it's usual 'parking spot' on the island, but was on the other side completely.  Naturally, after the Arizona blew, everything turned to chaos.  Soldiers didn't have time to get fully dressed before getting to stations and mounting some kind of defense.  My Grandpa mounted an anti-aircraft gun and tried his best to shoot down the Japanese planes as the flew over, completing almost three separate attack waves.

Grandpa later learned that the ship that was 'parked' where the Pennsylvania usually parks had sustained massive damage and was bombed heavily.  Obviously the Japanese had hoped to take out the Admiral (housed on the Pennsylvania) by sinking the flagship, but were disappointed.  I'm very grateful that my Grandpa lived through that attack, and the rest of America's involvement in World War II.

Thoughts from American Heritage: Superman as the American Hero

Where do we go from here?

A new Superman movie is currently in the works.  With creative oversight and an initial screenplay provided by Christopher Nolan (of "The Dark Knight" and "Inception" fame), Warner Bros. hopes to make this go-round better than 2006's "Superman Returns".  Nolan was chosen to 'godfather' the project after his considerable success at bringing Batman to life.  So how does one make Superman—colorful, underwear and all—relevant today, and find a place for him on the stage of the world today?  Perhaps one way to look at Superman is as the uniquely American hero he is.  He bears many similarities to America itself historically.

Superman was created by two young boys, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, both children of Jewish immigrants to America.  Interestingly, Superman's life history contains Jewish and American-immigrant themes.  He was sent away from his home, where he would've faced certain doom, like Moses in the Bible.  He comes to a new world, and struggles to fit in as a foreigner, like the immigrant parents of his creators.  He debuted in comics during the Great Depression, where he originally fought against greedy crime bosses, for social justice.  Specifically, his purpose is to fight for "Truth, Justice, and the American Way".

Superman seems discontent with staying at home and simply being a good citizen himself—he wants to help others, and stop crime and corruption.  He leaves his normal circle of influence to help people everywhere.  He generally has virtuous motives for doing so—that is, he "only uses his powers for good."  In comparison, Superman does domestically what America does internationally.

The Quintessential Superman.

George Washington believed strongly that America should avoid becoming 'entangled' in foreign affairs.  His isolationist policy lasted for over a century.  But eventually the threats overseas, and the attack on the U.S. at Pearl Harbor brought America into an active leadership role on the worldwide stage.  Today, the standard procedure in foreign policy is to unseat the reigning government, establish peace, and draft a constitution for the country intended to guarantee a democracy there ever after.

Much has been said about America's motives in maintaining such an 'aggressive' foreign policy.  Objectively, if not optimistically, I believe that America has gone into battle in the world over time for both self-interested and virtuous reasons.  But regardless of the debate and strife over America's motives, clearly Superman is the quintessential American Hero.  His story and history reflects America's so closely, that, given the current situation in the world today, it would be unwise to overlook this obvious connection and these essential similarities, as another generation creates yet another incarnation of the Man of Steel.

Articles of Faith—I Never Knew You

I served my mission in Florida, and I met all kinds of Christians—Evangelical, Charismatic, Non-denominational, etc.  In my last area there was a big revival meeting happening every night, where the crowds became so huge they had to move out to the airport to have enough ground to meet on.  There were claims of medically-verified miracles, divine healings, and even a resurrection from the dead!  It was crazy, but I loved it.  And even though I met some weird Christians on my mission, I met many who were thoughtful, well-educated, and willing to listen and discuss.

One of the big issues Christians throw at Mormon missionaries is the question of how we are saved.  It's a fairly loaded question, because one's answer to the question encompasses one's belief about the nature of the Godhead, the Fall, the place of ordinances and good deeds, the need (or not) for authority, and a slew of other issues which can be—and have been—debated for centuries!

I worked with a recent convert in one area as he struggled to understand and accept our beliefs and doctrines, as opposed to his upbringing and training in a regular Christian faith.  Over time we've had to sort some things out, and see where we actually agree in many cases and disagree in others.  I was learning about so many of these issues and questions that we don't hear much about in church, and so it was helpful for the convert and fascinating for me to explain what we believe, and see it all laid out.


My learning has continued since coming home, and studying here at BYU.  After reading papers and articles and writing one of my own, I'm finally beginning to see a more complete picture of how and where we differ from regular Christians.


You wouldn't believe it if you looked up on Wikipedia all the different issues and debates and philosophies about how salvation occurs.  While they don't go into near as much depth, providing counter-arguments and rebuttals, the Articles of Faith actually state very clearly where we stand on these soteriological (salvation-related) issues.

For those somewhat familiar with such lingo, I'll illustrate.  The second article describes in a nutshell what we believe about the Fall—and by implication, comments on original sin, total depravity, predestination and accountability.  The third article explains tersely what we believe as it relates to the necessity of ordinances, the place of grace, and the question of universalism.  The fifth article states briefly that we believe callings and revelations from God are given by those with authority, contrary to the notions of a "priesthood of all believers", or "sola scriptura".


If you had never heard of some of those terms before, or never knew there was a debate about some of those things, you were just like I was before my mission.  It's funny to realize, but I had the Articles of Faith memorized when I left for my mission, I just didn't know how helpful they could be.


Suffice it to say that I have newfound appreciation for the Articles of Faith—for succinctly stating what we believe, running counter to the religious trends of Joseph Smith's day, and for being the true word of God through His prophet.

Thoughts from American Heritage: The Problem of Evil in Government

Once upon a time there were two little boys, fighting over who would get the last piece of cake.  Their Mom hears the arguing and comes in to try and solve the problem.  Instead of cutting the cake herself, she wants her kids to learn to govern themselves and get along.  So how could she solve this problem?  How could she empower the boys to solve it amongst themselves, and ensure that the result is equitable for both boys?

This is the problem we face in government.  How do we control the often conflicting self-interest we all have, and channel our energies into working towards a common good "with Liberty and Justice for all"?

Plato (left) and Aristotle (right).

Plato and Aristotle had differing approaches to solving this problem.  Plato's thinking was that if the citizens of a democracy individually strived for virtue and excellence, they would naturally be good citizens, and willing to abide by law.  They would not do anything selfish to endanger the larger public, Plato proposed.  His plan for self-governance was based largely on the inherent virtue of the citizens themselves.

In other words, Plato's solution to the cake problem would be to trust that the little boys would be fair and divide the piece of cake evenly between themselves.  Now I don't have any kids, but I have a suspicion that such an approach probably would end with one of the boys crying.

Aristotle, Plato's pupil, favored a different approach.  He believed that government could be structured, with 'checks and balances' as we now call them, to make cooperation and equitable outcomes in everyone's self-interest.  He might solve the solution by giving one boy the knife to cut the piece with, but letting the other boy be the first to choose which half he wants.  Such an arrangement makes it in the first boy's self-interest to cut the cake as evenly as possible, because he doesn't want to shortchange himself.

On the other hand, the arguing boys would've been given a knife.

To say that all issues in government are as quaint as dividing a piece of cake would be utterly simplistic of me, and untrue.  But the challenge is real in many cases: how do we keep self-interest out and ensure justice and equity among ourselves?

I believe that successful self-government—of cities, nations, and the world—depends more on people's virtue than on whatever checks or balances we can devise and put into place.  We've all seen how corruption and inequity can still result in a system with checks and balances a plenty.  They are important, to be sure, but we've seen throughout history that negative human nature can work it's way into any system of government.  A good illustration of this can be seen in comparing the Law of Moses and the Law of the Gospel, or the higher law, as it taught in the Sermon on the Mount.

In consequence of their disobedience, the original children of Israel, after being delivered from Egypt, were given what we call the Law of Moses—a very structured, intricate set of laws and ordinances to keep them spiritually and temporally on track.  On nearly every subject imaginable, laws were given or added later on by rabbis.  The Jews continued to practice and expand upon that law until the time Christ came, by which time corruption, greed, and other negative aspects of human nature had worked their way into a divinely given system of law.

Jesus' Sermon on the Mount proclaimed a higher, more virtuous life.  Conspicuously, He did not set forth a new systematized legislation, give detailed new laws, or teach how best to fulfill the old laws that were given.  He merely encouraged His followers to lead virtuous lives, care for one another, and be their best selves.  It seems to me that his emphasis on virtue, rather than structure or laws, indicates that the first and most important challenge in government, was and is to be virtuous above all else.

Systems of government vary across the world, each with their own unique challenges and benefits.  No matter what system or method of government is in place, corruption and human nature can always make inroads unless pre-emptively dethroned in each individual, which comes through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and by practicing virtue in our own lives.

Thinking Like a Kid Again

This past weekend I had two opportunities to revisit the pre-adolescent brain—I watched "A Christmas Story" and spent time on Sunday evening playing with a baby who's less than a year old.


Playing with the baby was mentally exhausting.  I'm used to figuring people out, -ish, and understanding basic reasons why people do what they do.  I'm a psychology major!  But trying to read this kid's mind was impossible.  It was the most random amalgamation of actions and screeches and squeals and clicking sounds that I'd ever encountered.  There was no deciphering it.  I got hopeful when he would look directly at the toy I was offering him, seeing perhaps some gears turning in his head, but then he would start shaking his whole body up and down and kicking his legs out like he was doing the butterfly-stroke.  All this while laying on his back, wrapped in blankets with a pacifier in his mouth.


It was much easier to understand the kids in A Christmas Story, because there was clever and adult-friendly narration to explain everything in a simple, humorous way.  For those of you who haven't seen it, A Christmas Story came out in the early 80's, and is a hilarious story seen through the eyes of a kid (and narrated by him as in a grown up voice) trying to get what he wants for Christmas, as well as survive the local bullies and observe domestic affairs at home.  It is hilarious.  Maybe you know the part where he climbs up the slide to tell the mall-Santa what he wants, is rejected, and literally booted back down the slide.

Ralphie just wanted a BB gun for Christmas.

Here are some of my favorite quotes from the movie, which really help to show how this kid, and all of us, thought when we were young:

Flick: Are you kidding? Stick my tongue to that stupid pole? That's dumb!

Schwartz: That's 'cause you know it'll stick!

Flick: You're full of it!

Schwartz: Oh yeah?

Flick: Yeah!

Schwartz: Well I double-DOG-dare ya!

Ralphie as Adult: [narrating] NOW it was serious. A double-dog-dare. What else was there but a triple-dare-you, and finally, the coup de grace of all dares, the sinister triple-dog-dare.

Schwartz: I TRIPLE-dog-dare ya!

Ralphie as Adult: [narrating] Schwartz created a slight breach of etiquette by skipping the triple-dare-you and going right for the throat!

(After the kid does it and has to be rescued by the fire department, the teacher tries to guilt-trip whoever was responsible.)

Miss Shields: "Now I know that some of you put Flick up to this, but he has refused to say who. But those who did it know their blame, and I'm sure that the guilt you must feel would be far worse than any punishment you might receive. Now, don't you feel terrible? Don't you feel remorse for what you have done? Well, that's all I'm going to say about poor Flick." Ralphie as Adult: [narrating] "Adults loved to say things like that but kids knew better. We knew darn well it was always better not to get caught."

My Canadian and American Heritage

Let me begin by saying that I have been taking American Heritage this semester, and I love it.  Growing up in Canada, I didn't really know all the history of America—I knew about the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and other isolated details from American history that are widely known, but I didn't know the history very well.
I have thoroughly enjoyed learning the history of American government and economics, and seeing how they continually interact and change today.  It's probably been the most interesting and satisfying non-religious class I've taken so far.  And as with any good class, the material sticks inside the mind, causing further reflection outside of class.  I've had many thoughts and ideas rumbling around over the semester as I've taken that class, so they will now come out at the end of the semester in the form of blog entries for my English class!  Those entries will be called something like, "Thoughts from American Heritage" or something clever like that.

*          *          *

One of the assignments we had in our American Heritage class was to do an "Interview Paper" with a parent and grandparent, comparing our lives to theirs through several different categories.  My dad's father (an American) is passed away, so I got to talk with my mom's father (a Canadian) and learn about what his life was like when he was my age.  I realized early on that I knew very little about my Grandpa Jamieson's life.  We've lived too far away from him to have any extended meaningful contact, so I was glad that I got to learn some details about his life, even for a school assignment.  That paper's already been turned in, so this entry is kind of more for fun, just reflecting on how awesome my Grandpa is.

Rulon Alton Jamieson, 87

He was born in 1923, which means he grew up during the Great Depression.  He's also a full-blooded Iroquois, which makes me one-quarter.  He grew up on the reservation and has a great memory of stories and people from there.  He also provided us with a very old document detailing which chiefs were involved in forming the Six Nations—complete with little sketches of the different chiefs and which tribes and clans they were from.  Obviously it's very important to us.

He lived through World War II—he wasn't a soldier, although he nearly joined the "Royal Canadian Air Force".  Instead he ended up working in factories producing bomber planes and other military equipment.  He's a former regional billiards champion, and he used to supplement his income by beating others at pool and betting on horse races.

Today he visits the local Senior's Center during the day to play pool and cards with his contemporaries, and he can still hop fences and climb trees to pick fruit out of his yard.  He's very intelligent, he can play the guitar very well, and he enjoys solving Sudoku puzzles.  Grandpa, you're the man!

Originally Completed October 30th, 2010

Thanks to some artistically inclined friends of ours, my wife and I made a super cool "Jack of the Lantern" this past Halloween.  What do you think?  Comment below if you like it!

"Sans" awesome lighting.

"Avec" awesome lighting!