One of the best parts of the scriptures revealed in the latter-days is found at the end of Joseph Smith-History in the Pearl of Great Price. It is Oliver Cowdery's account of the restoration, beautifully written, but unversed and printed in a small type-setting at the end of the JSH.
But it is a worthwhile read, as Oliver's testimony confirms Joseph's testimony.
Let's take a paragraph-by-paragraph look at this writing.
PARAGRAPH 1: “These were days never to be forgotten—to sit under the sound of a voice dictated by the inspiration of heaven, awakened the utmost gratitude of this bosom! Day after day I continued, uninterrupted, to write from his mouth, as he translated with the Urim and Thummim, or, as the Nephites would have said, ‘Interpreters,’ the history or record called ‘The Book of Mormon.’
I love how Oliver puts this. His days as the scribe for the Book of Mormons "were days never to be forgotten." This hints of the joy Joseph and Oliver both must have felt, as they read/heard the words of God for the first time in that Great Book of Mormon. And, really, I can understand that joy because it must have been similar to the joy I get now when I read the Book of Mormon, even though I've read it many times before.
And how did Oliver feel when he first heard God's words in the Book of Mormon? Oliver writes that it "awakened the utmost gratitude of this bosom." Oliver's description is perfect. He didn't feel just gratitude. He felt the "utmost" gratitude--he couldn't have been more grateful. And where did that gratitude originate? His bosom. In other words, in his heart. As he heard and transcribed the Book of Mormon, his heart recognized truth and was grateful that God's truths had made their way to Oliver.
PARAGRAPH 2: "No men, in their sober senses, could translate and write the directions given to the Nephites from the mouth of the Savior, of the precise manner in which men should build up His Church, and especially when corruption had spread an uncertainty over all forms and systems practiced among men, without desiring a privilege of showing the willingness of the heart by being buried in the liquid grave, to answer a ‘good conscience by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.’"
Oliver is bearing his testimony of the Book of Mormon hear. If you read Christ's words in the Book of Mormon, how can you doubt, is essentially what Oliver is saying. Oliver sees Christ's beautiful directions to the righteous Nephites, who withstood the filth of their society to build a mighty kingdom of God. Oliver tells us that the people were so wicked in Nephite times that they refused to be baptized (or enter a "liquid grave" as Oliver calls it) and ignored the need to have a clear conscience when resurrected. Oliver admired, as do I, the Nephites' steadfastness living in such circumstances. To Oliver who lived in a day when men, even the wicked ones, all chose to get baptized, the fact that some would refuse baptism must have been a very foreign idea--and Oliver rightly noted the evil in refusing baptism for remission of sins.
PARAGRAPH 3: “After writing the account given of the Savior’s ministry to the remnant of the seed of Jacob, upon this continent, it was easy to be seen, as the prophet said it would be, that darkness covered the earth and gross darkness the minds of the people. On reflecting further it was as easy to be seen that amid the great strife and noise concerning religion, none had authority from God to administer the ordinances of the Gospel. For the question might be asked, have men authority to administer in the name of Christ, who deny revelations, when His testimony is no less than the spirit of prophecy, and His religion based, built, and sustained by immediate revelations, in all ages of the world when He has had a people on earth? If these facts were buried, and carefully concealed by men whose craft would have been in danger if once permitted to shine in the faces of men, they were no longer to us; and we only waited for the commandment to be given ‘Arise and be baptized.’"
Here, Oliver tells us that as he and Joseph read about the Savior giving authority to his disciples on the American continent, they realized that no one had authority on the Earth at that time. Oliver explains it beautifully: The priesthood is an authority built on revelation, and if the churches of the day were denying revelation, then how could they have the priesthood? If you deny there's revelation, then how could you bless the sick or give a blessing to the downtrodden in heart? Moreover, if God has given revelations to his people in all ages, then why would he stop now? I love the way Oliver says it: "His [God's]religion [is] based, built, and sustained by immediate revelations." Oliver points us that these true facts about the priesthood were buried by those priests who sought to profit from false doctrines.
PARAGRAPH 4: "This was not long desired before it was realized. The Lord, who is rich in mercy, and ever willing to answer the consistent prayer of the humble, after we had called upon Him in a fervent manner, aside from the abodes of men, condescended to manifest to us His will. On a sudden, as from the midst of eternity, the voice of the Redeemer spake peace to us, while the veil was parted and the angel of God came down clothed with glory, and delivered the anxiously looked for message, and the keys of the Gospel of repentance. What joy! what wonder! what amazement! While the world was racked and distracted—while millions were groping as the blind for the wall, and while all men were resting upon uncertainty, as a general mass, our eyes beheld, our ears heard, as in the ‘blaze of day’; yes, more—above the glitter of the May sunbeam, which then shed its brilliancy over the face of nature! Then his voice, though mild, pierced to the center, and his words, ‘I am thy fellow-servant,’ dispelled every fear. We listened, we gazed, we admired! ’Twas the voice of an angel from glory, ’twas a message from the Most High! And as we heard we rejoiced, while His love enkindled upon our souls, and we were wrapped in the vision of the Almighty! Where was room for doubt? Nowhere; uncertainty had fled, doubt had sunk no more to rise, while fiction and deception had fled forever!"
Oliver tells us that the Lord responded to their prayers for priesthood authority quickly. In this paragraph, Oliver tells us about how the Lord answers prayers: "The Lord, who is rich in mercy, and ever willing to answer the consistent prayer of the humble." The nature of the Lord, Oliver says, is to be rich in mercy, and as such, he is always there to answer the prayers of the humble. Oliver tells us that the answer to their prayers started with the voice of Christ speaking to him and Joseph; the veil parted, and an angel (John the Baptist) came down to answer their prayer--or, as Oliver eloquently puts it: the angel "delivered the anxiously looked for message."
I love how Oliver responds to receiving his priesthood authority: "What joy! what wonder! what amazement!" Well, Oliver was excited! And can you blame him? The priesthood authority, absent from Earth, for over a thousand years, had now been restored to him and his friend, Joseph. Oliver didn't miss the significance. He tells us that while the rest of the world's inhabitants were like the blind groping for the wall, he and Joseph could see in a light as bright as the blaze of day. It's a stirring contrast, but a true one. The light that was to be beamed to mankind through the restoration of the priesthood has in millions of lives given people the direction they need to get through the darkness. In that sense, this is an appropriate and deeply profound metaphor.
Oliver tells us the thrill he had when John the Baptist addressed he and Joseph as his fellow servants: "We listened, we gazed, we admired! ’Twas the voice of an angel from glory, ’twas a message from the Most High! And as we heard we rejoiced, while His love enkindled upon our souls, and we were wrapped in the vision of the Almighty! Where was room for doubt? Nowhere; uncertainty had fled, doubt had sunk no more to rise, while fiction and deception had fled forever!"
Can you imagine what that moment must have been like for Oliver and Joseph?! Do be called a "fellow servant" by John the Baptist? Do hear the voice of the Redeemer? To receive the Holy Priesthood? To feel God's love? To hear a message from an angel?
No wonder Oliver says what he does in the next paragraph:
PARAGRAPH 5: “But, dear brother, think, further think for a moment, what joy filled our hearts, and with what surprise we must have bowed, (for who would not have bowed the knee for such a blessing?) when we received under his hand the Holy Priesthood as he said, ‘Upon you my fellow-servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer this Priesthood and this authority, which shall remain upon earth, that the Sons of Levi may yet offer an offering unto the Lord in righteousness!’"
I love what Oliver says here: "Who would not have bowed the knee for such a blessing?" More than that, Oliver wants us to ponder what this moment was like for he and Joseph. He wants us to consider the joy they must have felt on this occasion.
PARAGRAPH 6: “I shall not attempt to paint to you the feelings of this heart, nor the majestic beauty and glory which surrounded us on this occasion; but you will believe me when I say, that earth, nor men, with the eloquence of time, cannot begin to clothe language in as interesting and sublime a manner as this holy personage. No; nor has this earth power to give the joy, to bestow the peace, or comprehend the wisdom which was contained in each sentence as they were delivered by the power of the Holy Spirit! Man may deceive his fellow-men, deception may follow deception, and the children of the wicked one may have power to seduce the foolish and untaught, till naught but fiction feeds the many, and the fruit of falsehood carries in its current the giddy to the grave; but one touch with the finger of his love, yes, one ray of glory from the upper world, or one word from the mouth of the Savior, from the bosom of eternity, strikes it all into insignificance, and blots it forever from the mind. The assurance that we were in the presence of an angel, the certainty that we heard the voice of Jesus, and the truth unsullied as it flowed from a pure personage, dictated by the will of God, is to me past description, and I shall ever look upon this expression of the Savior’s goodness with wonder and thanksgiving while I am permitted to tarry; and in those mansions where perfection dwells and sin never comes, I hope to adore in that day which shall never cease.”
After asking for us to ponder what it was like, Oliver tells us it was an indescribable moment. Oliver says it so well: "I shall not attempt to paint to you the feelings of this heart, nor the majestic beauty and glory which surrounded us on this occasion." He tells that no man can match the eloquence of the words John the Baptist used on that occasion, nor can man comprehend the wisdom of his words. That must have been some visit!
Then Oliver tells us the sum effect of this visit:
"Man may deceive his fellow-men, deception may follow deception, and the children of the wicked one may have power to seduce the foolish and untaught, till naught but fiction feeds the many, and the fruit of falsehood carries in its current the giddy to the grave; but one touch with the finger of his love, yes, one ray of glory from the upper world, or one word from the mouth of the Savior, from the bosom of eternity, strikes it all into insignificance, and blots it forever from the mind."
I read so much hope into that one sentence. No matter how much evil is promulgated against me in quest to follow the Savior; it will all be worth it, if I am proven worthy of his grace and love at that last day. Oliver, who had endured much, tells us that one touch with the finger of his love--or one ray of glory from heaven, makes all the persecutions he suffered insignificant.
No wonder that Oliver concludes with these words:
"The assurance that we were in the presence of an angel, the certainty that we heard the voice of Jesus, and the truth unsullied as it flowed from a pure personage, dictated by the will of God, is to me past description, and I shall ever look upon this expression of the Savior’s goodness with wonder and thanksgiving while I am permitted to tarry; and in those mansions where perfection dwells and sin never comes, I hope to adore in that day which shall never cease."
What a beautiful testimony; it is one worth studying and understanding. How grateful I am to be the beneficiary of the work the Lord did through his great servants Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. How grateful I am for my testimony of the restored church, this gospel, the priesthood restored, which I am blessed to hold. Most of all, how grateful I am for Christ. May his atonement be applied to my sins, that I may be washed clean and found worthy to stand. I pray in His Holy name. Amen.
Sunday, August 21, 2005
RELIGION: Teaching to Gain vs. Teaching to Edify: August 21, 2005
The first chapter of Alma illustrates an important difference between teaching for gain and teaching to edify. And it also shows the net effect of both.
TEACHING FOR GAIN
Nehor is the cause of a great contention among the Nephites. His preaching causes a sharp division among the
people.
And it's not hard to see why it would when you examine what Nehor's purpose in preaching was:
Nehor went among the Nephites "bearing down against the church; declaring unto the people that every priest and teacher ought to become popular; and they ought not to labor with their hands, but that they ought to be supported by the people" (Alma 1:3).
Nehor's purpose, therefore, was threefold:
(1) To get people to leave the Church of God.
You can see why that would upset the people who belonged to the church.
(2) To become popular
A self-serving purpose--clearly, a very unChristian pursuit. Christ did not seek his own popularity; rather, he sought the salvation of all. His prime purpose was to lift all, and for that, he caused that he himself should be lifted upon the cross. If Christ sought not glory for himself, neither should those who preach in Christ's name.
That is why part of the qualifications for teaching the gospel is "an eye single to the glory of God" (D&C 4:4). A teacher's singular purpose should be to help all come closer to Christ.
(3) To get money
This shows again Nehor's quest for an exalted place in society. Rather than laboring with the rest of the Nephites, he esteemed himself to be to good for labor. A preacher shouldn't be involved in commoner's work, he must have thought. So by taking their money, he wouldn't have to work, and he'd still have the ease of life that he desired.
A real problem with Nehor's pursuit for money and popularity is this: In order to get such, he had to preach what the people wanted to hear, not what they needed to hear.
On this point, Nehor was quick to sell out his God for a buck and a pack of friends.
So instead of teaching repentance as he should have, Nehor taught that all mankind had been already been saved; therefore, there was no need for the people to shed their ungodliness. They could cleave to their sins and not worry about the judgment. Such teachings put those who accept them on a road to destruction.
Nehor was rewarded handsomely for his efforts. They people paid him. Money which he happily spent:
"And he began to be lifted up in the pride of his heart, and to wear very costly apparel, yea, and even began to establish a church after the manner of his preaching" (Alma 1:6).
Nehor's pride swelled to the point that when he faced an honest challenge to his false teachings, he chose to silence his accuser with the sword rather than discuss the merits of the argument.
The man Nehor slew was Gideon, a mighty man of God.
For this act of murder, Nehor was put to death. Before his execution, Nehor acknowedged "that what he had taught to the people was contrary to the word of God" (Alma 1:15).
Nehor's dubious legacy lived on. Nehor had introduced priestcraft--preaching to get gain--to the Nephites, and his followers, despite his actions and admission, glommed onto priestcraft and upheld it.
These "preachers" are described this way:
"There were many who loved the vain things of the world, and they went forth preaching false doctrines; and this they did for the sake of riches and honor" (Alma 1:16).
This practice causes the followers of Nehor to persecute the people of the Church of God (Alma 1:19) and eventually it cause contentions between the groups to even come to blows (Alma 1:21), despite the Church of God's stance that its members shouldn't behave in such a manner. Many people eventually left the church, abandoning the strait and narrow for the ease of not being persecuted (Alma 1:24).
So we can see the effects of teaching for gain, and we can see that they aren't the kind of effects one wants in a society.
TEACHING TO EDIFY
Now, comes the contrast.
Remember Nehor's three purposes for preaching? Let's see how they contrast with the Nephites' purpose.
NEHOR: Sought to destroy the church of God
CHURCH PREACHERS: "They did establish the affairs of the church" (Alma 1:28).
NEHOR: Sought popularity
CHURCH PREACHERS: Viewed themselves as equals with their listeners:
"The priest, not esteeming himself above his hearers, for the preacher was no better than the hearer, neither was the teacher any better than the learner; and thus they were all equal" (Alma 1:26).
In other words, these preachers had an eye single to the glory of God. And they were humble--allowing themselves to be instruments in the hands of God. And for this, they took no glory to themselves, for they realized they had done nothing.
Isaiah explained why one who is used an instrument in God's hand shouldn't elevate himself in his mind:
"Shall the ax boast itself against him that heweth therewith? Shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it? As if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself as if it were no wood!" (2 Nephi 20:15).
So we see the contrast. The preachers of the Church of God were the ax in the Master's hand. The preachers of the order of Nehor provided no ax for the Master.
NEHOR: Sought money
PREACHERS: Didn't seek compensation.
"And when the priests left their labor to impart the word of God unto the people, the people also left their labors to hear the word of God. And when the priest had imparted unto them the word of God they all returned again diligently unto their labors" (Alma 1:26).
When the hearers went back to work, so did the priests.
Perhaps the most telling factor on this point is what the people, including the preachers of the Church of God, did when blessed with riches:
"And they did impart of their substance, every man according to that which he had, to the poor, and the needy, and the sick, and the afflicted; and they did not wear costly capparel, yet they were neat and comely.
"And thus, in their prosperous circumstances, they did not send away any who were naked, or that were hungry, or that were athirst, or that were sick, or that had not been nourished; and they did not set their hearts upon riches; therefore they were liberal to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, whether out of the church or in the church, having no respect to persons as to those who stood in need" (Alma 1:27,29).
For this, the people of the church of God were blessed. And they, even though they did not seek riches, become more prosperous than those who did seek riches, because the people of the Church were blessed by God.
Plus, their needy had their needs met, and they were unified. The divisions caused by the people who followed Nehor were stymied.
For this were the preachers popular? Probably not, but they fulfilled the work their Master, who loved them most, gave them to do. Were they rich? Yes, they had been blessed for their service. But more importantly, they and their flock found the treasures of the word of God. And because of the sacrifices of these preachers, the church was stronger.
So you can see how sharply the effects of righteous preachers differ from the effects brought on the people by those who preach wickedness.
TEACHING FOR GAIN
Nehor is the cause of a great contention among the Nephites. His preaching causes a sharp division among the
people.
And it's not hard to see why it would when you examine what Nehor's purpose in preaching was:
Nehor went among the Nephites "bearing down against the church; declaring unto the people that every priest and teacher ought to become popular; and they ought not to labor with their hands, but that they ought to be supported by the people" (Alma 1:3).
Nehor's purpose, therefore, was threefold:
(1) To get people to leave the Church of God.
You can see why that would upset the people who belonged to the church.
(2) To become popular
A self-serving purpose--clearly, a very unChristian pursuit. Christ did not seek his own popularity; rather, he sought the salvation of all. His prime purpose was to lift all, and for that, he caused that he himself should be lifted upon the cross. If Christ sought not glory for himself, neither should those who preach in Christ's name.
That is why part of the qualifications for teaching the gospel is "an eye single to the glory of God" (D&C 4:4). A teacher's singular purpose should be to help all come closer to Christ.
(3) To get money
This shows again Nehor's quest for an exalted place in society. Rather than laboring with the rest of the Nephites, he esteemed himself to be to good for labor. A preacher shouldn't be involved in commoner's work, he must have thought. So by taking their money, he wouldn't have to work, and he'd still have the ease of life that he desired.
A real problem with Nehor's pursuit for money and popularity is this: In order to get such, he had to preach what the people wanted to hear, not what they needed to hear.
On this point, Nehor was quick to sell out his God for a buck and a pack of friends.
So instead of teaching repentance as he should have, Nehor taught that all mankind had been already been saved; therefore, there was no need for the people to shed their ungodliness. They could cleave to their sins and not worry about the judgment. Such teachings put those who accept them on a road to destruction.
Nehor was rewarded handsomely for his efforts. They people paid him. Money which he happily spent:
"And he began to be lifted up in the pride of his heart, and to wear very costly apparel, yea, and even began to establish a church after the manner of his preaching" (Alma 1:6).
Nehor's pride swelled to the point that when he faced an honest challenge to his false teachings, he chose to silence his accuser with the sword rather than discuss the merits of the argument.
The man Nehor slew was Gideon, a mighty man of God.
For this act of murder, Nehor was put to death. Before his execution, Nehor acknowedged "that what he had taught to the people was contrary to the word of God" (Alma 1:15).
Nehor's dubious legacy lived on. Nehor had introduced priestcraft--preaching to get gain--to the Nephites, and his followers, despite his actions and admission, glommed onto priestcraft and upheld it.
These "preachers" are described this way:
"There were many who loved the vain things of the world, and they went forth preaching false doctrines; and this they did for the sake of riches and honor" (Alma 1:16).
This practice causes the followers of Nehor to persecute the people of the Church of God (Alma 1:19) and eventually it cause contentions between the groups to even come to blows (Alma 1:21), despite the Church of God's stance that its members shouldn't behave in such a manner. Many people eventually left the church, abandoning the strait and narrow for the ease of not being persecuted (Alma 1:24).
So we can see the effects of teaching for gain, and we can see that they aren't the kind of effects one wants in a society.
TEACHING TO EDIFY
Now, comes the contrast.
Remember Nehor's three purposes for preaching? Let's see how they contrast with the Nephites' purpose.
NEHOR: Sought to destroy the church of God
CHURCH PREACHERS: "They did establish the affairs of the church" (Alma 1:28).
NEHOR: Sought popularity
CHURCH PREACHERS: Viewed themselves as equals with their listeners:
"The priest, not esteeming himself above his hearers, for the preacher was no better than the hearer, neither was the teacher any better than the learner; and thus they were all equal" (Alma 1:26).
In other words, these preachers had an eye single to the glory of God. And they were humble--allowing themselves to be instruments in the hands of God. And for this, they took no glory to themselves, for they realized they had done nothing.
Isaiah explained why one who is used an instrument in God's hand shouldn't elevate himself in his mind:
"Shall the ax boast itself against him that heweth therewith? Shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it? As if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself as if it were no wood!" (2 Nephi 20:15).
So we see the contrast. The preachers of the Church of God were the ax in the Master's hand. The preachers of the order of Nehor provided no ax for the Master.
NEHOR: Sought money
PREACHERS: Didn't seek compensation.
"And when the priests left their labor to impart the word of God unto the people, the people also left their labors to hear the word of God. And when the priest had imparted unto them the word of God they all returned again diligently unto their labors" (Alma 1:26).
When the hearers went back to work, so did the priests.
Perhaps the most telling factor on this point is what the people, including the preachers of the Church of God, did when blessed with riches:
"And they did impart of their substance, every man according to that which he had, to the poor, and the needy, and the sick, and the afflicted; and they did not wear costly capparel, yet they were neat and comely.
"And thus, in their prosperous circumstances, they did not send away any who were naked, or that were hungry, or that were athirst, or that were sick, or that had not been nourished; and they did not set their hearts upon riches; therefore they were liberal to all, both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, whether out of the church or in the church, having no respect to persons as to those who stood in need" (Alma 1:27,29).
For this, the people of the church of God were blessed. And they, even though they did not seek riches, become more prosperous than those who did seek riches, because the people of the Church were blessed by God.
Plus, their needy had their needs met, and they were unified. The divisions caused by the people who followed Nehor were stymied.
For this were the preachers popular? Probably not, but they fulfilled the work their Master, who loved them most, gave them to do. Were they rich? Yes, they had been blessed for their service. But more importantly, they and their flock found the treasures of the word of God. And because of the sacrifices of these preachers, the church was stronger.
So you can see how sharply the effects of righteous preachers differ from the effects brought on the people by those who preach wickedness.
Monday, August 08, 2005
POLITICS: PETA Hypocrisy: August 8, 2005
We interrupt our regular programming to bring you the following ...
THE HYPOCRISY AT PETA
The following story is from This is True dated 17 July 2005. It is Copyright 2005 Randy Cassingham, all rights reserved, and reprinted here with permission:
---
Adding to Mr. Cassingham's story, I would like to offer the following commentary:
For the few of you who have followed my writings from my days as a college newspaper editor, you know that I have little tolerance for PETA.
I have long thought this organization was a few fries short of a Happy Meal. Or more accurately, a hamburger short of a Happy Meal. Their antics are degrading, self-centered propaganda designed to focus attention on ... on what ... Their cause? No. They want the attention to fall on themselves. They are happiest in the spotlight. They pretend to be martyrs for a cause because they want the spotlight to be on them and their lettuce bikinis or their throwing pies in the faces of rodeo princesses or whatever. They want the spotlight.
The animals are merely a ploy, a means to an end, to get the attention they want. PETA has done nothing to contribute to the politic dialogue. How could they? How can you talk to someone who'd rather throw bricks (figuratively speaking) than think?!
And now we learn this.
And it proves that animals really are just a means to an end. Once they've got their attention, the PETA people no longer need animals, so they can do with them what they please.
Now, I could be wrong, but this is the perception that PETA has always put forward with their silly antics. And I know there's hypocrites in every organization and blah blah blah. But these were PETA employees, disposing of pets PETA picked up to distribute to "loving homes." If these two were just rogue agents of PETA, then why didn't any other PETA employee confront the pair? Really, if this had happened at McDonald's that McDonald's had been taking pets from a local shelter, killing them and then dumping them in a dumpster, don't you think PETA would've been protesting? Heck, who wouldn't be protesting that? So why aren't protesting this?!
They've always been outlandish, and it just seems that their bizarreness is nothing more than shouting "Hey, Look at ME! Hey, Look at ME" into a microphone.
It's time that we all did ourselves a favor. It's time for all of us, especially those in the media, to ignore these attention-starved fools. That way, we'll be doing ourselves and the animals a real favor.
If you're an animal lover, you've been betrayed by PETA. It won't be the last time.
THE HYPOCRISY AT PETA
The following story is from This is True dated 17 July 2005. It is Copyright 2005 Randy Cassingham, all rights reserved, and reprinted here with permission:
"Ethical" Defined
After more than 100 dead dogs were dumped in a trash dumpster over
four weeks, police in Ahoskie, N.C., kept an eye on the trash receptacle behind a supermarket. Sure enough, a van drove up and officers watched the occupants throw in heavy plastic bags. They detained the two people in the van and found 18 dead dogs in plastic bags in the dumpster, including puppies; 13 more dead dogs were still in the van. Police say the van is registered to the headquarters of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, and the two occupants, Andrew B. Cook, 24, and Adria Joy Hinkle, 27, identified themselves as PETA employees. An autopsy performed on one of the dogs found it was healthy before it was killed.
Police say PETA has been picking up the animals -- alive -- from North Carolina animal shelters, promising to find them good homes. Cook and Hinkle have been charged with 62 felony counts of animal cruelty. In response to the arrests PETA President Ingrid Newkirk said it's against the group's policy for employees to dump animals in the trash, but "that for some animals in North Carolina, there is no kinder option than euthanasia." (Roanoke-Chowan News-Herald) ...Oops, my mistake: that's "Playing God" Defined.
In his author's notes section, Cassingham had more to say about this story:
The more I learn about PETA, the less I think of them. The story of them killing animals isn't even unusual. According to PETA's own filings, in 2004 PETA killed 86.3 percent of the animals entrusted to its care -- a number that's rising, not falling.
Meanwhile, the SPCA in PETA's home town (Norfolk, Va.) was able to find loving homes for 73 percent of the animals put in its care. A shortage of funds? Nope: last year PETA took in $29 million in tax-exempt donations. It simply has other priorities for the funds, like funding terrorism (yes, really). But don't take my word for it: I got my figures from http://www.PETAkillsAnimals.com -- and they have copies of PETA's state and federal filings to back it up. The bottom line: if you donate money to PETA because you think they care for and about animals, you need to think some more. PETA literally
yells and screams about how others "kill animals" but this is how they operate? Pathetic.And you know what I wonder? PETA's official count of animals they kill is 86.3 percent. But if they're going around picking up animals, killing them while they drive around and not even giving them a chance to be adopted, and then destroying the evidence by dumping the bodies in the trash, are those deaths being reported? My guess: no. While 86.3 percent is awful, the actual number is probably much, much higher. How dare they lecture anyone about the "ethical" treatment of animals!
(This is True is a weekly column featuring
weird-but-true news stories from around the world, and has been published since 1994. Click the link for info about free subscriptions.)
---
Adding to Mr. Cassingham's story, I would like to offer the following commentary:
For the few of you who have followed my writings from my days as a college newspaper editor, you know that I have little tolerance for PETA.
I have long thought this organization was a few fries short of a Happy Meal. Or more accurately, a hamburger short of a Happy Meal. Their antics are degrading, self-centered propaganda designed to focus attention on ... on what ... Their cause? No. They want the attention to fall on themselves. They are happiest in the spotlight. They pretend to be martyrs for a cause because they want the spotlight to be on them and their lettuce bikinis or their throwing pies in the faces of rodeo princesses or whatever. They want the spotlight.
The animals are merely a ploy, a means to an end, to get the attention they want. PETA has done nothing to contribute to the politic dialogue. How could they? How can you talk to someone who'd rather throw bricks (figuratively speaking) than think?!
And now we learn this.
And it proves that animals really are just a means to an end. Once they've got their attention, the PETA people no longer need animals, so they can do with them what they please.
Now, I could be wrong, but this is the perception that PETA has always put forward with their silly antics. And I know there's hypocrites in every organization and blah blah blah. But these were PETA employees, disposing of pets PETA picked up to distribute to "loving homes." If these two were just rogue agents of PETA, then why didn't any other PETA employee confront the pair? Really, if this had happened at McDonald's that McDonald's had been taking pets from a local shelter, killing them and then dumping them in a dumpster, don't you think PETA would've been protesting? Heck, who wouldn't be protesting that? So why aren't protesting this?!
They've always been outlandish, and it just seems that their bizarreness is nothing more than shouting "Hey, Look at ME! Hey, Look at ME" into a microphone.
It's time that we all did ourselves a favor. It's time for all of us, especially those in the media, to ignore these attention-starved fools. That way, we'll be doing ourselves and the animals a real favor.
If you're an animal lover, you've been betrayed by PETA. It won't be the last time.
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
The Third Place I'm Going When they Invent Time Travel
The third place I'm visiting when they invent time travel. If time travel ever gets invented the first place I'm going is to the 1984 Holiday Bowl to relive BYU winning the national championship. Go Cougars!! Then I'm off to Philadelphia on July 4, 1776 to see those brave Founding Fathers pledge their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor when they sign the Declaration of Independence (maybe I'll ask if I can sign it too).
The third place I'm going is a Nephite city called Ammonihah. I don't know the exact date, but it's around 82 B.C., and it will be the day that Alma and Amulek boldly testify in front of the hostile crowd at Ammonihah.
Also, I'd prefer to be invisible that day (they should probably have invisibility figured out before time travel, don't you think?), as I don't wish to interfere at all with what these two legendary missionaries are doing. But the first place I want to see them is in Amulek's home, eating breakfast (or not eating breakfast, in case they're fasting, which they probably were). I would like to look into Amulek's eyes to see if there's any nervousness or whether he is calmly confident. I'd want to know if he has inkling that this will be the last time he'll be in his house. And probably also that last time he'd be with his family on this Earth. I wonder if he had any idea how much he would have to sacrifice for his testimony of Jesus Christ that day.
Amulek's involvement in the mission started many days before. An angel visited Amulek and instructed him to receive Alma into his house. Then, Alma, who had been fasting for many days, encountered Amulek and meekly said: "Will ye give to an humble servant of God something to eat?" (Alma 8:19)
Amulek's response is beautiful in the way it shows his knowledge of Alma's divine calling: "I am a Nephite, and I know that thou art a holy prophet of God, for thou art the man whom an angel said in a vision: Thou shalt receive. Therefore, go with me into my house and I will impart unto thee of my food; and I know that thou wilt be a blessing unto me and my house" (Alma 8:20).
Alma is so hungry that he takes up a policy of eat first, introductions later. Only after he is full does Alma tell
Amulek what his name is.
Alma knew why he had returned to Ammonihah: to preach the gospel.
But it wasn't initially clear at first that Amulek was to join him. Perhaps Amulek hoped to join Alma on his mission or perhaps he'd even asked Alma to pray to find out the Lord's will concerning him, like many of the early Saints asked Joseph Smith to do. Whatever the case, after Alma had spent "many days" (Alma 8:27) at Amulek's house, the call came from the Lord that Alma and Amulek were preach the gospel (Alma 8:28).
Given the way Alma was treated the first time he preached both Alma and Amulek had to know they were risking their lives to preach in front of the people of Ammonihah. Amulek, though, was risking even more. This was his city; these were his friends; this was his home. He was risking not just his life, but his comfortable life and reputation to preach with Alma.
So whether the call was expected, and whether it was desired may be unknown. But this we do know: Amulek was called, so he went. High risk? Yes. But Amulek wanted to serve God first, and then let the consequence follow.
Alma wasn't much different. After being cast out of Ammonihah, his response was to fast and pray that he could go back. And when he was instructed he could go back, he did walk back slowly, he sprinted toward the city he'd been thrown out of; he ran toward his persecutors because he was on the Lord's errand.
In this way, Alma and Amulek were, like the Lamanites converted by the sons of Mosiah, saying, "If the Lord saith unto us go, we will go."
It's that kind of conviction and dedication that would be worth traveling 2,100 years through time to see--to see such men of Christ, willing to say, "I'll go where you want me to go, dear Lord."
The third place I'm going is a Nephite city called Ammonihah. I don't know the exact date, but it's around 82 B.C., and it will be the day that Alma and Amulek boldly testify in front of the hostile crowd at Ammonihah.
Also, I'd prefer to be invisible that day (they should probably have invisibility figured out before time travel, don't you think?), as I don't wish to interfere at all with what these two legendary missionaries are doing. But the first place I want to see them is in Amulek's home, eating breakfast (or not eating breakfast, in case they're fasting, which they probably were). I would like to look into Amulek's eyes to see if there's any nervousness or whether he is calmly confident. I'd want to know if he has inkling that this will be the last time he'll be in his house. And probably also that last time he'd be with his family on this Earth. I wonder if he had any idea how much he would have to sacrifice for his testimony of Jesus Christ that day.
Amulek's involvement in the mission started many days before. An angel visited Amulek and instructed him to receive Alma into his house. Then, Alma, who had been fasting for many days, encountered Amulek and meekly said: "Will ye give to an humble servant of God something to eat?" (Alma 8:19)
Amulek's response is beautiful in the way it shows his knowledge of Alma's divine calling: "I am a Nephite, and I know that thou art a holy prophet of God, for thou art the man whom an angel said in a vision: Thou shalt receive. Therefore, go with me into my house and I will impart unto thee of my food; and I know that thou wilt be a blessing unto me and my house" (Alma 8:20).
Alma is so hungry that he takes up a policy of eat first, introductions later. Only after he is full does Alma tell
Amulek what his name is.
Alma knew why he had returned to Ammonihah: to preach the gospel.
But it wasn't initially clear at first that Amulek was to join him. Perhaps Amulek hoped to join Alma on his mission or perhaps he'd even asked Alma to pray to find out the Lord's will concerning him, like many of the early Saints asked Joseph Smith to do. Whatever the case, after Alma had spent "many days" (Alma 8:27) at Amulek's house, the call came from the Lord that Alma and Amulek were preach the gospel (Alma 8:28).
Given the way Alma was treated the first time he preached both Alma and Amulek had to know they were risking their lives to preach in front of the people of Ammonihah. Amulek, though, was risking even more. This was his city; these were his friends; this was his home. He was risking not just his life, but his comfortable life and reputation to preach with Alma.
So whether the call was expected, and whether it was desired may be unknown. But this we do know: Amulek was called, so he went. High risk? Yes. But Amulek wanted to serve God first, and then let the consequence follow.
Alma wasn't much different. After being cast out of Ammonihah, his response was to fast and pray that he could go back. And when he was instructed he could go back, he did walk back slowly, he sprinted toward the city he'd been thrown out of; he ran toward his persecutors because he was on the Lord's errand.
In this way, Alma and Amulek were, like the Lamanites converted by the sons of Mosiah, saying, "If the Lord saith unto us go, we will go."
It's that kind of conviction and dedication that would be worth traveling 2,100 years through time to see--to see such men of Christ, willing to say, "I'll go where you want me to go, dear Lord."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)