unseen

One thing I noticed and really liked was in a movie when someone used for an excuse of not seeing a thing that they couldn't believe it because they could not see it. So, a per a on coveted their eyes and said, "Am I still here?" Point made. I similarly complain that I cannot believe something without evidence, thinking that I am any different.  It is likewise as foolish to believe one could only have evidemce of something through sensing it. It makes total sense that people do not perceive things the exact same way. Humans do not look the same or see things the same and when we (man) claims to "see" a thing quite often it is explained differently although the sane thing is examined. A perfect example was given year ago by Dieter Uchtdorf when he told a story about blind men who relayed what an elephant was from personal knowledge. One had actually touched it and after examining it (it's stout leg) had determined it was alot like a tree because it felt much like bark and had such a wide base it was likely tall. The next man had also touched it and looked farther with his hands to reveal it had a long sharp smooth part like a spear(tusks) and more like a giant soldier than a gentle tree. But, then a third explained that he had even more evidence that proved both previous witnesses were wrong. This man had not only felt many parts, but had actually found what felt Luke a rope and had swung on it (it's tail). He declared that it was absolutely not a dangerous soldier, but almost immediately in response, the next reported it slithered like a snake and though he had not found fangs yet, but found a Huge Salivating mouth. It had a tounge that seemed made for digesting men! It was a fearsome creature, far more deadly than a human soldier. All were right and had first hand accounts.

What really struck me today was as we were studying an episode in the life of Jesus Christ where he asked who men say that he is, lots of reports were given, but last of all Jesus asked who they (his disciples) thought he was. Peter said that he was the Son of God. And it was explained that he was not made aware of his truth by means that men possess, but only God. As my class talked about this it was mentioned by a few people that the truth is simply there waiting to be "revealed" or sensed, and that idea is so cool. There is no thing that cannot be revealed or evidenced. Too often though things are misunderstood. Our teacher used a cool object lesson that I got. She showed books of computer generated images that looked like one thing. But seemed to transform into multi dimensional things by changing our focus. 

In a podcast I had seen this morning regarding Peter's proclation and Jesus's comment of Peter's source that it came from Heaven or upwards in opposition to the wisdom of men or looking laterally.

In class it was mentioned that though it is somewhat good to get support from other men, one cannot build their testimony on it, Because if you are swayed by opinions of men that is likely to change, but truth doesn't change.

here it is!

Certainly, some will think, "Here it is. She has finally fallen off of her rocker." And you would be wrong, not in that I am old enough to need a rocker, but that I have fallen off of an accustomed way of thinking.  Truth be told, I have never believed the wisdom that says "don't talk to strangers." Or "train a child up..he will not depart from it." If they were true, well, we would all have been saved from to vice od social media, but how could anyone ere be anything but what they were? I loved the song we sang in brownies, "make new friends, but keep the old. one is silver and the other gold." I was like what the heck are we singing so happily? My mother told me not to talk to strangers, so making new friends is not gonna be possible for me, later I learned phrases like ",against my religion" or "concientios(sp?)objector". 

Years later, I am thinking alot about what I have taught or need to yet teach my offspring...I typed children, but none are technically children, so they say. And so, I concluded, well, if I teach them how to think it will be of more value than to teach great thoughts. Then, I thought of the countless parents who took comfort in the scripture, and I think it does more good to just believe it, so I only make this comment where it will never be seen, but how could it be true that if you train a child a certain way he will come back. How could there ever be diversity of thought, unless, at the time it was said, not parenting at all was a thing and thus clearly not teaching anything would differ from teaching and habits, but neither of my parents were, for example, trained in "Mormonism" though many of their habits were enlarged...it was often said by my friends who preacher's daughters that "Mormons make good Methodists". and I think they say that because the basics are so similar, and more happiness is certainly found in accentuating and noticing those similarities. But, I want my children to stick to the thongs they were taught because they trust them to be, under scrutiny, true principles.