First off, what exactly is a nerd? I think there are different levels of “nerd”. The “nerd” I’m talking about is not that weirdo with asthma, high-water pants, enormous glasses, who loves math and science, and gets “kick me” stuck to their back. Someone like this guy:
Although those guys often fall into the category I'll be talking about. I’ll explain in a moment.
The nerd I’’m talking about is the “fangirl/boy” except one step beyond. You see, nerds “fangirl” over certain things like Star Wars, Doctor Who, Star Trek, and other things similar. While there are fangirls for Twilight or for certain actors and such, these things are not considered nerdy. Do you see my point?
Then, there’s a degree of loving something so much that you fall into the nerdy category. I mean, some people like Star Wars, but they are not Star Wars nerds. You are a Star Wars nerd when you have seen every single movie, know all the actors’ names and their birthdays, know all the trivia behind the scenes, can find hidden easter eggs, know the “extended universe”, keep up on actor’s and director’s lives, have very firm opinions on certain controversial subjects (“Han shot first!”, “the seventh film was too much like the fourth one”, “the prequels were terrible”), you know all the “inside jokes” that other fans have made, and so on. That is a Star Wars nerd. This can apply to basically anything. Not just the “nerdy” subjects I brought up earlier, but anything. There are Twilight nerds out there. I am a Disney nerd.
I attribute this behavior to the “obsessive personality”. I can’t really explain this fully, but I know for a fact that many people are afflicted with it. When you find something you really like, you latch onto it and you just have to know more. It literally consumes your life. A lot of people will watch a movie and they’re like “Yeah, that was a good movie” and then don’t watch it again except maybe years later. Then there’s the obsessive people who will watch the same movie and think “OMG! That was freakin’ FANTASTIC!!! I need to watch it again!” and then will. Then after watching it again, they’ll feel deprived, so fill the void with looking up random trivia online, facts about the actors, see what other people had to say about the movie, and so on.
The same goes for TV shows. This is is especially bad with TV shows because they are dragged out over a long period of time. A nerd will start a TV show then will get sucked in. However, because there’s no new episode, they have to fill the void will the same examples I gave above. The internet is a great source to fill that obsessive craziness you feel bursting within you. (Nerds are especially good binge watchers if all the episodes are already out, because they HAVE to know what's going to happen next and/or it's just SO good.)
Books are no different. You read a book, you get invested and you HAVE to find out more, you HAVE to talk to other people and share your opinions on the matter.
Believe me, when there’s no one around to do that with for a long period of time, it feels very isolating. There’s all this pent-up energy and feelings inside you. Even if you haven’t necessarily watched or read anything new recently, it’s still so awesome to talk to someone and “fangirl” over your passions (because, for real, they are passions). Even if you're repeating yourself over and over again, it's just so awesome! Notice that "normal" people do this all the time with "regular" subjects. How often do people talk about their shopping escapades, their dating life, or the sport they play. Think about that for moment. What do you enjoy talking about? You must have repeated yourself at least once, maybe even to the same person. There is absolutely nothing wrong with talking about what you love!
I think that a large majority of the time, this trait is found in the introverts. My theory why this is is because introverts have a difficult time connecting with real people, so they turn to fictional ones. Also, I, as a naturally sympathetic person, find it easy to relate to the people I watch and read about. Also as a writer, I am fascinated by all the different personalities and ways people are portrayed. As an artist, I love different film styles, lighting, colors, cinematography, etc.
My point is, the key to understanding this is not to judge because it literally does rule and consume our lives. It's a sensitive topic. Think of something you really love or are really passionate about... How would you like it if someone began insulting your newborn child, or the way you did your hair, or your golf swing? Imagine if you could never ever talk about it to anybody even though you're bursting with pride and happiness because you love it so much.
While with other people, you might go about your everyday lives without even thinking of a book or TV show, we nerds do not. I can’t go a day without thinking about one of my fandoms. So I ask you to not be thrown when we might look at you like a crazy person when we find out that you “haven’t watched Doctor Who!?!???” or “haven't read Harry Potter!???!” or whatever, but that’s only because we’re so literally consumed by it and maybe even a bit upset that we can’t talk about it to you. (I, personally, am only surprised when it’s a pop culture phenomenon like Harry Potter or Star Wars, not when it’s something more obscure.) And yes, we will chastise you if you insult the show/book, or characters in it because we take it very seriously. They are like our precious babies that we will defend to the death.
So please, do not misunderstand these nerds. They just really love the things they’re passionate about. It's just different from how you live your lives. They don’t really think lowly of those who don’t happen to watch/read whatever they do, so you shouldn’t think lowly of them.
I have never seen a video that more accurately describes
me. (OK, so maybe it's slightly exaggerated, but still)
Only nerds will find this truly hilarious because of all the
references, but others will be able to understand our mindset.
So I'm on a bit of a Scarlet Pimpernel high because of this massive project I'm working on (which will come to light in all due time). In order to prep myself for this, I've reread the book, read different analysises, rewatched all sorts of movie adaptions, practically memorized the music from the musical, watched the musical, researched all sorts of historical background... I think we can safely say that I am a Scarlet Pimpernel professional.
But that's not my point. My point is that I've had to watch the 1982 film again. And by golly, Anthony Andrews just nails that role! I mean, I always thought that before, but after all my meticulous research and rereading... dang!
And the make-up and costumes! Amazing! Especially the Scarlet Pimpernel's disguises. They are SO good! It is so hard to tell that it's him. Of course a lot of that is attributed to the actor, because later in the scene he'll change his posture and voice, and you can clearly tell it's him. Props, Andrews, props.
That's all I'm posting this for. I just had to display this! For one thing, the idea of one man being able to sneak in and out of a guarded gate repeatedly in numerous disguises is so much fun. Then, of course, this movie's make-up and costumes as well as Anthony Andrew's brilliant acting!
Because he is actually the Scarlet Pimpernel:
A noble, clever, daring adventurer with ridiculously sharp wit who saves the lives of French aristocrats. And he thoroughly enjoys what he does and is super good at it. I mean, look at that smirk.
But he has many disguises, the main one as Sir Percy Blakeney in public life. A foppish, brainless idiot who cares only for trivial things such as how to properly tie a cravat. I love how the book describes him: "the sleepiest, dullest, most British Britisher that had ever sent a pretty woman yawning".
I mean, you can see the difference, right? The laziness, the stupidity in his face? Not quite as sharp. And that voice! The drawl! If you ever needed an example of a British accent, this is the most British voice I ever heard. "Sink meh!"
Then check these out:
This one's my favorite disguise, right at the beginning. Especially if you have no idea who Percy is and you're just like, "That's our hero?" only to be pleasantly surprised.
Then you can suddenly tell it's him when he changes his posture and (obviously) when he changes his voice.
Then this one as an old hag. I sometimes think this is the most obvious one. You can tell it's him more especially when he talks. It's not the voice, just something about his chin or something... But still! Not bad work.
And again when he drops the charade:
And the hunchback:
"Let that be a lesson to you, sir. Never take anyone for granted."
So here's a montage of all the disguises so that you can fully appreciate it. Seriously!
So major props to the costume and make-up department as well as a standing ovation to Anthony Andrews for one heck of a performance!
And if you haven't seen this movie, I highly, HIGHLY recommend it! The Scarlet Pimpernel (1982) starring Anthony Andrews, Jane Seymour, and Ian Mckellen. Go find it now!
So I’ve come to the realization that I have not made a post dedicated to one of my all-time favorite stories: Jane Austen’s classic, Pride and Prejudice. How could this have passed me by for so long? I honestly think it is one of the greatest stories ever written. It doesn’t have a lot of action, stupid jokes, sex, or any of that stuff that makes something popular or “good” by today’s standards. It’s a witty commentary on society, not just the era it was written in, but on how humans act around one another anytime. Specifically pride and prejudice.
You have amazing characters put in interesting situations, specifically a love-hate romance. Wrap it all up in the regency era and bam! Fantastic book.
I’ve read the book dozens of times and I have also seen several movie/TV adaptions. All of them have had their strengths and weaknesses, but I’ve liked them on some level. So, I’ve compiled a list. Which adaption did what the best? I’ve picked out key elements from the story and then analyzed each adaption, deciding which one had the best for each category.
So here we go...
ELIZABETH
Ashley Clements from The Lizzie Bennet Diaries
Our main character. This was super tough to choose. All the Lizzies I’ve seen have been fabulous, but I narrowed it down to Ashley Clements and Jennifer Ehle (from the 1995 mini series). I eventually decided to go with this one because... well, I just think she captured the fun side of Lizzie a lot more. Although the ’95 series does capture Lizzie’s character very well, I think that LBD really shows a lot more of her wit, her silliness, her cynicism, and definitely her prejudice against Darcy. In the 1995 version, you can kind of see her annoyance of Mr. Darcy, but her contempt does not become very clear until the proposal scene (which, in the book, you are fully aware of how much she does not like him). LBD makes you fully aware of her feelings towards Darcy, which is one of the main reasons I picked it.
MR. DARCY
Colin Firth from the 1995 BBC mini-series
The love interest. I think this was sort of an obvious choice. I was trying really hard to be unbiased and to really consider all the other Darcys out there, but of course it had to come back to him. He IS Mr. Darcy. Personally, I don’t think he is the most handsome actor to have played him (not that he's ugly, mind you), but the way he portrays the character is so perfect! He comes off as prideful and stand-offish, but if you look closely, you can actually see him smiling subtly at some things. You realize he’s not so stiff and grumpy like he initially appears, he’s just quiet and shy. That is Mr. Darcy. He's not grumpy and emotionless. He is amused by things, he's witty, he's intelligent, he has emotions. All the other actors don’t manage to capture that quite as well. They always play him as stiff and proud, but don’t portray the awkwardness and subtle wit.
Then of course, you just have to melt every time he looks at Lizzie. That face! *swoons*
(Then, the unforgettable lake scene. Do I even have to talk about it?)
MR. WICKHAM
Adrian Lukis from the 1995 BBC mini-series
Our antagonist. As I was thinking about this one, I realized that most of the adaptions sort of gloss over him and don’t put a lot of effort into making him believable. I mean, the whole point is for him to appear as a nice, sympathetic guy who you would want to be friends with (in contrast to Mr. Darcy who nobody likes). Almost all the adaptions automatically make him come off as shady. No room for friendship, he suddenly tells Lizzie his sob story and she believes him just like that. Why? What reason does she have to believe a complete stranger? She’s smarter than that.
That is why I chose this version, because it really takes the time to establish Wickham as a nice and trustworthy guy. Even after he’s been exposed as a moocher, womanizer, and gambler, he still waltzes around with that charming smile, ever-so polite. And Adrian Lukis pulls it off. He is able to appear so falsely charming and pleasant. The way he reluctantly tells Lizzie his backstory is perfect. Like, pretending he’s not so bitter about it and actually sounds like he’s at peace with it, like “all is forgiven. I am happy. I’m not manipulating you in any way.”
MR. COLLINS
David Bamber from the 1995 BBC mini-series/ Matt Smith from Pride and Prejudice and Zombies
The foil (def: opposite of the protagonist). I honestly could not choose! I was dying in agony trying to pick one! Now, you may say that I’m biased because Matt Smith is the Eleventh Doctor from Doctor Who, but in all honesty, I went into the movie skeptical of the casting choice. I wasn’t sure if he could really pull it off. But, boy was I wrong! Most Mr. Collinses in the past have to say these goofy, awkward lines, and they almost seem aware that they’re saying them. Do you know what I mean? Like, you can kind of tell they’re making an effort to be weird and/or creepy as part of the character. I mean, it still works. But just the way that Matt Smith played it... it was just so natural and hilarious. I don’t think he really looked the part, he’s far too cute and puppy-dog-like, but he portrayed that awkward, bumbling, idiotic, clueless character very well.
As to David Bamber, I simply could not rule him out. He is just too perfect! He looks the part for one thing, but then the way he delivers his lines... I can’t handle it! He’s just so passionate. You can’t forget the way he says “Lady Catherine de Bourgh” as though she were some sort of goddess. He's incredibly awkward and clueless, but not so much so that you're repulsed by him (like some versions). Bamber has enough charm to keep him on the fence of likable and annoying which is perfect.
SUPPORTING CAST
1995 BBC mini-series
I had to go through several characters and I was torn on a couple in different adaptions, I almost thought of dividing them into more categories (but then this post would be very extensive). However, when it came down to it, I had to admit that the majority of my favorites came from the mini-series. You gotta love Mrs. Bennet and her over-dramatic wailing. Or how about Mr. Bennet and his sardonic attitude? Mr. Bingley’s ginormous smile and over-enthusiasm? Caroline and Mrs. Hurst’s stupid laughter?
I mean, these are just a couple characters and couple of notable traits. I could go on. I think that the casting was spot on for this series and each actor captured their character perfectly right down to the drunk servant dancing outside the first ball.
PLOT (How well is the plot portrayed?)
1995 BBC mini-series
This one is on my list a lot, it seems. But there’s no denying that it lays out the plot the best. Since it is a mini series, it was able to put a lot of detail into it. There was very little of the book that was left out. Plus, it did not stray far from what was originally written (because sometimes even mini series will change up the plot a lot). Also, it was done very well and the characters were spot on.
SCENERY
2005 movie
When I first saw this movie, I was blown away. I was so used to the look of the mini-series, I was not expecting this. I mean, the Bennets lived on a farm in the actual country. The book talks about them living in the country, but this movie takes it literally and slaps them out in the middle of the hills and farmland.
But wow did that make for some impressive shots. I swear, every scene and every shot was a masterpiece. Whether you’re looking at the green hills of the English countryside, the rocky mountains, a grand house, the interior of a ballroom, or the inside of a barn, you are just in awe.
COSTUMES
2005 movie
Again, this movie looked fantastic! I’ll just say that it didn’t do a whole lot for me in many areas, but it sure looked amazing. The costumes are no exception. The ballgowns, the everyday dresses, the servants’ clothes, the rich clothes, the coats, the bonnets, everything was a piece of art. And everything seemed to match its setting, like a painting.
FIRST PROPOSAL SCENE
Pride and Prejudice and Zombies
Okay, so I barely watched this recently and obviously this movie is very unconventional and different from the actual Pride and Prejudice story. However, it does get the general story across, it just has zombies in it. Anyways, when I first saw this scene-- a very key scene to the book-- I was thoroughly entertained. I mean, traditionally Mr. Darcy comes, asks her to marry him (in a sort of back-handed way), she turns him down, and they get into a heated discussion about pride and Darcy’s faults and crimes, eventually ending with Lizzie declaring that he is the last man in the world she would ever marry.
This all still happens in PP&Z except instead of just standing there and yelling at each other, they are actually physically fighting. I know that sounds lame, but it was actually portrayed very well. I cannot even begin to describe it. I know it’s not what happens in the book, but it’s just... It’s like a physical representation of their emotions, you know? Lizzie is the one actually attacking him and he’s mostly defending himself. And the way she declares that he’s the last man in the world she could ever marry and then immediately goes to stab him in the heart. It’s rather symbolic.
Of course the choreography of the fighting is very entertaining to watch as well. DANCE AT NETHERFIELD 2005 movie
Like I said earlier, this movie didn't do a whole lot for me except look nice, but I do have to admit that this scene was portrayed really well. Even though it did leave out several lines and chunks of conversation, you can just feel the tension between the two characters. If I'm being completely honest, I do think that the '95 version portrays the actual conversation better, but the atmosphere and tone that this movie sets for it is perfect. Even though in the book, Lizzie is a lot more aloof and casual about her questioning while Mr. Darcy is sort of confused, the way that this movie turns it into a more intense, romantic-tension bit is great. I love when it shows them dancing alone, as if they've become the only two in room because they're so focused on each other. Also that music, it's so eerily romantic.
SECOND PROPOSAL SCENE
The Lizzie Bennet Diaries
This one immediately came to mind. There is no doubt which adaption portrays this scene the best. It brings out so many emotions, I cannot handle it! I remember when I first saw it, I cried. How many adaptions can manage that? And that kiss! I’ve been considering a blog post on what makes a good on-screen kiss, and I know I would use this one as an example. Yes! So good!
It gets all the lines in there (even if they are modernized), it gets those emotions across, those two FINALLY get together! It’s perfect!
Today, in my Book of Mormon class, we discussed apostates and Anti-Christs. I had never really thought about the topic before, at least not very deeply. I knew what they were, I read about them in the Book of Mormon, I knew about Korihor, Sherem, Amlici, etc, but I had never really considered modern-day Anti-Christs.
Now, I know that there’s not really a specific person who can be pegged as “the Anti-Christ” as most people know the term, but Anti-Christ teachings can be found all over the place. In class, we discussed how the most dangerous and threatening people to the church are the apostates: people who were once members, but have fallen away. These are the tares from the wheat and the tares parable. They grow among us and look very similar, but they are actually a weed.
Anti-Christ teachings come in forms of “false educational, political, religious, and philosophical concepts” according to President Benson. Many members fall prey to these. Aren’t all of these relevant today? How much political turmoil is there going on? How much philosophical and moral issues are brought to light? So many people have left the church because of false teachings in these areas.
Anti-Christs go about with the actual “intent to destroy the church of God” (Alma 2:4). They may have other motives, but the initial goal is to bring down the church. In class we discussed absolute truths. I cannot remember the exact quote, but it was by Elder Oaks, and he said that some people say that there are no absolute truths and that it’s all relative. Basically, believe what you want and then that’s what it is.
This is untrue. My teacher brought up excellent examples of why this is not so:
#1- The sun is in the sky. Someone who is blind, or someone who grew up in a cave could choose not to believe it, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there. Even at night when we can’t see it, that doesn’t mean it’s not still there.
#2- Two friends see a girl they have’t seen in years and one thinks she looks pregnant while the other one thinks she’s just put on some weight. They can argue the fact back and forth, but she’s not going to be pregnant and non-pregnant each time they say so just because they believe it. Say she is actually pregnant. Just because the one friend says she not, doesn’t make her not pregnant.
Some absolute truths of the church: Jesus is the Christ, God is real, we are sons and daughters of God, God speaks to prophets today. Just because other people choose not to believe these things does not make them untrue.
On the subject of speaking to prophets, this is another issue many members often have. A common problem today is that people do not believe in God and his commandments. All that matters are man’s laws and judgement. Basically, do what you want and don’t get caught. Just as long as you’re happy and it doesn’t inflict on other’s “happiness”. These peer pressures and temptations, the “eat, drink, and be merry” mind set, comes into conflict with God’s laws. These laws are found not just in the scriptures, but are given to us through the mouth of the prophet and the brethren.
This is what really trips people up. People cannot accept some of the modern-day revelation that has been given to us. No, I’m not just talking about the recent children of same-sex marriage policy change (although, that is a very good example). This has been going on since the church was established. Heck, this has been going on since ancient times. Remember the rich man who was asked to give up all that he had and follow Jesus? He didn’t like that and went his own way.
So, an Anti-Christ isn’t someone who is going to lead the devil’s servants in a great battle during the apocalypse or any of that stuff you see on TV (yes, I’m talking about Supernatural). They’re not even one specific person. They’re much more subtle and unnoticeable. The teachings may appear as harmless ideas, teachings, TV shows, or whatever, but it’s just the beginning to Satan’s plan to destroy the church of God. Of course we know that the Lord will prevail in the end, but that doesn’t mean we should be careless. And besides, what about our own salvation?
I have raved about how amazing my Book of Mormon class is this semester. Every single class always blows my mind, enlightens me, and/or gives me such a rich and spiritual experience. My teacher, Brother Allison, is fantastic and super knowledgable. I just wish I could share all the info and experiences with everybody. I love them so much! Then I had a thought... what if I recorded a class? At least part of one since it’s an hour-long class.
So I didn’t actually film it, I only recorded the audio and then I wrote down the transcript here.
This is the beginning quarter of my lesson today. The topic was Anti-Christs.
****************************************
This is one of my favorite paintings when it comes to Satan. There’s not a whole lot of paintings when it comes to Satan, but I actually like this one because it’s Christ casting out Satan. And Carl Bloch was kind of an art aficionado. I don’t have an art degree, but I do enjoy good art. Carl Bloch is probably the painter for the LDS church and he was never LDS. He was over in Denmark and he painted a whole bunch of paintings throughout his lifetime about 300 years ago.
These are all paintings of Carl Bloch, you recognize them? We probably have more Carl Bloch paintings in LDS temples than any other artist. One of the ones I really like over here is this one
But we don’t really ever use it probably because the angel has wings. But he’s got a couple versions, he’s actually got three different versions with the angel in Gethsemane with Christ, comforting him. And we learn through latter-day revelation it was who?
Student: Michael.
Yes, Michael, or Adam. Anyway, Carl Bloch has kind of a neat place in the LDS church.
I need a volunteer to read this. This is probably the best quote we’ll see today. It’s President Benson on... In fact let me give a little background on this... In his talk, he said this: there’s three major purposes in the Book of Mormon.
This is one of the three. Had I come up with my own list of twenty major purposes in the Book of Mormon, I don’t think I ever would have hit this one. So the fact that the prophet says that it’s one of the three main reasons we have the Book of Mormon catches my interest.
“Second, the Book of Mormon exposes the enemies of Christ. It confounds false doctrines and lays down contention. It fortifies the humble followers of Christ against the evil designs, strategies, and doctrines of the devil in our day. The type of apostates in the Book of Mormon are similar to the type we have today. God, with his infinite foreknowledge, so molded the Book of Mormon that we might see the error and know how to combat false educational, political, religious, and philosophical concepts of our time.”
So, if you would have just said this (“the Book of Mormon exposes the enemies of Christ”) that would have impressed me. But there’s a lot of meat in this little quote. I just wanted to break it down for a minute and talk about it. So, it fortifies the humble followers against these things. How do you think the Book of Mormon fortifies us against evil designs, strategies, and doctrines?
Student: Well, a lot of the message of the Anti-Christs we hear in the Book of Mormon is delivered a little bit differently, but a lot of it’s the same concept. I think we know our enemy, we can recognize that. It’s not something that’s going to surprise us.
And he also goes on to say, it’s the same kind of thing we have today, right? So if we can recognize the strategies and the tactics... I mean how helpful is that? If you’re going into a war against an unknown enemy with unknown weapons, that’s a little daunting. But if we can see what the weapons are and what the strategies are in advance, I think that could be very helpful to us.
OK, here’s another thing that captures my attention. This is actually two parts in my mind. We get attacks in the Book of Mormon from apostates. What does that mean, “apostates”?
Student: People who have left the church.
People who are either... they may still be technically members, but they’ve now rejected the teachings of the church basically. Or they may be excommunicated nonmembers. But the attacks all throughout the Book of Mormon, the anti-Christs are who?
Student: Apostates.
Apostates. Members or former that are attacking the church. Can I just tell you, that is the same today. The ones who do the most damage are the tares. The parable of the wheat and the tares. Remember why we don’t get rid of the tares before they’re all fully grown?
Student: It’ll hurt the wheat.
It’ll hurt the wheat and also they look very similar, it’s hard to detect. President Kimball said of the parable of the wheat and the tares: the tares are members of the church, but are in apostasy. So it’s hard to detect. Who does more damage to the church? Non-Mormons who complain about the church or apostates within the church?
Student: Apostates.
Apostates.
Student: A lot of them know the church ordinances, temple ordinances, and stuff. And that messes that up for everyone.
Yep. It’s apostates that kind of do the most damage. So it’s the same today, even though the Book of Mormon was 2500 years ago, depending on what time you’re looking at, it’s the same today. We have apostates in the church who can afflict some harm. But also... Now here’s my thought, because I read this quote and really pondered it yesterday as I was putting all this together. I’m not too worried, I hope, about anybody in here being an apostate. I’m going to take for granted that we’re all faithful members of the church and we’re going to stay that way. I hope that’s the case. My bigger concern is the latter part of the quote. Because what else does he say about this then? That we will see the error and know how to combat false education, political-- boy, talk about politics going on right now-- religious, and philosophical concepts.
I had a talk with Elder Johnson of the First Quorum of the Seventy a while back, and one of the things he said was he is very concerned about is that faithful saints, good members, who ignorantly, because of ignorance are sucked into some of these things in our world and society. They buy into incorrect things, but in ignorance. They don’t mean wrong, they’re not trying to do the wrong thing, but they still get sucked in. So today, I actually want to focus on that a little bit. Because I pondered what to do for the lesson, I thought now that you’ve done the reading and the background for anti-Christs, let’s talk about today some of the things members trip up on, get offended about, or struggle with because of false educational, political, religious, or philosophical concepts. That’s my bigger concern, I think.
Alright, having said that, let’s look at a couple more quotes here. Elder Oaks, this is two parts. I broke it up. Can I have someone read this first part?
Student: “Some say when it comes to moral issues, there are no universally objective right or wrong answers. No inappropriate or appropriate statements, and no reasonable or rational ways to which make moral distinctions that apply every time, in every place, and to every person.”
You do not combat that here on this campus I would hope. In my bachelor’s degree, it was brought up all the time by my professors. That there is no absolute truth. It’s all a matter of opinion. Let me give you a little story about this: I had a teacher that I really liked and took several classes from for my major, but he was an atheist and he made it known that he was an atheist. But I still liked him as a person, I liked the way he taught, he got the class involved, it was a good class. But I heard him say more than once that there’s no absolute truth, it’s all relative. I did a lot of thinking about that. I was a returned missionary and I didn’t believe that. I knew of a talk from President Kimball who was the prophet when I went out on my mission where he said there are absolute truths, the fact that there is a Jesus the Christ. That is an absolute truth, even if most of the world doesn’t believe it, that doesn’t do away with it. He still lived. And so I was kind of aware of that, but I didn’t want to get into a religious debate with my teacher in class, that would be counter-productive.
So I did some thinking about this and sure enough, he brought it up again. And I raised my hand and said, “Could I talk to you about this?”. He said, “Ah! Taker!”, you know, someone is willing to take the challenge. I said, “Yes.” And he says, “You’re religious, aren’t you?”, and I said, “I am.”. And he said, “OK, go ahead.” I mean, he was just ready to have this religious debate. I mean, can you prove spiritual things?
Student: No.
So it’s kind of a fruitless endeavor to have a debate like that in class. So I did not go that direction. I said, “I believe tat there is an orb in the sky called the sun. S-U-N. And even if someone’s blind or someone was raised in a cave and doesn’t believe there’s a sun, it doesn’t make it go away. Just because we can’t see it at night doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It’s still there and it’s still real.”
I could just see on his face the look of confusion. Like, “this is not what I expected”. I think he was ready to argue religious things, but I refused to go there.
The other example I use was this.. because I’d thought it through and I knew the topic would come up again in class... and I said, “Suppose my friend and I five years out of high school more or less are at college and we see a girl from high school that we hadn’t seen in years on campus. And I look at her and say, “I think she’s pregnant.” My friend says, “No, I think she’s just put on weight.” “No, I think she’s pregnant.” “No, I think she’s put on weight.” We can debate that all day long, but it doesn’t make her pregnant and non-pregnant back and forth. Let’s, for sake of argument, make her pregnant. The opinion that she’s not pregnant doesn’t make her not pregnant. The absolute truth is that she’s pregnant. An opinion actually has no bearing on that. Same with the sun in the sky. It’s not a matter of opinion. It actually exists whether people believe it or not.”
He had no clue what to do with that. I stumped my teacher on a topic he was hoping someone would challenge him on. He simply said, “I didn’t think you’d go that direction, let’s move on.” And he just moved on.
Well, I want to bear testimony on the spiritual side of things, there are absolute truths. There is a Heavenly Father, there is a Savior. That doesn’t go away just because some people in the world don’t believe in them. Alright, so very popular topic. I faced it all the time in college. I hope not here though. I hope everyone here has a teacher who has a testimony and understands there are some absolute truths.
Now the second part of the quote:
Student: “This is the belief applied by many in the popular media in current peer pressure. Break free of the old rules, you will feel good to you, there is no accountability beyond man’s law or public disapproval on those who are caught. Behind such ideas is the assumption that there is no God or if there is He has given no commandments that apply to us today.”
OK, how much does this sound like the world today? The only thing to fear is that there’s no God and so whatever you do just don’t worry about the rules. The only thing to worry about, interestingly enough-- I’ve never thought about it this way until Elder Oaks said it this way-- the only thing we do worry about are those two things: Man’s laws and public disapproval. How big today in our society is being politically correct? How important is that?
Student: Major.
Student: Big time.
Holy cow! It’s everywhere and everything! In fact, I’m going to do something that’s a little... maybe it’s a little... give me a minute...
So, there’s the commercial. I saw that and I thought, that’s kind of funny, I enjoyed it. But now, this commercial has caused a politically correct fire storm. Have you heard about this?
Student: Yeah, they’re going nuts.
Student: They are?
“Pro-choice group cries foul”. There’s three things that I’ve heard. Three complaints about this commercial. People are up in arms about this. I’m going to start with the minor ones and get to the major one. One complaint is that it make men look dumb.
*laughter*
Now, when have Doritos commercials ever really made men look really bright? Just saying. I don’t ever really remember people crying foul about that before in previous Doritos commercials. I think every one kind of makes the guy look like a doofus, but it’s funny.
Student: It’s just the one guy. It’s not saying all guys.
Yeah. The other concern, the second concern is that it makes women... It’s saying women are moody.
Student: She’s pregnant!
*laughter*
That is the crying foul about that. But the biggest one is... it’s really taking the internet by storm... is a pro-choice group on this very issue saying this is unfair, they’re trying to humanize the fetus.
*stunned silence*
That’s the big one on the internet. The abortion rights groups especially are up in arms saying “you’re trying to humanize the fetus! That’s unfair!”.
Student: It’s just reflexes.
I tuned into a morning talk show yesterday. A radio talk show thing. And the talk show host says, “Well what do they expect to find? A duck?”
*laughter*
But there’s three different complaints, three different groups complaining. The man looks dumb, it makes the woman look moody, and we’re trying to humanize the fetus for political advantage. They’re doing that intentionally right now during the presidential campaign year. Trying to go against those who are pro-choice, trying to make the fetus look human. That is one of the real complaints out there.
Going back to [the quote], do we live in a society right now that’s kind of wound up by public disapproval? I wouldn’t have guessed that a Doritos commercial could have caused so much controversy. But it really has.
Student: I really do think that it is a problem that the wife makes fun of the husband in front of the nurse though. I think that’s one of the main problems in marriage.
Well, I think there’s a valid point there because when I came home from school as a kid to watch TV, the shows that were on TV, all the parents were respected. Just to give you an example: The Brady Bunch. Who usually solves the problems? There’s always some problem with the kids. Have you ever seen The Brady Bunch?
Students: Yeah.
Who always solved the problems in the end? The mom and dad always had the answers. The Andy Griffith Show. Andy could always solve any problem he had. Leave It To Beaver. Dad and mom were always super wise. And I could go on and on. How many sitcoms today show the parents as being wise? Parents are always idiots. You could be as bright as could be as a teenager, but once you turn into parenthood as far as TV goes, you become an idiot. So good luck guys, you’re all about that age. But that’s the way media portrays it too often. Not just dad, but mom and dad become kind of bobos when they get married, now they don’t know anything.
Student: What’s funny is that, first of all, it’s just a story. Like, it’s not saying that all people are like that. It’s not saying that all pregnant women do that, all men are dumb, all fetuses... Like the fetus for example was going to have reflexes and it needs nutrients, so it’s making a joke on that. So it’s following the Dorito, it’s just food, it’s not really thinking about it if that’s what they care about.
But it’s three fire storms from three different angles and the big one is about humanizing the fetus which is bizarre to me.
Student: It’s alive.
What do we think is going to be in there?
Student: It’s not dead.
Soon as it comes out, we would call that thing human. Anyway, down to the last one. This is President Benson as well:
Student: “Today the world is full of alluring and attractive ideas that can lead even the best of our members into the depths of deception. Students at universities are sometimes so filled with the doctrines of the world and begin to question the doctrines of the gospel.”
Pause right there. Remember President Uchtdorf encouraging us not doubt our faith, but to doubt our...
Student: Doubts
Doubts. Doubt our doubts before we doubt our faith. What I think that, I hope not at this university, but at some universities, they come out after four years of worldly indoctrination and they start to doubt their faith. That becomes a concern. Keep going.
Student: “How do you, as a priesthood leader, help fortify the members against such deceptive teachings? The Savior gave the answer in his great discourse on the Mount of Olives when he promised, “whoso treasureth my word shall not be deceived”.”
The iron rod is?
Students: The word of God.
The word of God. I want to testify that as you hold on to the iron rod, the word of God, which is he’s advocating here, you will not be deceived. The word of God is the scriptures, but it’s also the words of the brethren. How many times in the scriptures does it talk about abortion? It doesn’t. But you know we have some excellent talks from the brethren in the latter days on abortion. Same sex marriage, same sex attraction. How much is that talked about? There is some in the bible, but not a whole lot. But you do have some very powerful talks from the brethren on this in the latter days. So it can’t be just the scriptures, we’ve got to plug in to the modern day prophets and understand so they help us from deception.
I want to talk about three of those today. Hot button topics today that the brethren have spoken on. Many members can go back to this. Too many members are unaware of those things and sometimes get sucked into the wrong notions because they are not aware the words of the current brethren or these topics.
Student: What’s interesting is that these studies have been done on BYU, BYU-Idaho, and BYU-Hawaii, different campuses, like how the different campuses make a difference on how someone is going to turn away by the time that they graduate. It’s like this crazy thing. It’s not about the school, it’s about like why you go here. You treasure up the words. You’re not going to turn away from it. If you don’t necessarily treasure up the words and don’t have a testimony, there’s always going to be people like that. It’s not about where you study.
****************************************
And that was all I recorded. I didn’t capture the really deep discussion part of the lesson. We began talking about Anti-Christs' teachings and how we see them today. We discussed how socialism is the downfall of charity and humanity. Brother Allison accidentally, indirectly called Hilary Clinton an Anti-Christ, which was pretty funny. It was after he showed a clip of her declaring that religion is unnecessary and is the reason the country is not progressing. We also watched a clip of a scholar professing an alternate view that the country is in need of religion. In summary, it was a very good lesson.
