:-)

If you watch “The Price is Right,” you see the contestants jump up and down and scream when they win a coffee table. But on Jeopardy, they win thousands and evince no emotion at all. Though I don’t tend to view the world in general through the lens of game shows, I do tend to identify more closely with the Jeopardy-type reaction.

cje, I’ve heard that before in the context of giving a naturalistic explanation for the miracle of the loaves. It sounds better in the context that you mention.

Margaret, I think I may just have a hard time conceding that I’m any kind of manifestation of a miracle.

One scene involved the appearance of St.Peter to a boy (modern day). Peter (the apostle) gives the boy an explanatiion of the miracle of the loaves and fishes.

Basically what happened is that most of the 5000 had actually brought food along with them. When Jesus asked if any had any food to share everyone clammed up, except the small boy with the loaves and fishes.

So Jesus, (being Jesus and sort of relising what’s goiung on) breaks up the loaves and fishes, places them in the 12(?) baskets and then passes them out to the crowd. As the baskets pass the people in the crowd–the ones too afraid to share their food– relise the error of their ways and keep for them selves only the food they need and place the left over amount in the basket. The result being all the surplus food and still everyone being fed.

The point is that the miracle was that hearts were chnged not that food fantastically appeared out of thin air.

Rent the movie–it is very good.

cje

Btw, Bookslinger, I really liked your idea of the Guatemalan woman being the prepared one. I recognize that I often have to be dragged to miracles because I have a bad habit of either not recognizing or of arguing with my spiritual impressions. There was a time in the temple when I argued against a strong prompting several times. (There was a reason I was to be at the veil to assist a particular sister–this is one of those very sacred experiences I won’t share on a blog.) I am set apart to help with Spanish sessions, and I kept arguing that I wasn’t set apart to help at the veil with this session, which was an English one. I was in the Celestial Room to meet a woman being endowed in one of the sessions–I didn’t know which–and I was wearing my name tag identifying me as a worker. The internal conversation was like this: “Ask if you can help at the veil.” “No, I don’t think so.” “Come on, ask.” “No, I’m not set apart for this one. It’s English.” “Just ask.” “No, I’m not going to.” Finally, another worker crossed the room, passing every other worker, and came up to me. “Could you help at the veil?” she asked.

I did, and there was a “striking” miracle (using DKL’s word). Obviously, I am stubborn. I wonder how many times I’ve won an argument I shouldn’t have won.

DKL: You said: “One can say that it’s better to search for bread on the sabbath than for tobacco because it’s better to be Mormon. But I think that if you work out that line of reasoning, you’ll end up begging the question.”
I don’t see that leading to circular reasoning at all. Presumably, the tobacco would be for you. There is a huge difference in purchasing candy, tobacco, or anything else to satisfy our particular wants, and purchasing something intended exclusively as a symbol of the Christian covenant and bought for others, not for oneself. Mormon or Hindu, the act of working beyond the self and for the good of others is sanctified.

And thanks, DKL and Danithew for making me feel so welcome at MM. I do like MM. You’re a little premature in your invitation, though. You don’t really know me yet. The thing I like about MM is that I feel pretty free to say all sorts of things–probably because DKL has set that rather “in your face” standard. I enjoy that–even though I won’t be even slightly shy in meeting him squarely in the midst of his arguments and wrestling hard. I’ve already warned DKL that I have a rather wicked sense of humor. I could reveal it here, and you might be scrambling for a way to get me to quit blogging. Right now, I’m a nomadic blogger who does it between files of the footage I’m transcribing. I think I’ll stay nomadic for awhile.

In the part where this ordinary-human-looking man claims to be the devil, Dudley asks him for some kind of sign to prove he has the power to grant wishes. When the devil asks what he wants, Dudley asks for the devil to make him an ice-lolly (popsicle). Just then, an ice-cream vendor wheels by, and the devil stops him, buys a popsicle, and gives it to Dudley.

Dudley protests that it wasn’t a miracle, just an ordinary purchase, and the devil responds “You got what you asked for, so why are you complaining?”

There are parts in it that mainstream christian denominations would find very irreverent, but most of the things being lampooned are points where LDS doctrine differs from mainstream denominations. One such gag is based on “God is everywhere at once” so the devil kicks Dudley Moore in the butt, and says “God was in your back pocket.”

If you ever see it listed in your TV listings, it’s worth setting your TIVO or VCR to record. Or buy it if you see a used VHS of it for sale for a couple bucks.

The memory of that popsicle gag has stayed with me. Our prayers are often answered through seemingly ordinary means.

If you had not brought the bread, the only result would be that someone at Church with enough responsibilities already would end up running home and getting some bread.

Margaret, you make a good point about where I’d be nowadays on Sundays. This past Sunday, I’m happy to report that I’d have probably been sleeping. For many years I worked 7 days a week, including Sundays. My office was downtown in Boston, and I took a lunch break one Sunday where I drove down Boylston Street (or maybe it was Newbury Street) looking for a tobacconist that was open to purchase the Nat Sherman cigarettes I smoked. I did find one, but I usually made it a practice to stock up on Saturday to avoid having to locate a tobacconist who kept Sunday hours.

On the other hand, my wife laughs that my family gives her credit for every redeeming trait that they see in me. They are, undoubtedly correct, but she doesn’t want any part of it. It’s a double-edged sword: Taking credit for my progress over the years means taking blame for my frequent backsliding, and our marriage is a constant battle to keep me from eating my dinner over the sink. Eventually, she just shrugs and says, “Well, he cleans up nicely.” She also claims that I’d have made the same kind of progress into adulthood with or without her. And who knows but that I’d be in a very similar place (sans the frantic search for bread) without the church? It’s hard to say what changes are inevitable and which are contingent, or which are “real” and which are just veneer. There’s just no telling.

One can say that it’s better to search for bread on the sabbath than for tobacco because it’s better to be Mormon. But I think that if you work out that line of reasoning, you’ll end up begging the question.

That said, both of your comments are a heck of a lot better than my post. Really amazing stories. In the end, miracles don’t have to be earth shattering — just self-shattering in some sense. And the way you tell these stories communicates their profundity in a big way.

I’m happy to have your comments, but you should be getting the idea that we’d love to have you blog here.