Lehi’s Three Sacrifices:

A Relationship to the Festivals of Passover, Weeks, and Tabernacles

S.Faux, Ph.D.

Original Draft: May 5, 2005
Current Version: April 12, 2008

Preface: This is probably is my most important blog essay in terms of providing an intellectual contribution. The main findings used by this essay were initially brought to light by Dr. Bruce L. Brown of Brigham Young University, and I am posting my expansion with his permission (although he is NOT responsible for any errors I introduced). This essay summarizes and develops Brown's discovery. I have seriously considered turning the paper into something more suitable for peer-reviewed publication. However, time and health have dictated otherwise. The primary lesson of this essay is that the Book of Mormon has a depth and richness that makes it worth serious scholarship. Dismissing the book as mere frontier literature does an injustice. The ideas in this essay need to be both accessible and assessable.

*****

A few years ago BYU professor of psychology, Dr. Bruce L. Brown, gave a devotional talk (“The Great Plan of Redemption,” August 4, 1998), describing how he had made close friends with a psychologist who also was a Jewish Rabbi. They discovered as they worked with each other that both had a love for the scriptures. Gifts were given. The Rabbi gave Dr. Brown a large Torah with a blue leather cover. Later, Bruce Brown gave the Rabbi a Book of Mormon about the same size with a similar blue leather cover.

Surprisingly, the Rabbi began to read the Book of Mormon. After reading several chapters in 1 Nephi, he said, “This is a book written by a Jew to a Jew.” He went on to explain to Bruce Brown the meaning of the sacrifices of Lehi described in the Book of Mormon, aspects that Bruce Brown had never noticed before.

The Rabbi noticed that Lehi had offered sacrifices near the Red Sea after the manner of the Mosaic law on three separate occasions (1 Nephi 2:7; 5:9; and 7:22). He explained to Bruce Brown that Jews did not arbitrarily offer sacrifices, but instead those sacrifices were given in conjunction with Jewish festivals. In a fascinating way, Lehi’s family was living out the themes of three festivals as they celebrated each sacrifice. Unfortunately, these proposed correlations have never been fully developed.

Latter-day Saints do recognize the importance of Judaic culture and its festivals. The LDS Bible Dictionary ("Sacrifices," pages 765-767) gives an extended discussion of the different types of sacrificial offerings given by the ancient Jews. There is a similar extensive discussion for “feasts” or festivals (p. 672-674). The Book of Mormon Reference Companion (D. Largely, Ed.) provides some nice articles in sections entitled: “Sacrifices” and “Altar of stones.” This short essay will argue that the three sacrifices of Lehi when placed in the context of Jewish festivals yields an enriched understanding of the ancient ties or correlations of the Book of Mormon.

Briefly, before going further, we must understand that the Mosaic Law demands the following:

Deuteronomy 16:16 [emphasis and brackets mine]
16 Three times in a year shall all thy males appear before the LORD thy God in the place which he shall choose; in the [1] feast of unleavened bread, and in the [2] feast of weeks, and in the [3] feast of tabernacles: and they shall not appear before the LORD empty.

Lehi’s First Sacrifice – 1 Nephi 2:7

The first sacrifice appeared to be given in conjunction with the Passover or the Feast of Unleavened Bread (celebrated in the spring; Hebrew = Pesach). A primary scriptural theme of the feast would be the following:

Exodus 12:26 – 27
26 And it shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service?
27 That ye shall say, It [is] the sacrifice of the LORD'S passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped.

Unleavened bread was prepared and consumed (Deut. 16: 3) in order to commemorate the haste with which the Israelites under Moses escaped from Egypt by means of the parting of the Red Sea (Ex. 14: 15-31), and as they ran into the wilderness. The feast had a deep and abiding theme of freedom and deliverance from bondage in order to find the Promised Land.

The parallels with the flight of Israel are unmistakable. Lehi escaped the evils of Jerusalem, which was about to be destroyed. His family on their way to the Promised Land (somewhere in the Western hemisphere) had to travel into the wilderness. Like Moses, they camped by the Red Sea.

1 Nephi 2:5-7
5 And he came down by the borders near the shore of the Red Sea; and he traveled in the wilderness in the borders which are nearer the Red Sea; and he did travel in the wilderness with his family, which consisted of my mother, Sariah, and my elder brothers, who were Laman, Lemuel, and Sam.
6 And it came to pass that when he had traveled three days in the wilderness, he pitched his tent in a valley by the side of a river of water.
7 And it came to pass that he built an altar of stones, and made an offering unto the Lord, and gave thanks unto the Lord our God.

Lehi’s family appeared to be living out an exodus experience as they celebrated the Passover and gave sacrifice upon an altar of stones. The parallels are so close that critics of the Book of Mormon have argued that Lehi’s story was dependent upon Exodus (e.g., G. Palmer, 2002, Mormon Origins, p. 74-78). Unfortunately, such critics often have neglected to mention that spiritual stories often parallel each other. Many other examples of parallelism could be cited. The story of the fasting of Jesus (Matthew 4:8–11) closely parallels the story of the fasting of Elijah (1 Kings 19: 4-12). Jesus feeding the multitudes (Mark 8: 1-10) closely parallels how Elijah multiplies the widow’s oil and meal (1 Kings 17: 10-16). The story of Jesus raising the widow’s dead son (Luke 7: 11-17) closely parallels Elijah raising the widow’s dead son (1 Kings 17: 17-22).

If Lehi’s family was living out an exodus experience and celebrating the Passover, then the Book of Mormon provides many details but without ever using the word “Passover.” Some critics could argue that Joseph Smith did not understand the connection between an exodus and Passover. Instead, he merely conjured up memories of Moses. However, accusations of modern borrowing become strained when the first sacrifice is viewed within the context of the other two sacrifices.

If Lehi made only one sacrifice, then we could easily dismiss the Mosaic parallels described above as inconclusive. But, there are two more sacrifices with similar parallels to Jewish festivals. Ultimately, we must ask: How did Joseph Smith know all this information?

In sum, Lehi’s first sacrifice is consistent with the Passover themes of freedom and deliverance from bondage in order to find a Promised Land.

Second Sacrifice – 1 Nephi 5:9

On the Jewish calendar the Festival of Weeks or Pentecost (May / June; Hebrew = Shovuos) comes after Passover by seven weeks or 50 days. It is a celebration of scripture: the Torah (the five books of Moses) and the 10 Commandments given at Mount Sinai. Occasionally, the festival is called the “Giving of the Torah.” Because it occurs in early summer, it also celebrates the first of the harvest and thus it is sometimes called the Festival of First-Fruits. The holiday involves an intensive reading of scripture into late hours of the night.

In this festival the Book of Ruth is often read, and Jewish women play a more active role in the scriptural readings. Interestingly, in 1 Nephi, chapter 5 we read the extremely rare voice of a woman testifying of the Lord. The overall context is that the sons of Lehi have just returned from Jerusalem with the plates of brass, a compendium of scripture. Celebration is punctuated with burnt offerings:

1 Nephi 5:7-11 [emphasis and brackets mine]
7 And when we had returned to the tent of my father, behold their joy was full, and my mother was comforted.
8 And she spake, saying: Now I know of a surety that the Lord hath commanded my husband to flee into the wilderness; yea, and I also know of a surety that the Lord hath protected my sons, and delivered them out of the hands of Laban, and given them power whereby they could accomplish the thing which the Lord hath commanded them. And after this manner of language did she speak.
9 And it came to pass that they did rejoice exceedingly, and did offer sacrifice and burnt offerings unto the Lord; and they gave thanks unto the God of Israel.
10 And after they had given thanks unto the God of Israel, my father, Lehi, took the records which were engraven upon the plates of brass, and he did search them from the beginning.
11 And he beheld that they did contain the five books of Moses [the Torah], which gave an account of the creation of the world, and also of Adam and Eve, who were our first parents.

Please note that the second sacrifice was given in gratitude for the safe return of Lehi’s sons and for the receipt of the sacred plates of brass containing the books of Moses. The phrase “books of Moses” is used twice in the Book of Mormon. Besides verse 11 quoted above, the phrase is only found again in 1 Nephi 19:23. Thus, it is fascinating that one of Lehi’s sacrifices is juxtaposed against the reading of the five books of Moses, that is, the Torah. A coincidence seems unlikely.

In sum, Lehi’s second sacrifice is consistent with the Feast of the Weeks and its themes of joy in the scripture, receiving the Torah on Mt. Sinai, and Lehi’s sons’ delivery of the sacred brass plates containing holy writ.

Third Sacrifice – 1 Nephi 7:22

On the Jewish calendar the Festival of Tabernacles (Hebrew = Sukkos) follows the Festival of Weeks. It occurs in September or October. It is a celebration of the ingathering or harvest, and thus is sometimes called the Feast of the Ingathering. Another common name is Feast of Booths. Many details of this great holiday are described in another essay of mine called “Festivals of sacrifice.”

One of the basic themes of the Feast of Tabernacles is with respect to joy of harvest, which also symbolizes the harvest of souls. Notice that 1 Nephi, chapter 7 discusses extensively the harvest of Ishmael’s family from Jerusalem. Further, notice that after the sacrifice of thanksgiving was offered (v. 22), Lehi and his band went about harvesting seed.

1 Nephi 7:1-2, 4-5, 22
1 … it was not meet for him, Lehi, that he should take his family into the wilderness alone; but that his sons should take daughters to wife, that they might raise up seed unto the Lord in the land of promise.
2 And it came to pass that the Lord commanded him that I, Nephi, and my brethren, should again return unto the land of Jerusalem, and bring down Ishmael and his family into the wilderness. …
4 And it came to pass that we went up unto the house of Ishmael, and we did gain favor in the sight of Ishmael, insomuch that we did speak unto him the words of the Lord.
5 And it came to pass that the Lord did soften the heart of Ishmael, and also his household, insomuch that they took their journey with us down into the wilderness to the tent of our father. …
22 And it came to pass that we did come down unto the tent of our father. And after I and my brethren and all the house of Ishmael had come down unto the tent of my father, they did give thanks unto the Lord their God; and they did offer sacrifice and burnt offerings unto him.

Verse 22 ends chapter 7 and the following verse directly follows. In the original 1830 Book of Mormon there was no chapter separation between these verses. In the context of this essay, I wonder whether these verses have been inappropriately separated into different chapters.

1 Nephi 8:1
1 AND it came to pass that we had gathered together all manner of seeds of every kind, both of grain of every kind, and also of the seeds of fruit of every kind.

Again, verse 8:1 seems to belong with the others above because it involves harvesting that is consistent with a Feast of Ingathering and the associated sacrifice.

In sum, Lehi’s third sacrifice is consistent with the Feast of Ingathering and its themes of joy in the harvest of souls and the harvest of seed.

Issues and Conclusions

Notice the three sacrifices of Lehi were correctly ordered in timing and sequence – Passover, Weeks, and Tabernacles (Deut. 16:16). Some critics have complained that the Book of Mormon never refers to Jewish festivals. It is true that the Book of Mormon does not name the festivals. However, this essay makes the claim that one cannot fully appreciate the Book of Mormon without being literate in the ritual life of Judaism.

The findings presented here reveal a sophisticated depth to the Book of Mormon that is not easily explained by the authorship of an uneducated boy from the American frontier of the 1820s – that is, Joseph Smith. Joseph may have had access to information about Jewish culture and festivals, but if he did, then why are the festivals not named explicitly in the Book of Mormon? Even so, authorship is not the problem being addressed in this essay. More important is the level of sophistication in the Book of Mormon that is too often dismissed by academic analysts. In terms of actual religious practice, it is the integral sophistication of the book that ultimately explains its popularity with millions of followers.

The main thesis here proposed is not without problems that require some solution. This essay cannot provide fully developed answers, but it can provide a start.

First, burnt sacrifices were performed by priests of the tribe of Levi, having the Levitical priesthood. The lineage of Lehi was the tribe of Manasseh (see Alma 10:3). Even so, most Mormon scholars assume that Lehi held a higher priesthood, the Melchizedek (e.g., see: D. R. Seely, “Lehi’s altar and sacrifice in the wilderness,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, 2001, 10(1), p. 62-69).

A further problem is that Deuteronomy 12: 13-14 appears to forbid burnt sacrifices outside of the Jerusalem temple. However, the Jewish people of the time might have understood that there could be exceptional circumstances. For example, Samuel offered sacrifices in Gilgal:

1 Samuel 10:8
8 And thou shalt go down before me to Gilgal; and, behold, I will come down unto thee, to offer burnt offerings, and to sacrifice sacrifices of peace offerings: seven days shalt thou tarry, till I come to thee, and shew thee what thou shalt do.

Samuel at Gilgal offered sacrifices apparently in the absence of the tabernacle (see also, 1st Samuel 13:7-9). Biblically, such sacrifices were an exception to the rule. Lehi and his family certainly had exceptional circumstances.

If one does not accept the divine origin of the Book of Mormon, then the above issues are non-problems. It does not matter whether Lehi held a priesthood or whether Lehi broke the rules about the place of sacrifice. Regardless of one’s position on the dimension of religious legitimacy, the Book of Mormon is worthy of a deeper analysis than often provided by religious critics. The three sacrifices of Lehi are examples.

*****

NOTE: I am pleased to announce that "Mormon Insights" received "BIV's Blog of the Month Reward."

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Abe Lincoln and the Mormons:

A Brief Review of Presidents and Prophets

President Abraham Lincoln (Source: Library of Congress)

My Army son (#1) and his newly wed wife recently gave me a book by Michael K. Winder: Presidents and Prophets: The Story of America's Presidents and the LDS Church (Covenant Communications, 2007). It is a fine book, and I am pleased with the gift. However, there are little points that bother me. For this essay, I am going to focus on Winder's chapter 16 on Abraham Lincoln.

The first sentence in the chapter has a phrase that says: "Abraham Lincoln knew the Mormons, and likely met Joseph Smith." Likely??? How likely was it really that Joseph Smith would have run into Abe Lincoln? The only real hint we have is found in a letter. Here is the small relevant portion from a longer letter, which mostly dealt with issues extraneous to Mormons:

Lincoln to John Todd Stuart, 1 March 1840, Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, 1:206-207

Springfield, March 1, 1840.

Dear Stuart: …

Speed says he wrote you what Jo. Smith said about you as he passed here. …

Your friend, as ever,

A. LINCOLN.

Winder provided little or no analysis of this letter. Therefore, I will add my two cents. The letter is addressed to John Todd Stuart, who was one of Lincoln's first law partners and who was a Representative in Washington (1839-1843). The letter refers to "Speed." This "Speed" is no doubt Joshua Fry Speed, who ran a notable general merchandise store in Springfield. He was a great personal friend of Lincoln – and a roommate.

Consistent with the letter's claim, Joseph Smith passed through Springfield, Illinois on or about March 1st of 1840 (Joseph Smith chronology, BYU Studies, 2007, 46: 110). He was returning from a trip to Washington to obtain redress for the Missouri persecutions of the previous several years.

Please note in the letter that it was Speed who was the source of information about what "Jo. Smith" said. The letter said, "he wrote you," meaning Speed wrote Stuart. One must wonder whether the referenced circa-1840 letter of Joshua Fry Speed to John Todd Stuart still exists. No one knows.

It seems likely to me that Joseph Smith paid a visit to Speed's general store, probably to obtain supplies. Lincoln slept at the general store at night, after the store was closed. Joseph could have met Lincoln, but more likely he talked with Speed during the day, and then Speed probably talked with Lincoln later that night.

Why would Joseph Smith speak about John Todd Stuart to Joshua Fry Speed? The reason comes from an important historical footnote. History of the Church 4:43 indicates that on December 7th, 1839 Joseph Smith and Elias Higbee met with the full Illinois delegation in the Capitol building in Washington. This delegation involved Senator John M. Robinson, Senator Richard M. Young, and Representatives John Reynolds, Zadok Casey, and John T. Stuart. Stuart as a U.S. congressman had concerns about events in Nauvoo and the many voters therein. Mormons had relatively friendly relations with the man for years. For example, the Nauvoo Politics section of the Encyclopedia of Mormonism referred to the extensive "LDS support for the Whig John T. Stuart in the congressional election of 1841… ."

In any case, I find no convincing evidence that Abraham Lincoln ever met Joseph Smith. It is possible that they met, but we need to be skeptical of wishful thinking.

*****

According to Winder, in December of 1840 "Lincoln [assisted] the Saints in getting the Nauvoo Charter approved in the Illinois legislature." Apparently, Lincoln voted for the Nauvoo Charter.

*****

Winder does NOT mention the following:

In 1856, Lincoln was considered during the Republican Convention as a potential Vice Presidential candidate.

Why is this point relevant to Latter-day Saints? Consider the published platform of the party:

Republican Party Platform of 1856
Resolved: That the Constitution confers upon Congress sovereign powers over the Territories of the United States for their government; and that in the exercise of this power, it is both the right and the imperative duty of Congress to prohibit in the Territories those twin relics of barbarism--Polygamy, and Slavery.

In 1856, polygamy and slavery were considered the two top political problems on the horizon. With the rise of the Civil War, however, slavery dominated and polygamy temporarily dropped off the wayside.

*****

Lincoln had a hands-off policy towards Mormons. He was pre-occupied with keeping the Union together during the Civil War.

Winder does mention a famous meeting between then LDS representative T. B. H. Stenhouse and Lincoln in 1863. In that meeting Lincoln explained his Mormon policy:

From: Gustive 0. Larson, The "Americanization" of Utah for Statehood, San Marino, California: Huntington Library, 1971, p. 60, footnote 61
When T. B. H. Stenhouse ["then a Mormon in good standing"] asked the President what course he intended to pursue with reference to the Mormons, [Lincoln] replied, "Stenhouse, when I was a boy on the farm in Illinois, there was a great deal of timber on the farms which we had to clear away. Occasionally we wou[l]d come to a log which had fallen down. It was too hard to split, too wet to burn and too heavy to move, so we plowed around it. That's what I intend to do with the Mormons. You go back and tell Brigham Young that if he will let me alone, I will let him alone."

Winder leaves the impression that Lincoln appreciated the Mormons, but clearly Lincoln had other distractions. Here is just one example (a favorite story of mine):

At the beginning of the Civil War General McClellan headed the whole U.S. Army. The only problem was that for months and months Lincoln could never get McClellan to attack the enemy. Whenever Lincoln asked McClellan why his Army was not in battle there were excuses like “the roads are too muddy” or “we need more men.” One day Lincoln and a friend (named Hatch) visited McClellan’s Army camp. They went to a high point where they could see almost the entire huge force. While looking at the Army, Lincoln bent over to his friend and said in almost a somber whisper, “Hatch, Hatch, what is all this?” Hatch replied, “Why Mr. Lincoln, this is the Army of the Potomac.” Lincoln straightened up and then said in a loud voice, “No, Hatch, NO. This is General McClellan’s body-guard.” (See: D. H. Donald, Lincoln, New York: Simon & Schuster, p. 387).

*****

The Winder book did publish a most fascinating ledger from the Library of Congress indicating several books about Mormonism that Lincoln had checked out.

He checked out the Book of Mormon on November 18, 1861 and returned it on July 29, 1862. However, he also checked out the following anti-Mormon books for the same duration: John Hyde (1857) Mormonism: Its Leaders and Design, and Lt. J. W. Gunnison (1856) The Mormons, Or, Latter-Day Saints, In The Valley Of The Great Salt Lake..., . A few days later, he checked out Jonathan Baldwin Turner (1842) Mormonism in All Ages, another anti-Mormon diatribe.

We do not know whether Lincoln opened any of the pages to these books.

*****

Winder ends this chapter on Lincoln with an extensive discussion of how LDS leaders have paid extreme respect to the accomplishments of this President. Appropriately, Winder uses the term "Great Emancipator" in association with Lincoln. He was. Lincoln left an imprint on this country and on this Church that has grown only stronger with time.

I do recommend the Winder book, but readers should beware that the coverage is introductory and leaves important gaps in places. The book is nicely illustrated, reasonably documented, and is generally a fun read.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Hooah! The Army "Amen"

Soldiers, for some reason, have always liked mottos. After some victorious battle, Julius Caesar is said to have exclaimed, "Veni, vidi, vici," a Latin phrase for “I came, I saw, I conquered.” Caesar was known for his distant campaigns, his determination, and his strategies in battle. In modern times, Ft. Jackson (of South Carolina) has a motto that says “Victory Starts Here.” This relates to the fact that the Fort does a lot of "boot camp" training, but in general, the motto really means that victory begins in the head – the soldier's brain. Smart soldiers are victorious. My favorite military motto is "Hooah," which can mean … well, just about anything.

*****The Meaning of Hooah*****

"HOOAH" (roughly pronounced “who-ah” in a deep guttural tone) is slang used by U.S. Army soldiers to represent the acronym: H.U.A., which stands for "Heard, understood, and acknowledged". (But, I will admit there are entire blog essays written on the etymological controversies of how and where the term was derived).

Hooah is usually a highly positive and affirmative term that can mean anything except "No!" I have heard it used to mean the following:

1. Great! Fantastic! Cool! Yes!
2. You are welcome. (In response to a "Thank you.")
3. I'm listening (or at least pretending to).
4. A highly motivated "Darn!" (or substitute your favorite 4-letter word)
5. I have had enough. Move on. (Change the topic in this conversation).
6. Amen.

In reality, the usage is almost limitless.

So, if you are at Church and happen to hear a soldier in uniform use the term "Hooah," just think of this translation: "I am happy, unified, and at-one" (as in at-one-ment or atonement). If you hear the term outside of Church, well … it could mean something quite different. ;)

***** Hooah as Life Philosphy*****

"Hooah" represents the Army's "can do" philosophy. It is a verbal monument for determination.

What is your philosophy of life? A significant part of my life philosophy would be determination, although I admit some people (like members of my family) might just prefer to call me plain old stubborn.

Indulge me for taking a side-trip on a tangent. I have had three major jobs (at different locations) in 26 years in the academic world. I have far more rejection letters archived in my home office, than I have had acceptance letters. Ironically, in the past I have been accepted by the Ivy League and rejected by the Podunk League. Does that reflect a haphazard employee selection process or an efficient recognition of "goodness of fit?" After years of pondering, I think it has more to do with mere determination – on my part. I simply was undeterred in making applications.

My philosophy would be summarized by Acts 5:29 “Obey God rather than men.” It is a goal really. It means that life has a deeper purpose than just to live and then to die. It means I want to seek good, do good, and be good. It means a lifetime of searching for God. If we were immediately perfect, we would never know the difference between good and bad. I like the Army attitude: “If it ain’t raining, you ain’t training.” Opposition serves a purpose and has a function.

Part of my philosophy is prayer. "Hooah" for the U.S. soldier, for whom I pray everyday. My prayers always include soldiers and missionaries. My advice to such young people: When you are out in the field running, tracting, doing cadence, etc., look to the heavens. Something tells me God and his angels watch over you (how exactly, I do not know).

Part of my philosophy is science. As a scientist, I try to explain the world by the blind operations of nature. Science requires the rules of naturalism. Afterall, it is NOT very informative to explain the world by just saying “God made it” or “God made me do it.” Science cannot resort to using “God” in its explanations because God explains EVERYTHING and therefore nothing. Some scientists over-extend their enthusiasm for naturalism and insist, “There must be no God.” Such a claim over-generalizes the rules of science. (I am a fan of Richard Dawkins' evolutionary analyses, but I think he knows far too little about theology). A good counter-argument to Dawkin's "god delusion" arguments can be found at Steven Peck's LDS blog: The Mormon Organon. See specifically his Zygon (pdf) paper.

I stand in awe of scientific accomplishments, but there is more than science in this universe. Therefore, I go to Church. Hooah!!

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Being Hated for His Name's Sake:

Some Thoughts on Religious Prejudice

For any number of reasons, I suppose, Mormonism is one of the last targets of “acceptable” prejudice. People know that racism and sexism are immoral. Some progress has been made on homophobia, although much more education is needed. And, Mormonism is widely perceived as “weird.” The quantity of this misperception was most evident during the recent political campaigns of Mitt Romney for President.

I must admit, I never felt any discrimination because of Mormonism until I moved to the Midwest. My Mormonism never came up as an issue in other places I had lived as an academic student or professional: California, Utah, Oklahoma, and Massachusetts.

During my first year in this state (about 20 years ago) I attended a non-LDS social event and was talking to a small circle of people at an evening lawn party. Somehow, the topic of Mormonism was raised, and one of the individuals commented that, "Those people are more bizarre than the Amish." With that surprising double stroke of prejudice, I far too meekly indicated that I was Mormon, and I assured the group that I was no more bizarre than the average professor, which, of course, was inadequate as it merely illustrated the original accusation.

Later by a just few years, I was walking on a community pathway and I was stopped by an acquaintance, who knew I was a Latter-day Saint. He said out of the blue, “Do you really believe Joseph Smith was carrying around gold plates in a wooden box?” I was so stunned by the question that the best I could do was say, “Well, he was carrying around something in that box!” Sorry, I wish I had a better comeback. Because the man was a devout Protestant, I could have poked fun at his particular denomination, but I am glad I did not. At least, I did not stoop to his level. Prejudiced people think it is ONLY the other person’s beliefs that are strange.

Ten years ago, at a Midwest historical conference on the Mormon Trail I was examining some history books for possible purchase. The lobby was filled with conference attendees, many of whom were LDS. The lady at the cash register must have thought I did not look like a Mormon (whatever that stereotype is). She said to me, again out of the blue, "If we lived in the not too distant past, I am sure it would be OK to call these people cultists!" I wish I had complained to the manager, but all I said was, "No, Ma'am," which was a vague and incomplete expression of disgust.

I guess these examples merely show that I am NOT a particularly good defender of the faith, at least NOT on the fly. The most recent expressions of prejudice against Mormons that I have observed were during the Mitt Romney Presidential Campaign.

*****

The following is a nice reaction to Mormon electoral prejudice by a non-LDS news editor:

Excerpt from: “Time to set aside one more prejudice”
Carmi Times, By Barry Cleveland
November 8, 2007
Millions of Americans say they won't vote for a Mormon. … Why? It all comes down, in my opinion, to two things: ignorance and fear. …

[A] lot of Americans don't know … any Mormons. …

Mormons … try to be good citizens, good parents and providers, and they try to do what's right.

…

… 
Reason No. 2: Fear. A lot of evangelical Protestants believe that if [a Mormon] were elected president, the Mormon church would grow by leaps and bounds… .

Are they right? … Ask yourself: Have the United Methodists blossomed under George W. Bush? Did Bill Clinton attract new Baptists in droves? Would you convert to another religion just because the president espoused that faith?

…

… Would a Mormon president do what the church president out in Salt Lake told him to do? Did Kennedy follow the pope's orders? Come on.

In case you haven't figured it out, I like Mormons… .

But I am not a Mormon … .

*****

Jesus indicated that persecution would be one of the signs of his true followers, and he indicated that many would come in his name without authorization:

Luke 21:8 – 20
8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am [Christ]; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.
9 But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the end [is] not by and by.
10 Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom:
11 And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.
12 But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute [you], delivering [you] up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.
13 And it shall turn to you for a testimony.
14 Settle [it] therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer:
15 For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.
16 And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends… .
17 And ye shall be hated of all [men] for my name's sake.
18 But there shall not an hair of your head perish.
19 In your patience possess ye your souls.
20 ¶ And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Verse 8 tells us that in the last days there will be much confusion on religion. It tells us that there will be right ways and wrong ways to do religion. It says there will be many who will attempt to deceive in the name of Christ. Jesus says to his followers, “Don’t be deceived” by false doctrines. What is the remedy? Answer: the scriptures. To me, the most important doctrine is found the New Testament and the Book of Mormon, which is “Another Testament.” To me, the Book of Mormon clarify doctrines that are a little fuzzy in the New Testament.

Verses 9 & 10 remind us that there will be many wars – wars after wars.

Verse 11 reminds us of calamities of weather, earthquakes, and disease.

Verse 12 reminds us that the true followers of Jesus will be persecuted. Prejudice and a lack of social acceptance is a form of persecution.

Verse 13 tells us that prejudice and persecution will lead to opportunities to bear your testimony. As illustrated by my stories above, sometimes the opportunities are missed opportunities.

Verse 14 says that you need not think too much beforehand what you will say in such situations. If one is in tune to the spirit, then the right words will come out.

Verse 15 is translated by the New American Standard Bible as:
“for I will give you utterance and wisdom which none of your opponents will be able to resist or refute.”

Verse 16 says that everyone will seem to be against you.

Verse 17 says that you will be hated for the sake of Jesus.

Verse 18 says that despite the persecution you will be protected. (Missionaries enjoy protection up to a point. They must do their part to be safe and be smart).

Verse 19 is translated by the Amplified Bible as: "By your steadfastness and patient endurance you shall win the true life of your souls."

Verse 20 tells us that when we see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then its destruction is near, and the second coming is at hand.

The prophecy in verse 20 probably has already been fulfilled, shortly after the death of Christ.

When Vespasian became the emperor of Rome in the spring of 70 A.D. he ordered his son Titus to conduct a military campaign against Judaea, especially Jerusalem. Titus took the Fifth, Tenth, Twelfth, and Fifteenth Roman legions with him – about 80,000 troops.

By August of the year 70 Jerusalem was in flames and the Temple was destroyed. Only the outer retaining walls of the temple were left standing. Today, the single retaining wall that still remains is the western wall, now known as the “wailing wall.”

Persecution is nothing new to the Jews and the Christians. It has followed them wherever they have gone.

*****

The following are some quotations that I have found on persecution. They speak for themselves and need no elaboration.

Ezra Taft Benson, “The Book of Mormon—Keystone of Our Religion,” Ensign, November 1986, p. 4
From the Book of Mormon we learn how disciples of Christ live in times of war. From the Book of Mormon we see the evils of secret combinations portrayed in graphic and chilling reality. In the Book of Mormon we find lessons for dealing with persecution and apostasy. We learn much about how to do missionary work. And more than anywhere else, we see in the Book of Mormon the dangers of materialism and setting our hearts on the things of the world. Can anyone doubt that this book was meant for us and that in it we find great power, great comfort, and great protection?

Encyclopedia of Mormonism, Vol.2, MISSIONARY, MISSIONARY LIFE
Almost every missionary experiences a test of faith and courage. The experience of telling people that one represents Jesus Christ and has a message that will change their lives forever leads to solemn introspection, earnest prayer, and continual study. …

The tasks of a missionary often are traumatic. Missionaries may experience cultural shock, language barriers, health problems, personality adjustments, hostility, and sometimes severe persecution. Yet missionaries are, for the most part, dedicated, enthusiastic, and faithful, and later may describe their service as "the best two years" of their lives to that time. Companions encourage one another, and the missionaries gain a new perspective of themselves, of people, of the place where they serve, and of the gospel.

Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, p.7 - p.8, Brigham Young, October 23, 1853
Joseph could not have been perfected, though he had lived a thousand years, if he had received no persecution. If he had lived a thousand years, and led this people, and preached the Gospel without persecution, he would not have been perfected as well as he was at the age of thirty-nine years. You may calculate when this people are called to go through scenes of affliction and suffering, are driven from their homes, and cast down, and scattered, and smitten, and peeled, the Almighty is rolling on His work with greater rapidity.

2 Timothy 3:12
12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

2 Nephi 26:8
8 But behold, the righteous that hearken unto the words of the prophets, and destroy them not, but look forward unto Christ with steadfastness for the signs which are given, notwithstanding all persecution--behold, they are they which shall not perish.

Alma 5:53-55
53 And now my beloved brethren, I say unto you, can ye withstand these sayings; yea, can ye lay aside these things, and trample the Holy One under your feet; yea, can ye be puffed up in the pride of your hearts; yea, will ye still persist in the wearing of costly apparel and setting your hearts upon the vain things of the world, upon your riches?
54 Yea, will ye persist in supposing that ye are better one than another; yea, will ye persist in the persecution of your brethren, who humble themselves and do walk after the holy order of God, wherewith they have been brought into this church, having been sanctified by the Holy Spirit, and they do bring forth works which are meet for repentance--
55 Yea, and will you persist in turning your backs upon the poor, and the needy, and in withholding your substance from them?

Psalms 119:161
161 ¶ … Princes have persecuted me without a cause: but my heart standeth in awe of thy word.

Psalms 143:3
3 For the enemy hath persecuted my soul; he hath smitten my life down to the ground; he hath made me to dwell in darkness, as those that have been long dead.

Matthew 5:10
10 Blessed [are] they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

*****

I am very saddened when I hear outsiders speak negatively of Mormons. Such commentaries are pure prejudice. (If you think Mormons currently practice polygamy, then click on the red icon just above the picture of Jesus on the left). We Latter-day Saints seek to be pure Christians – nothing else. Further, we seek to be superior citizens of the United States, even laying down our lives for it, if necessary.

We LDS must proceed ahead in life without worrying about what people think about the Church we attend on Sundays. All we can do is combat prejudice one person at a time by being a good example to others as to what Mormonism is truly all about.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Speaking of 14-Year Olds:

Learning to Preach at an Early Age

Fear of speaking in front of a crowd of people is one of the great phobias of American culture. And yet, if there is to be a healthy liberty in this country, its citizens must learn to speak up and to do so loudly. The same can be said for citizens of the Church. Our religious administration is a lay ministry. Young people must learn from an early age to stand at a pulpit and preach. Training for such preaching can begin at age 13 or 14 for both males and females in equal amounts. Such teenagers literally will stand before the formal congregation in our Sacrament meeting and give a small sermon.

As the beneficiary of this training system, I have nothing but praise. At age 14 I delivered my first Church talk. My voice trembled and my hands noticeably shook as I read from my talk into the microphone. I probably was nearly sleepless the night before. My second talk a few months later was much less traumatic, and with time I became much more comfortable. I realized that if I was properly prepared, there was not much to worry about.

My occupation as an adult is college teacher. I speak in front of people every day to earn a living. I have received a variety of rewards and recognitions for such work. Even so, I think back to my early Church training as a teenager. That training forced me to organize my thoughts, write them down, practice, and then speak clearly into the microphone.

The cycle begins anew. Now I am raising a 14-year old boy, a great kid with his own distinct challenges. For whatever reason, he fears no audience. He actually looks forward to speaking. At the pulpit he shows no fear, and he looks the audience in the eye. I feel fortunate that my early fears were not hereditary.

Here is my son's most recent "mini-sermon" or talk. He wrote the entire talk himself. He did ask me to help in choosing some scriptures to cite. I did NOT give him any scriptures but I pointed him to the LDS.org "Topical Guide" on FAITH. From there, he picked his own verses to incorporate into the talk. (I recommend that technique).

Here is his brief talk:

Given: June 29, 2008 in the 3rd Ward:

I was asked by Brother J… to speak about faith.

In late May, a few days after my school ended, I was scheduled to have a catheterization of my aorta, which is a main artery of the heart and the chest. I was in deep suspense waiting for the day to get over with. And when it finally came I was in real deep suspense, but I knew it’d be over with before I’d become conscious again, since I would be put to sleep.

What my catheterization doctor told me and my parents was if I had surgery I'd have to stay there for the night, and I might have to keep from doing any physical activity for weeks until it finally healed. What really shocked me (more my dad) was the doctor said I would have a 1-2% chance of not making it through the surgery.

A lot of these possible negatives came with the surgery and I didn’t like it. But I was praying about my surgery weeks before it happened. Literally every day I prayed and mentioned it.

My faith in Christ helped me successfully get through the procedure. Not only that, but my prayers were answered. I ended up not having to have a stent put in my aorta, nor did I have to stay overnight. The doctors studied my heart, and they decided nothing had to be done. I only had to stay in the hospital for 4 hours in the recovery room. It was such a relief to get that surgery off my back (so to speak); and no life changing adjustments came with it.

This is just one of many examples about how our faith in Christ rewards us in ways that is more valuable then diamonds.

1 Peter 1:7 says: "That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ."

D&C 63:10 also says: "Yea, signs come by faith, not by the will of men, nor as they please, but by the will of god."

Faith in Jesus is the first principle of the gospel. All other principles in the church are based on it.

I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ amen.

*****

My three sons are all outstanding individuals. I wish I could take all the credit for their character. I cannot. Their mother cannot. The Church has given us more as a family than we could ever repay in a lifetime.

Although I am clearly biased on the matter, all of my sons are excellent speakers. They are missionary minded. They have immense love for the United States. These are fundamental skills that will assist them throughout their lives.

*****

For readers interested in my son's heart procedure, please read my essay "Challenges of the Heart."


*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Paul's Formula for Inner Peace:

His Second Letter to the Corinthians

The true God worthy of worship is a God of grace, peace, mercy and comfort. In Second Corinthians, Paul wrote:

2 Corinthians 1:2 – 4
2 Grace [be] to you and peace from God our Father, and [from] the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 ¶ Blessed [be] God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;
4 Who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God.

Paul was teaching that God is the God of comfort and mercy. He was suggesting that our tribulations teach us how to console others. How should we console? By introducing others to the comfort of God.

In the second chapter of 2nd Corinthians the LDS Bible (1979) heading reads: “Saints should love and forgive one another…” Paul taught:

New Century Version : 2 Corinthians 2:5-7
5 Someone there among you has caused sadness, not to me, but to all of you. I mean he caused sadness to all in some way. (I do not want to make it sound worse than it really is.)

Then, verse 6:

6 The punishment that most of you gave him is enough for him.

Then, verse 7:

7 But now you should forgive him and comfort him to keep him from having too much sadness and giving up completely.

In chapter 3, the LDS Bible (1979) heading reads, “The gospel surpasses the law of Moses.” Paul taught in verse 3:

Weymouth New Testament : 2 Corinthians 3:3
3 For all can see that you are a letter of Christ entrusted to our care, and written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the ever-living God--and not on tablets of stone, but on human hearts as tablets.

Paul was reminding the Saints that they were followers of the Spirit (the tablets of the heart), not a long list of Mosaic rules (the tablets of stone).

Then, in the same chapter, Paul said something very significant:

2 Corinthians 3:16 – 17 [pronoun "it" changed in v. 16]
16 Nevertheless when [they] shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord [is], there [is] liberty.

Paul was teaching that the Church of revelation means having liberty. It is NOT arbitrary that an allusion to the temple was made. The Spirit gives liberty. We are a church of freedom, not constraint. Freedom is to be enjoyed and the heart is to be free in this Church.

*****

The LDS Bible (1979) heading of chapter 4 reads: “Mortal trials are nothing as contrasted with eternal glory.” Paul taught:

2 Corinthians 4:8 - 9
8 ¶ [We are] troubled on every side, yet not distressed; [we are] perplexed, but not in despair;
9 Persecuted, but not forsaken; cast down, but not destroyed;

A few verses later he said:

2 Corinthians 4:17 - 18
17 For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding [and] eternal weight of glory;
18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen [are] temporal; but the things which are not seen [are] eternal.

Paul was teaching in these verses that our momentary afflictions can work for eternal purposes.

*****

The LDS Bible (1979) heading for chapter 5 reads: the “Gospel reconciles man to God.” I will quote from the New International Version (NIV), which gives some of the clearest language (of course, you should read the KJV as well):

New International Version : 2 Corinthians 5: 9-15, 17-21
9 So we make it our goal to please him … .
10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad. …
14 For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.
15 And he died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised again. …

17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!
18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation:
19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.
20 We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God.
21 God made him who had no sin to be [a] sin [offering] for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

Joseph Smith reworked this chapter, and therefore it may have a few problems. It is a challenge to understand.

My interpretation would be as follows: In this life we prepare to stand before the judgment seat of Christ where we will be judged according to our works. However, none of us could be reconciled with God except that Christ died as a sin offering for us. Therefore, our sins may be forgiven. In Christ we do become righteous and may sit down beside the Lord again.

What are these works that Paul talks about in verse 10? I think I agree with Bishop N. T. Wright, “New Perspectives on Paul,” 10th Edinburgh Dogmatics Conference: 25–28 August 2003, p. 9).

The ‘works’ in accordance with which the Christian will be vindicated on the last day are not the unaided works of the self-help moralist. Nor are they the performance of the ethnically distinctive Jewish boundary-markers (sabbath, food-laws and circumcision). They are the things which show, rather, that one is in Christ; the things which are produced in one’s life as a result of the Spirit’s indwelling and operation.

*****

In chapter 6 these are my favorite phrases:

v. 2: “[N]ow is the day of salvation.”

v. 13: “[B]e ye also enlarged.”

Compare Alma 5: 57 with 2 Cor. 6:17, and then be reminded that the Book of Mormon is a complex amalgamation of scriptures, a true work of genius. There is no controversy that the King James Bible is interwoven throughout the Book of Mormon.

However, it would be a very superficial analysis to suggest that Joseph Smith merely plagiarized. The Book of Mormon’s use of scripture is complex and rich in ways that would seem to go beyond a normal mental capacity. It is NOT enough to understand that the Book of Mormon is true, because one should also understand HOW it is true. An upcoming essay will discuss the beautiful integration of Bible scripture in the book.

*****

A few "born-again" Christians sometimes seem to believe that they should never feel sorry for sin because they are saved by grace. This is a misconception without foundation in scripture. Chapter 7 is all about the godly sorrow that leads to repentance.

Using the KJV, let me capture some of the significant verses and phrases:

2 Corinthians 7: 1-12
1 ¶ … let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. …
4 Great [is] my boldness of speech toward you, great [is] my glorying of you: I am filled with comfort, I am exceeding joyful in all our tribulation.
5 ¶ For, when we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest, but we were troubled on every side; without [were] fightings, within [were] fears. …
8 For though I made you sorry with a letter [note: probably the first epistle to the Corinthians], I do not repent, though I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though [it were] but for a season.
9 Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.
10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death. …
12 ¶ Wherefore, though I wrote unto you, [I did it] not for his cause that had done the wrong, … but that our care for you in the sight of God might appear unto you.

Yes, grace saves us, but our behavior still matters. Paul was always concerned about behavior. There is no license to sin. The license given by the atonement is to repent, forgive, and improve, even if ever so slowly. Such a formula truly saves.

*****

Chapter 8 is about eternal riches. Paul said:

2 Corinthians 8:9
9 For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich.

In Chapter 9 Paul talked about giving of one’s riches.

2 Corinthians 9:6 - 8
6 ¶ But this [I say], He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.
7 Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, [so let him give]; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
8 And God [is] able to make all grace abound toward you; that ye, always having all sufficiency in all [things], may abound to every good work:

As Paul wrote verse 7 he probably was influenced by Ecclesiasticus 35:9 from the apocrypha: “With every gift show a cheerful face, and dedicate your tithe with gladness.” Even Paul’s writings were an amalgamation.

*****

In chapter 10, Paul was concerned about the stretch of his Apostolic authority and was concerned whether the Corinthians were taking his letters seriously. Verse 10 may be a self-description. We get the following from the Weymouth New Testament:

Weymouth New Testament: 2 Corinthians 10: 7-14
7 Is it outward appearances you look to? If any man is confident as regards himself that he specially belongs to Christ, let him consider again and reflect that just as he belongs to Christ, so also do we.
8 If, however, I were to boast more loudly of our Apostolic authority, which the Lord has given us that we may build you up, not pull you down, I should have no reason to feel ashamed.
9 Let it not seem as if I wanted to frighten you by my letters.
10 For they say "His letters are authoritative and forcible, but his personal presence is unimpressive, and as for eloquence, he has none."
11 Let such people take this into their reckoning, that whatever we are in word by our letters when absent, the same are we also in act when present.
12 For we have not the 'courage' to rank ourselves among, or compare ourselves with, certain persons distinguished by their self-commendation. Yet they are not wise, measuring themselves, as they do, by one another and comparing themselves with one another.
13 We, however, will not exceed due limits in our boasting, but will keep within the limits of the sphere which God has assigned to us as a limit, which reaches even to you.
14 For there is no undue stretch of authority on our part, as though it did not extend to you. We pressed on even to Corinth, and were the first to proclaim to you the Good News of the Christ.

Paul was reminding the Corinthians that Apostles have been given a certain authority. Their authority includes giving advice and sometimes commands. But, the prime authority of the Apostle is to proclaim the Good News.

*****

In chapter 11 Paul gave us a brief glimpse of his life. He said:

2 Corinthians 11:25
25 Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep;

So, it sounds like on one of the shipwrecks, Paul had to hang onto wreckage in the ocean until some other ship picked him up.

In chapter 12, Paul referred to the third heaven:

2 Corinthians 12:1 - 4
1 ¶ IT is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.
2 I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven.
3 And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;)
4 How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

Paul referred to a “thorn in the flesh” (some kind of health malady) and a revelation:

2 Corinthians 12:7 - 9
7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
8 For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me.
9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.

In chapter 13 Paul said:

2 Corinthians 13:1
1 ¶ … In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

Then, in verse 11 he exhorts his followers to be perfect, of good comfort, of one mind, and living in peace.

*****

How are Christians to be made perfect, comforted, unified, and brought to peace? Latter-day Saints know the answer to that question. So did the Apostle Paul.

*****

Post Script: Happy Birthday Dear Mother!!

*****

Weymouth New Testament – in the public domain

Scripture taken from the New Century Version®. Copyright © 2005 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Scripture taken from the Holy Bible, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society. All rights reserved throughout the world. Used by permission of International Bible Society.

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Visionary Variations:

Apostle Paul & Joseph Smith as Examples

This essay reviews an essential counter-argument that must be considered in discussions about the variations in Joseph Smith's first vision experience – and that is the variations in the Apostle Paul's first vision experience. For both individuals we have multiple versions of their first encounter with Christ. Yet, both told the truth as best they could.

Before elaborating on the above theme, I wish to remind the reader of a couple of points. When Joseph Smith told others during the 1820s to the 1840s about his first vision, he sometimes heard complaints “that there were no such things as visions or revelations in these days; that all such things had ceased with the apostles, and that there would never be any more of them” (Joseph Smith History 1: 21). (See my short essay on "Cessationism").

We need to remember that Jesus experienced the same basic complaint. During the earthly ministry of Jesus there were groups of Jewish people who did NOT believe in continuing revelation. For example, the Sadducees believed only in the Books of Moses (the first five books of the Bible); they did NOT believe in angels, a resurrection, or in an afterlife (e.g., Acts 23:8). Jesus taught to beware of the teachings of the Sadducees (e.g., Matt. 16:12). (See also: LDS Bible Dictionary entry for "Sadducees").

As a second point, we need to remember that the four Gospels of the New Testament tell the story of Christ quite differently, with events in different orders, with missing or inserted details, probable borrowing of information from "Q" or other sources, and possible confounding and mixing of story events. Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the so-called synoptic gospels) are the most similar, and John is quite distinct from the other three. These differences are usually NOT seen by Christians as being incompatible.

My point is that having vocal and vehement critics is to be expected when the message is important. Further, variation or variability is NOT a convincing evidence of falsehood.

*****

Critics have been bothered that Joseph Smith over the years told (slight) variations in his "First Vision" story. The critical implication is that the basic story is false. (For other counter-arguments and data sources, see Tim Malone's essay "Multiple Versions for the First Vision," which provides many basic links to follow). But, the Apostle Paul ALSO told his "First Vision" story differently – with much greater variation (See Acts 9:1-9; Acts 22:6-21; Acts 26:12-18; and Galatians 1:6-24; Acts 9:7 versus Acts 22:9 appear to contradict each other) than that found in Joseph Smith's versions. It is a human characteristic that repeated stories vary.

Concerning the first vision, Joseph Smith compared himself with Paul. Here is a tiny portion of his "official" story:

Joseph Smith History 1: 24-25
24 … I felt much like Paul, when he made his defense before King Agrippa, and related the account of the vision he had when he saw a light, and heard a voice; but still there were but few who believed him; some said he was dishonest, others said he was mad; and he was ridiculed and reviled. But all this did not destroy the reality of his vision. He had seen a vision, he knew he had, and all the persecution under heaven could not make it otherwise; and though they should persecute him unto death, yet he knew, and would know to his latest breath, that he had both seen a light and heard a voice speaking unto him, and all the world could not make him think or believe otherwise.
25 So it was with me. I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; …

The scholarly Bible atlas, Biblica (2006, p. 463) states, “It is perhaps not surprising that we have variant attempts to describe the Damascus road event [Paul’s conversion story], for how can one describe an encounter with the risen Lord?” If Paul can be excused for his rather large variations, then Joseph can be excused for his rather small variations. We might remember the words of the prophet Moroni who acknowledged the imperfections in his writing (Mormon 9:31). Prophets, except Jesus, are NOT perfect people.

As flawed as they were, the Church owes much to both Paul and Joseph Smith. Joseph ran the Church from 1830 to 1844 and accomplished more in that 14 years than most persons could accomplish in several lifetimes. Similarly, it was the work of Paul over about 20 years that established the beginnings of the Christian Church -- again, accomplishing a great amount.

Paul’s first mission was to Cyprus and Asia Minor (see Acts 13 – 14). His second mission (see Acts 15 – 18) began from Jerusalem and went to Asia Minor and Greece (Thessalonica, Athens, and Corinth). He visited Ephesus and then returned to Jerusalem. The date of this second mission was around C.E. 51, a date obtained from Acts 18:12, which refers to Gallio, a proconsul of Corinth and Achaia who served at that time. Paul’s third mission (see Acts 19 – 22) began in Antioch, Syria and from there he visited many of the same churches he established on his second mission; at the end he returned to Jerusalem. His last great journey was to Rome (Acts 27 – 28). Very quickly, he was thrown in prison for two years. Paul died in C.E. 66 or 67.

The four basic versions of Paul's First Vision story are found in the following verses: Acts 9:1-9; Acts 22:6-21; Acts 26:12-18; and Galatians 1:6-24. Below are just two of the versions. One should note that Apostle Paul's story is told with great variation.

Conversion story: Version #1

New International Version : Galatians 1: 6 – 24 [italics mine]
6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!
10 Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.
11 I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.
13 For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus. 18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord's brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie. 21 Later I went to Syria and Cilicia. 22 I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23 They only heard the report: "The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy." 24 And they praised God because of me.

Conversion story: Version #2

New International Version: Acts 9: 7 – 22
7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything.
10 In Damascus there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision, "Ananias!" 
 "Yes, Lord," he answered.
11 The Lord told him, "Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. 12 In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight."
13 "Lord," Ananias answered, "I have heard many reports about this man and all the harm he has done to your saints in Jerusalem. 14 And he has come here with authority from the chief priests to arrest all who call on your name."
15 But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. 16 I will show him how much he must suffer for my name."
17 Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, "Brother Saul, the Lord—Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here—has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit." 18 Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul's eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized, 19 and after taking some food, he regained his strength.
Saul spent several days with the disciples in Damascus. 20 At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God. 21 All those who heard him were astonished and asked, "Isn't he the man who raised havoc in Jerusalem among those who call on this name? And hasn't he come here to take them as prisoners to the chief priests?" 22 Yet Saul grew more and more powerful and baffled the Jews living in Damascus by proving that Jesus is the Christ.

It seems to me that Versions #1 and #2 have significant differences. I will not go into them all, but Version #1 suggests that Paul did not "consult any man," and that he went immediately into Arabia -- maybe for years. By contrast, Version #2 indicates that Paul was assisted by Ananias (if not more individuals) and spent some time in Damascus. The book of Acts gives no mention of Paul's trip to Arabia at all.

No doubt, one can spin these stories to create reconciliations, but my point is that Joseph's variations did not set a precedent and were no greater than Paul's. Maybe prophets are NOT exempt from the human tendency to (slightly) vary their stories. Different versions emphasize some details over others, and some versions omit details entirely. The essential point is that BOTH Paul's and Joseph's stories show the human tendency to tell stories in a somewhat inconsistent manner. Are the fundamentals of their stories wrong? I do NOT think so.

It is easy to criticize Paul or Joseph, but we Latter-day Saints would rather appreciate the magnitude of their efforts. Their flaws were minor by comparison.

*****

Scripture taken from the Holy Bible, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 International Bible Society. All rights reserved throughout the world. Used by permission of International Bible Society.

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Overwhelmed by the Spirit of Revivalism:

Early Influences on the Latter-day Saints

1839 watercolor of a Methodist revival – source: Library of Congress

Preface and forewarning: This is an essay dedicated to the many early American Protestant Revivalists. To my way of thinking, they were harbingers establishing the way for the full restitution in the fullness of times that began in 1830 by Joseph Smith. In their search for God, they sought to be overwhelmed by the spirit, and who could blame them.

The Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement, (2005) . D. A. Foster, P. M. Blowers, A. L. Dunnavant, & D. N. Williams (Eds.). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,"CONVERSION," p. 240
The Stone movement began in the context of the Great Western Revival (1797-1805), in which Presbyterian, Methodist, and Baptist revivalists alike asserted that human beings are sinners. The common revival technique, aimed at producing conviction of sin, included preaching the law and denouncing sin. Hearers struggled to overcome sin and were advised by the preachers to pray for an infusion of grace (the Holy Spirit), assuring salvation. The revival was accompanied by the falling exercise as early as 1800 and later by the other physical responses identified as "the jerks" and the "laughing" and "dancing" exercises.

Culturally, Latter-day Saintism does NOT directly derive from revivalism, but there are recognizable similarities – for example, these LDS verses:

Article of Faith #7
7 We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

Mormon 9:7
7 And again I speak unto you who deny the revelations of God, and say that they are done away, that there are no revelations, nor prophecies, nor gifts, nor healing, nor speaking with tongues, and the interpretation of tongues;

This essay is an attempt to reveal some of the influences revivalism has had on Mormonism and Mormon ideas – at least in the types of language we LDS often use.

*****Early Revivalists*****

Forgive the scientist coming out in me, but if one could create a standard Christianity by averaging together all the Christian denominations in 19th century America, then one would find that the Latter-day Saint religion was standard Christianity on steroids. That is, Mormonism had all the standard pieces of Christianity plus more: Apostles, priesthood, continuing revelation, additional ancient literatures, and the temple rituals of Melchizedek. Given the close affinity of Mormonism with its predecessors, I would argue that we LDS cannot understand our own Church history without understanding the religious history which preceded and concurred with the formation of our own Church.

In fact, I would go farther. We LDS owe a debt of gratitude to those spiritual predecessors, who were sincerely and legitimately seeking God. They established a way and pattern for Joseph Smith to watch. Their influence was immense and was important. Joseph Smith did NOT grow up in a cultural vacuum. He was influenced by his surroundings, perhaps even by design.

I am impressed by George Whitefield (pronounced wit-field), who led the so-called First Great Awakening in the mid-18th century – about 1740 to 1770. I am impressed by Barton Stone (1772-1844) and his colleagues Alexander Campbell (1788-1866 ), and Walter Scott (1796-1861), who helped lead the Second Great Awakening in the early 19th century.. They formed the so-called Stone-Campbell Restoration movement that eventually became part of the Disciples of Christ. They each sought a restoration but insisted it could come ONLY from the Bible. The guiding motto of this movement was: "Let Christian unity be our polar star."

Interestingly, Walter Scott taught a set of first principles that were strikingly similar to those proposed by Joseph Smith:

The Encyclopedia of the Stone-Campbell Movement, (2005) . D. A. Foster, P. M. Blowers, A. L. Dunnavant, & D. N. Williams (Eds.). Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, p. 241
… Walter Scott employed a "Five Finger Exercise" to summarize the process of conversion: faith, repentance, baptism, remission of sins, gift of the Holy Spirit. These steps presupposed the gospel and offered an alternative to the more common early nineteenth-century revival practice of praying at the altar… .

One can see a direct correlation with the LDS 4th Article of Faith.

I am NOT suggesting that Barton Stone and his colleagues were friends to Mormonism. They were not. Alexander Campbell spent a considerable effort attacking Mormon ideas. Yet, it is ironic that Sidney Rigdon came out of the Campbellite movement. The Kirtland followers of Rigdon that converted to Mormonism, over 100 in number, were highly influenced by the Campbellites. Historian R. S. Van Wagoner, author of Sidney Rigdon (1994) quotes B. H. Roberts as concluding that Campbell and Scott were "sent forth to prepare the way before the Lord" (p. 61).

I am NOT suggesting that revival procedures were in direct accord with latter-day revelation. The revivals often consisted of altar calls to a "mourning bench," and such participants often produced profuse prayers, fell unconscious, spoke in tongues, had seizures called "jerks," laughed and shouted without control, and produced contorted dances. Latter-day Saint practices seldom, if ever, went to these extremes, and certainly not in modern times. Nevertheless, the LDS 7th Article of Faith, as quoted above, states: "We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth."

*****

Another important revivalist (but from an entirely different Christian perspective than that found in the Stone-Campbell movement) was Charles Grandison Finney. Starting in the mid-1820s through 1875, Finney was a major influence in the revival circuit of the East. His 1835/1868 book Lectures on Revivals of Religion was an early advertising program for the promotion of Christianity. He developed new methods, including the use of advance teams to publicize a revival within a region; he spoke of a personal God using informal language; his protracted revivals were held over a secession of days; he would publicly identify successful saints and failing sinners; he allowed women to pray out-loud, and he made use of an "altar" (leading to the term "altar call") known as the "anxious bench" in which new converts would sit before the congregation while struggling, straining, and praying their way to salvation.

Finney's early conversion experience in 1821 reminds us that "visions" of Christ, although not common, were NOT entirely rare either:

A BIOGRAPHY OF
CHARLES GRANDISON FINNEY (1891). G. FREDERICK WRIGHT, D.D., LL.D. (Oberlin Theological Seminary, OHIO).
In [an evening in 1821] he had the office to himself, and, after building a fire in the open fireplace, he retired to the back room to renew the devotions which in the earlier part of the day he had commenced at his familiar haunt in the forest. Here it seemed to him that he had a vision of the Lord, and that Christ met him face to face. So complete was the illusion, that it was some time before it was dispelled. It seemed to him, he says, that he saw Christ as he would see any other man, and that beneath his benignant gaze he was melted to tears, and he wept aloud like a child. On being aroused from this rapt vision, he returned to his seat by the fireplace in the main room of the office, and as he sat down by the fire he received what he describes as "a mighty baptism of the Holy Ghost." This was an experience for which he was not looking, and of which he did not remember ever to have heard before. It seemed to him as if there was a positive force like electricity entering and penetrating his whole system. He "wept aloud with joy and love," and, to use his own words, "literally bellowed out the unutterable gushings" of his heart. So overwhelming were these waves of feeling, that he cried out, "Lord, I cannot bear any more; I shall die if these continue."

We Latter-day Saints do NOT need to be reminded about the immense amount of good that the Christian religion has brought to the United States. The LDS believe that America was set apart for its role in the restoration. We may not fully understand revivalists like Finney, but we should NOT condemn their efforts. They appeared to be harbingers establishing the way – even if they did not fully understand the nature of their cause.

*****

It is probably a mistake to lump all revivalist groups together. Practices varied, and some groups were more sedate than others. For example, revivals run by George Whitefield were different in appearance compared to those run by the "Shouting" Methodists which involved greater displays of jerking, dancing, laughing, and falling.

Such behaviors when they did occur were a form of conversion experience. Here are some useful descriptions:

Levi Purviance, The Biography Of Elder David Purviance, (Dayton: B. F. & G. W. Ells, 1848; Reprint. 1940), p. 242-52.
It took the name of the falling exercise from its manner of operation. It was no uncommon occurrence for persons while listening to preaching, exhortation, prayer or singing, to fall from their seat or feet to the ground, and some appeared almost in a lifeless condition: while others would cry to God in the most fervent manner, for mercy to their needy souls.

John B. Boles (1996), The Great Revival: Beginnings of the Bible Belt, University Press of Kentucky, p. 67-68
These exercises, whatever their exact psychological motivation, were of six distinct varieties, commonly called the falling exercise, the rolling exercise, the "jerks," the barking exercise, the dancing exercise, and the laughing and singing exercises. … The common falling exercise was the collapse into a semi-conscious state, after which many arose to shout praises to their God.

The important thing to note is that these exercises, when they did occur, were often associated with a loss of bodily control, which were often described collectively as being "slain by the spirit." The fall or collapse apparently was due to the legs giving way. The jerks, dancing, and laughing occurred because the person could not help him or herself behave in any other way while under the "influence" of the spirit."

*****Palmer's Hypotheses*****

Grant Palmer in his book An Insider's View of Mormon Origins (2002) made the point that the Book of Mormon has a relationship with evangelical protestantism and revivalism. On page 98 of his book he states:

In evangelical meetings it was common for those who were moved by the preaching to break out in tears and fall to the ground. This was considered to be a state of "conviction."

On page 100 he elaborates:

[T]he falling exercise was not essential, but some kind of emotional manifestation was expected such as clapping, shouting, twitching, and dancing.

Grant Palmer made the argument that King Benjamin's speech to the Zarahemlans found in the Book of Mormon (Mosiah, ch. 2 through 5) follows the basic revival pattern developed by the Methodists during the Second Great Awakening. This pattern is described in the book as a "non-biblical form of spiritual regeneration" (Brent Lee Metcalfe as cited by Palmer, p. 99).

For example, the "falling exercise," as mentioned by Palmer was a dominant feature of early American revivals. He cites the following Book of Mormon passage:

Mosiah 4: 1-3 [emphasis mine]
1 AND now, it came to pass that when king Benjamin had made an end of speaking the words which had been delivered unto him by the angel of the Lord, that he cast his eyes round about on the multitude, and behold they had fallen to the earth, for the fear of the Lord had come upon them.
2 And they had viewed themselves in their own carnal state, even less than the dust of the earth. And they all cried aloud with one voice, saying: O have mercy, and apply the atoning blood of Christ that we may receive forgiveness of our sins, and our hearts may be purified; for we believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who created heaven and earth, and all things; who shall come down among the children of men.
3 And it came to pass that after they had spoken these words the Spirit of the Lord came upon them, and they were filled with joy, having received a remission of their sins, and having peace of conscience, because of the exceeding faith which they had in Jesus Christ who should come, according to the words which king Benjamin had spoken unto them.

Unmentioned by Palmer (perhaps because he gives it no credence) is the fact that many LDS scholars relate the general circumstances behind the King Benjamin speech to the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles.

Similarities with revivals also are striking in the following passage referring to the Sons of Mosiah and their missionary work. People were metaphorically brought before the "altar" of God:

Alma 17:4
4 And they had been teaching the word of God for the space of fourteen years among the Lamanites, having had much success in bringing many to the knowledge of the truth; yea, by the power of their words many were brought before the altar of God, to call on his name and confess their sins before him.

Of course I could be wrong, but it is my best guess that such revival metaphors were the best way to communicate to 19th century readers about the nature of the conversion experiences of the Lamanites. I see no theological, linguistic, psychological or historical reasons to claim that Joseph Smith's vocabulary was not involved in the phraseology of the book – after all, Joseph described his efforts as a process of "translation."

*****


Library of Congress: Methodist preacher Lorenzo Dow and the Jerking Exercise. by Lossing-Barrett, from Samuel G. Goodrich, Recollections of a Lifetime. New York: 1856.

*****

The Book of Mormon is for OUR modern time. Although Joseph Smith did NOT know Reformed Egyptian (the proclaimed original language of the book), he claimed to have "translated" the Book of Mormon, which I think is appropriate even if unorthodox in usage. The Book of Mormon needed to be put into a language that modern Engish speaking peoples could understand. The language was Joseph Smith's. (I would take some exception to the "tight-control" hypothesis of Royal Skousen, whose work I still immensely respect). To me, the Book of Mormon reflects the English language of the Bible and the verbal community of Joseph Smith's time.

To say that Joseph Smith was influenced by the revival language of his day is simply to say he was influenced by the English language of his day. We cannot nor should not expect Joseph Smith to have used any other terminologies than those that were at his immediate disposal through the sources of his language environment. This is not to suggest, however, that the Book of Mormon was any less than appropriately translated.

To illustrate this influence we must turn to scripture regarding "falling" and look for behavior similar to the falling exercise. Falling prostrate is common in scriptural passages, whether in the Bible or in the Book of Mormon.

Falling has slightly different meanings depending upon context. Let's keep the following meanings in mind: To lie with one's face to the ground, or to be prostrate, is an act of submission, humility, and adoration. It is a sign of respect. In scripture when an individual encounters a divine presence there can be the implication that the individual has been incapacitated and weakened, either emotionally or physically. The phrases used by the scriptures most often include "fell to the earth" or "fell on his/her face." Yet, at other times and in other contexts these phrases may refer to simple bowing before others (kings, prophets, friends) as a mere sign of respect.

*****The New Testament*****

In the New Testament the Greek word that is used most often for "fall prostrate" is piptō (Strong's # G4098). This word is used many times, such as in the following [emphasis mine]:

Matthew 17:6
6 And when the disciples heard [it], they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.

Matthew 26:39
39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou [wilt].

Luke 5:12
12 ¶ And it came to pass, when he was in a certain city, behold a man full of leprosy: who seeing Jesus fell on [his] face, and besought him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.

Luke 17:16
16 And fell down on [his] face at his feet, giving him thanks: and he was a Samaritan.

Acts 9:4
4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

Used a little less commonly is the Greek word prospiptō (Strong's # G4363) meaning to fall forward and prostrate one's self. Its usage is not easily differentiated from that of piptō. Representative verses in which prospiptō is used are:

Mark 7:25
For a [certain] woman, whose young daughter had an unclean spirit, heard of him, and came and fell at his feet:

Luke 5:8
When Simon Peter saw [it], he fell down at Jesus' knees, saying, Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.

The important point to notice in the New Testament is that when an individual "falls" to the ground before another individual or entity, the falling is mostly an action of respect and humility. The term in some rare situations in the Bible also may imply more. For example, Saul's conversion experience cited in Acts (above) probably involved some loss of bodily function, since he became temporarily blind.

*****The Old Testament*****

In the Old Testament the usage and meaning of the term "fall" is a little more complicated. The most common Hebrew term for "fall" or "fell" is based in the Hebrew root naphal (Strong's #5307) which can refer to bowing facedown on the ground, lying prostrate, or simple falling. Often it refers to an act of submission to a divine being or to a human superior. Again, rarely does one find the term associated with anything like a "falling exercise" in which one loses bodily control because the term normally means simply to lie facedown in a prostrate position.

Examples of naphal as an act of submission to the divine [all emphasis below is mine]:

Genesis 17:3
3 And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him …

In Numbers 16:19 "the glory of the LORD appeared unto all the congregation," and the congregation then understandably:

Number 16: 22
22 … fell upon their faces… .

Yet, the same word was used when Moses, a few verses before, bowed facedown before the angry and very human congregation (Num. 16:4).

Joshua 7:6
6 ¶ And Joshua rent his clothes, and fell to the earth upon his face before the ark of the LORD until the eventide… .

Ezekiel 1:28
28 … This [was] the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD. And when I saw [it], I fell upon my face, and I heard a voice of one that spake.

(The same root word naphal for "fell" as an act of submission or bowing before God also can be found in the following verses in Ezekiel: 3:23; 9:8; 11:13; 43:3; and 44:4).

The following uses naphal to express an act of submission to an angel:

Daniel 8:17
17 So he came near where I stood: and when he came, I was afraid, and fell upon my face: but he said unto me, Understand, O son of man: for at the time of the end [shall be] the vision.

Naturally, there are synonyms in Hebrew, usually with nuances of meaning. Another word to bow down and prostrate oneself is shachah (Strong's #H7812). In this verse Balaam bows and falls before an angel:

Numbers 22:31
31 Then the LORD opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the LORD standing in the way, and his sword drawn in his hand: and he bowed down his head, and fell flat on his face.

The word "fell" in the verse above is shachah and the word "bowed" is qadad (Strong's # H6915).

Examples of naphal as an act of submission to superiors [all emphasis below is mine]:

Genesis 50:1
1 ¶ AND Joseph fell upon his father's face, and wept upon him, and kissed him.

Genesis 50:18
18 And his brethren also went and fell down before his face; and they said, Behold, we [be] thy servants.

Joshua 5:14
14 And he said, … [as] captain … I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant?

Ruth 2:10
10 Then she fell on her face, and bowed herself to the ground, and said unto him, Why have I found grace in thine eyes, that thou shouldest take knowledge of me, seeing I [am] a stranger?

1 Samuel 25:23
23 And when Abigail saw David, she hasted, and lighted off the ass, and fell before David on her face, and bowed herself to the ground…

2 Samuel 14:4
4 And when the woman of Tekoah spake to the king, she fell on her face to the ground, and did obeisance, and said, Help, O king.

Again, synonyms are involved. The Hebrew word shachah (Strong's #H7812; described above) can be used for bowing or falling prostrate before a King as well as a divine entity, as in the following:

2 Samuel 18:28
28 And Ahimaaz called, and said unto the king, All is well. And he fell down to the earth upon his face before the king, and said, Blessed [be] the LORD thy God, which hath delivered up the men that lifted up their hand against my lord the king.

In the following an Aramaic cognate of naphal is used for fall: nĕphal (Aramaic; coded as Strong's # H5308). Here is an example passage, although there are others:

Daniel 2:46
46 ¶ Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and worshipped Daniel, and commanded that they should offer an oblation and sweet odours unto him.

Examples of naphal as an act of mere falling [all emphasis below is mine]:

Genesis 17:17
17 Then Abraham fell upon his face, and laughed, and said in his heart, Shall [a child] be born unto him that is an hundred years old? and shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear?

1 Samuel 17:49
49 And David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang [it], and smote the Philistine in his forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth.

*****The Book of Mormon*****

The main dimension to notice in the following long list of Book of Mormon passages is that falling on the face or falling on the ground is OFTEN associated with strong emotional and physical components that are reminiscent of the falling exercise found in revivalism. Yet, other passages with such phrases and terms also denote mere respect, submission, and prostration, just as in the Bible. In some ways, the "falling" terms as used by the Book of Mormon are among the richest description in all of scripture.

For each passage or set of passages I will give a brief introduction to help establish the context.

*****

In the following, Jacob preached to Sherem, who was overcome by the spirit and fell:

Jacob 7:15
15 And it came to pass that when I, Jacob, had spoken these words, the power of the Lord came upon him, insomuch that he fell to the earth. And it came to pass that he was nourished for the space of many days.

Later, when the converted Sherem was about to die, he preached to the people about his new faith:

Jacob 7:21
21 And when the multitude had witnessed that he spake these things as he was about to give up the ghost, they were astonished exceedingly; insomuch that the power of God came down upon them, and they were overcome that they fell to the earth.

The following verses describe the conversion reaction of Alma the younger and the four sons of Mosiah as they encountered an angel of the Lord. In this case, the "falling" probably was meant as an expression of submission.

Mosiah 27:12, 18-19
12 And so great was their astonishment, that they fell to the earth, and understood not the words which he spake unto them.

18 And now Alma and those that were with him fell again to the earth, for great was their astonishment; for with their own eyes they had beheld an angel of the Lord; … .
19 And now the astonishment of Alma was so great that he became dumb, that he could not open his mouth; yea, and he became weak, even that he could not move his hands; therefore he was taken by those that were with him, and carried helpless, even until he was laid before his father.

Sometimes in scripture, evil men are literally "slain by the spirit." In the following passage the chief judge of Ammonihah and his associates were struck down. They had entered the prison containing Alma and Amulek, where upon they smote them and challenged them to deliver themselves by the power of God. Alma then called upon his faith in Christ, leading to the following:

Alma 14:27
27 And it came to pass that so great was their fear that they fell to the earth, and did not obtain the outer door of the prison; and the earth shook mightily, and the walls of the prison were rent in twain, so that they fell to the earth; and the chief judge, and the lawyers, and priests, and teachers, who smote upon Alma and Amulek, were slain by the fall thereof.

The verse above proves that "smoting" can be harmful to one's health (I thank my Sunday School teacher for the joke).

King Lamoni was physically overcome after hearing the words of Ammon:

Alma 18:42
42 And now, when he had said this, he fell unto the earth, as if he were dead.

King Lamoni was laid still as if dead for two full days, but when he was raised, Ammon fell (bowed) in submission to God to pray.

Alma 19:14
14 Now Ammon seeing the Spirit of the Lord poured out according to his prayers upon the Lamanites, his brethren, who had been the cause of so much mourning among the Nephites, or among all the people of God because of their iniquities and their traditions, he fell upon his knees, and began to pour out his soul in prayer and thanksgiving to God for what he had done for his brethren; and he was also overpowered with joy … .

Having a joyful meeting with Alma, the strength of Ammon was overcome:

Alma 27:17
17 Now the joy of Ammon was so great even that he was full; yea, he was swallowed up in the joy of his God, even to the exhausting of his strength; and he fell again to the earth.

In verse 7, the "voice of thunder" was an angel causing Alma and the sons of Mosiah to fall to the earth in submission. The angel then commanded Alma to "Arise" (v. 8), whereupon he was commanded to no longer seek to destroy the church of God, lest he be destroyed himself. In verse 10 Alma states he fell and lost bodily control of mouth and limbs. Verse 11 suggests that he became deaf.

Alma 36:7, 10-11
7 And behold, he spake unto us, as it were the voice of thunder, and the whole earth did tremble beneath our feet; and we all fell to the earth, for the fear of the Lord came upon us.
10 And it came to pass that I fell to the earth; and it was for the space of three days and three nights that I could not open my mouth, neither had I the use of my limbs.
11 And the angel spake more things unto me, which were heard by my brethren, but I did not hear them; for when I heard the words--If thou wilt be destroyed of thyself, seek no more to destroy the church of God--I was struck with such great fear and amazement lest perhaps I should be destroyed, that I fell to the earth and I did hear no more.

Nephi had prophesized that the Chief Judge had been murdered. Messengers were sent to the judgment seat for verification. They fell in submission when the prophesy was determined to be true.

Helaman 9:4, 14
4 And now behold, when they saw this they were astonished exceedingly, insomuch that they fell to the earth; for they had not believed the words which Nephi had spoken concerning the chief judge.
14 We ran and came to the place of the judgment-seat, and when we saw all things even as Nephi had testified, we were astonished insomuch that we fell to the earth; and when we were recovered from our astonishment, behold they cast us into prison.

Nephi, the son of Nephi who was the son of Helaman, and his followers were under the threat of death by the unbelievers. He therefore cried to God on behalf of his people. In verse 11, Nephi bowed in submission to God. The voice of the Lord came to him. In verse 16, the unbelievers upon realizing that their plans for murder had been foiled, fell to the earth as if dead. In verse 17, all people fell to the earth in submission in preparation for the appearance of the Lord. When Jesus finally did appear, the people fell in submission.

3 Nephi 1:11, 16-17
11 And it came to pass that he went out and bowed himself down upon the earth, and cried mightily to his God in behalf of his people, yea, those who were about to be destroyed because of their faith in the tradition of their fathers. …
16 And there were many, who had not believed the words of the prophets, who fell to the earth and became as if they were dead, for they knew that the great plan of destruction which they had laid for those who believed in the words of the prophets had been frustrated; for the sign which had been given was already at hand.
17 And they began to know that the Son of God must shortly appear; yea, in fine, all the people upon the face of the whole earth from the west to the east, both in the land north and in the land south, were so exceedingly astonished that they fell to the earth.

3 Nephi 11:12
12 And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words the whole multitude fell to the earth; for they remembered that it had been prophesied among them that Christ should show himself unto them after his ascension into heaven.

The second most common way term the Book of Mormon uses to express acts of submission is bowed. This "bowing" was exclusively to God or to kings, and was NOT associated with physical disabilities. The absence of strong emotional or physical revival-type components might suggest that "bow" was translated from a different word than "fall."

Mosiah 7:12
12 And now, when Ammon saw that he was permitted to speak, he went forth and bowed himself before the king; … .

Alma 22:2
2 And it came to pass that he went in unto him into the king's palace, with his brethren, and bowed himself before the king… .

Alma 46:13
13 … he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren… .

Alma 47:22
22 … they went and bowed themselves before the king, as if to reverence him because of his greatness.

Helaman 7:10
10 … Nephi had bowed himself upon the tower which was in his garden… .

3 Nephi 1:11
11 … he went out and bowed himself down upon the earth, and cried mightily to his God … .

3 Nephi 11:19
19 And Nephi arose and went forth, and bowed himself before the Lord and did kiss his feet.

3 Nephi 19:19
19 … Jesus departed out of the midst of them, and went a little way off from them and bowed himself to the earth … .

3 Nephi 19:27
27 And [Jesus] turned from them again, and went a little way off and bowed himself to the earth; and he prayed again unto the Father… .

Ether 6:12
12 … And when they had set their feet upon the shores of the promised land they bowed themselves down upon the face of the land, and did humble themselves before the Lord… .

Assuming that the term bowed was translated consistently from the same foreign term, then there may be a hint as to its distinct usage. Twice in 2 Nephi the term bowed is used metaphorically to represent humility and the absence of haughtiness:

2 Nephi 12:11, 17
11 And it shall come to pass that the lofty looks of man shall be humbled, and the haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, and the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day. ...

17 And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low; and the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day.

Unfortunately, the absence of the original plates of the Book of Mormon makes my assertion mere speculation and unfortunately beyond much further analysis.

*****Conclusions*****

It is a mistake to conclude that the Book of Mormon simply borrowed from early American revivalism. The influences are much more complex. For example, the usage of "fell" and "bowed" in the Book of Mormon could have subtle meanings with distinct characteristics. A minor amount of revivalist-like descriptions are associated with the "falling" phrases, especially with respect to loss of bodily control. This association is greatly diminished in the "bowed" passages. How did Joseph Smith keep these distinctions straight? Overall, the Bible has very few passages related to being overcome by the spirit and loss of bodily control, although they can be found.

This essay is not designed to test the ancient origins of the Book of Mormon. However, it is important to emphasize that apparent correlations of king Benjamin's speech could be made to BOTH 19th century revivalistic practices and ancient Biblical Jewish festivals, such as Tabernacles. These correlations illustrate my perspective that there could be both ancient and modern influences in the Book of Mormon. Influence need not travel in a single direction for any of the scriptural passages discussed above. In any case, my continuing argument in this blog-series is that the Book of Mormon is worth serious academic analysis, and that it should not be brushed off as primitive frontier literature. The Book of Mormon has rich subtlety that has challenged readers for almost two centuries.

What is clear and should be less controversial is that early revivalists stirred enthusiasm for Christ and enriched peoples lives with Biblical scripture. They created the beginning foundations for cultural acceptance of spiritual gifts, as would be preached by the Latter-days Saints. Such work set the stage for Mormon missionaries of the 1830s, and allowed the Church to grow at a fairly rapid pace. The timing of the restoration was NOT arbitrary – in terms of place (America) – in terms of person (Joseph Smith) – and in terms of cultural and religious milieu (i.e., revivalism).

This essay scratches the surface. There is much more research to be done, and I am confident that several Ph.D. dissertations could be hatched from the combined topic of revivalism and restorationism. Perhaps the spirit of revivalism has overwhelmed me (as a topic, at least). I do NOT claim to have solved big problems in this essay, but I hope some interest has been generated that otherwise might not have existed.

*****

Extra Reading: For a full analysis of the activities of Methodist revivals around 1820 near the Palmyra, New York area, see: D. Michael Quinn (2006). Joseph Smith's experience of a Methodist "Camp Meeting" in 1820. In: Dialogue paperless: E-paper #3.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Cessationism:

Attempting to Crumble the Foundation

There is an old Protestant doctrine called “cessationism” that contends that there are no more miracles or gifts of the spirit after the original Apostles, and that there were no more Apostles after Paul. It is the view that the original Apostles had a unique role with unique spiritual abilities that were necessary for establishing the Christian kingdom. Once established, Christianity had no need for either Apostles or the apostolic gifts of the spirit.

Latter-day Saints are NOT cessationists in any sense of the term. Our Articles of Faith negate the idea. Further, it is probably not arbitrary that these two Articles of Faith are in close proximity:

Articles of Faith
6 We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

7 We believe in the gift of tongues, prophecy, revelation, visions, healing, interpretation of tongues, and so forth.

In other words, Latter-day Saints believe in both modern Apostles (to this day) and modern gifts of the spirit (to this day). However, we also believe there was a temporary loss of authority upon the deaths of the original Apostles that led ultimately to a restoration (see: Need for Restoration).

Although cessationists contend that the office of Apostle was foundational, they argue that just as one does not lay a new foundation upon another foundation, one should not build new Apostles on top of old Apostles. In other words, the office of Apostle is now defunct – it ceases to exist.

A favorite verse cited by cessationists is 1 Corinthians 15:8, which they interpreted to mean that Paul was the last Apostle. However, let’s read the verse in its entire context:

1 Corinthians 15:7-10 [brackets are mine]
7 After that, he [the resurrected Jesus] was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which [was bestowed] upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

Did Paul mean to imply he would be the last Apostle ever? How could Paul even come to think that? The resurrected Jesus appeared to him. Could not Jesus just as easily appear to others? If not, why not?

I think Paul was saying that of all the Apostles then living, he was the last to see Christ. He was saying (to paraphrase), “Because I persecuted the Church before I became a Christian, I was the last to see Jesus and I am the least important of the Apostles.”

Then, in verse 10, Paul speaks of the “enabling power.” He boasts a bit and says (to paraphrase), “I have worked harder than all of the other Apostles, but only by the enabling power of God.” I wonder if Peter, James & John would have fully agreed with that claim.

I agree with cessationists that Apostles are foundational. However, in opposition to cessationism, I would say that one should not let the foundation disappear. It needs to remain functional. (I wish to say, however, I respect all my Christian brothers and sisters whether they are cessationists or continuationists).

As Paul says, “[When] all the building [is] fitly framed together it groweth [into] an holy temple” (Eph. 2: 21). In other words, one needs all the pieces to the building, especially the Apostles. Let’s look at the full context of this passage:

Ephesians 2:19 – 21
19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner [stone];
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:

These verses tell us that the organization of the Church is like a holy temple. Temples were priesthood-based. Organization matters. Priesthood cannot be taken for granted. Gifts of the spirit matter. No one has the right to crumble or redesign the basic organization. The Church is supposed to have apostles and associated gifts of the spirit.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT

The Pre-mortal Existence:

A Brief Introduction to Ancient and Modern Ideas
on a Prior Existence

What is the relationship between the pre-mortal existence (sometimes called "preexistence" or "antemortal existence") and "war in heaven?" The terminology itself can be confusing. The word preexistence might appear to refer to something "prior to existence" which would be inherently self-contradictory. For that reason, many prefer the terms pre-mortal or antemortal life, since the clear reference is to an existence prior to this one. "War in heaven" is almost equally misunderstood. How can heaven, a place normally defined as peaceful, be in a war? The answer is that there was a rebellion in the prior existence – the pre-mortal existence. These ideas need elaboration.

The most famous Bible verses are the following by the Apostle John:

Revelations 12:7-9
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

However, non-LDS Bible scholars do not necessarily agree whether this apocalyptic war in heaven refers to the past or future. Further, many see "the war" as merely symbolic of the evident and on-going war of good against evil.

Jude in the New Testament appears to refer to that same war described by John in the following verse:

Jude 1:6
6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

The verses quoted above make a strong correlation with these found in Isaiah:

Isaiah 14: 12-15
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

There are a number of Latter-day scriptures that clarify that the rebellion took place in the past, such as the following:

D&C 29:36
36 … for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;

Ambiguities in ancient scripture abound, and it is clear, especially when salvation is at stake, that there is a need for modern prophetic clarification.

*****

It is important to keep in mind that our knowledge of pre-mortal life from Jewish writings is at best vague and incomplete. The Bible only hints at a general pre-existence. We can find such verses as:

Jeremiah 1:5
5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Also in the Old Testament, God asks Job to consider, “Where were you when I created the earth and the sons of God shouted for joy?” The Lord was chastising Job, and the actual implication might have been, “Where were you? You were nowhere.” The actual verse reads:

Job 38: 4, 7
4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? … [and]
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

In Ecclesiastes we find another hint in a verse speaking of death:

Ecclesiastes 12: 7
7… and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Note that spirits do not just go to God upon death, they “return.” The Hebrew root is "shuwb" (Strong's #H7725), meaning to return, come back, or be brought back.

It is a stretch to say that ancient prophets or ancient religious writings expressed any deep understanding of the preexistence. One can find only hints. For example, such a hint is found in “The Second Treatise of the Great Seth,” which is part of the Nag Hammadi papers that were discovered in 1945. This document appears to have Christ making a reference to the great Council or "heavenly Assembly," from which he received his commision. It says:

"Second Treatise of the Great Seth," VII, 50:1-25, in James Robinson (Ed.): The Nag Hammadi Library in English, p. 330
Let us gather an assembly together. Let us visit that creation of his [God]. Let us send someone forth in it.... And I [Christ] said these things to the whole multitude of the multitudinous assembly of the rejoicing Majesty. The whole house of the Father of Truth rejoiced that I am the one who is from them.... They charged me since I am willing. I came forth to reveal the glory to my kindred and my fellow spirits.

The statement above sounds like a more complicated version of the brief statement found in Abraham:

Abraham 3:27
“And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me.”

It is in Abraham chapter 3 that we find the clearest explication of the doctrine of pre-mortal existence, and I will leave it to the reader to study that chapter. The quote above is consistent with what Jesus said in John 8:58, "Before Abraham was, I am.”

Joseph Smith did not teach about the pre-mortal existence in great detail. The Book of Abraham, which has most of the facts and doctrine, was translated and finished in two periods of time. Specifically, the first two chapters of the Book of Abraham were completed by 1837, but the remainder, including chapter 3, was finished by early 1842 in Nauvoo (see Richard Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, p. 286). In other words, Joseph Smith’s advanced thinking and knowledge about the topic of pre-existence did not surface with maturity until the 1840s.

Usually, when Joseph spoke on the topic, it was in brief references, like the following:

Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 354.
The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. [Spoken on Sunday April 7th, 1844 at General Conference on the grounds of the Nauvoo Temple, under construction.]

Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 181; Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, p. 209.
At the first organization in heaven we were all present and saw the Savior chosen and appointed and the plan of salvation made, and we sanctioned it.” [Date of quote unknown, but certainly it was given in the 1840s.]

Although the doctrine of pre-existence is crucial to our modern-day understanding of the plan of salvation, we need to appreciate that revelation about the topic was given in bits and pieces. Charles Harrell, a BYU professor, makes the point this way:

Charles Harrell, (1988). "The Development of the Doctrine of Preexistence, 1830-1844," BYU Studies 28:2, p. 75.
Perhaps no doctrine has had greater impact on Latter-day Saint theology than the doctrine of preexistence, or the belief in the existence of the human spirit before its mortal birth. … This distinctive LDS doctrine was not immediately comprehended by the early Saints in the more fully developed form in which it is understood today. Like many of the other teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, it was revealed line upon line and adapted to the Saints’ understanding.

We should expect this kind of evolutionary doctrinal development. We are a Church of revelation, and revelation does NOT come all at once. Therefore, modern prophets had to expand upon the understanding of Joseph. Again, this point is made by Harrell:

Charles Harrell, (1988). "The Development of the Doctrine of Preexistence, 1830-1844," BYU Studies 28:2, p.91.
The development of the doctrine of preexistence from 1830 to 1844 illustrates the expanding theology of the early church. It was especially meaningful for saints at this time to lift their voices and sing the Lord is extending the Saints understanding. While it is difficult to determine precisely how prevalent particular beliefs were and when they began to take root or change form, it is clear that the basic idea of preexistence began to emerge shortly after the organization of the Church but was not fully expounded in church publications until after Joseph Smith’s death while the prophets initial teachings on preexistence were perceived in the light of contemporary views on the nature and origin of spirits these tentative beliefs were continually being reevaluated and revised in light of the ongoing teachings of the prophet until by the end of 1844, all of the basic elements of the current LDS doctrine of preexistence were in place. Nearly a century and a half later, this doctrine continues to vitalize LDS theology adding a significant dimension to nearly every precept of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

What great knowledge about this doctrine awaits us in the future? There is much left to know.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Samaritans and Temple Cleanliness:

An Analysis of Ritual Purity

It is a real mistake to believe that ALL of religious practice comes from God. Religion is imbued with culture, and culture is imbued with all kinds of prejudices. No one understood this principle better than Jesus!

This can be illustrated with what is probably my favorite story of the Bible, “Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well of Jacob:”

John 4: 5 – 14
5 Then cometh he to a city of Samaria, which is called Sychar, near to the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph.
6 Now Jacob's well was there. Jesus therefore, being wearied with [his] journey, sat thus on the well: [and] it was about the sixth hour.
7 There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her, Give me to drink.
8 (For his disciples were gone away unto the city to buy meat.)
9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.
10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.
11 The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water?
12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle?
13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again:
14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

From verse 9 we learn “Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.” The religion of the Pharisees had made the Samaritans an unclean race. Yes, this perception was nothing other than a form of racial prejudice.

The Pharisees and the Jews in general were obsessed with cleanliness, and any people they did not like were considered unclean. To understand how the Pharisees arrived at this strange belief, we need to discuss the rules of cleanliness and the Temple!!

*****Temple and Ritual Purity*****

It is important to have a mental image of the Jerusalem temple. Its grounds consisted of a large arena of about 144,000 square meters. A rough sense of proportion can be obtained in LDS Bible map #12. Around the perimeter of the temple grounds were porches or porticoes consisting of a most impressive display of large Corinthian columns in double rows. Brief YouTube tours of computer reconstructions can be obtained here and here. The portico on the east was known as "Solomon's Porch." Its importance has been previously addressed in another blog essay, but Jesus preached there and the early Christian Church (both Jews and Gentiles) met there.

On the south perimeter was the spectacular Herod's Basilica, with ramps that led to buildings containing dozens of baptismal or cleansing fonts called miqvaoth (a plural term and pronounced mik-vah-oat; miqveh is the singular). The Jews would ritually purify themselves (partial body or full body) before entering the Temple grounds.

Perhaps it was in these fonts or in the nearby Pool of Bethesda that thousands were baptized on the Day of Pentecost, as described in Acts:

Acts 2:5, 41, 45
5 ¶ And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. …
41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls. …
46 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart… .

Notice in verse 46 that these early Christians did Temple work!!!!! Where are the Temples in traditional Christianity today?

It is fascinating to me to see how modern non-LDS scholars recognize the importance of the temple and yet they too often cannot pull themselves away from the idea of the temple being obsolete. A most impressive book discussing temple cleansing rituals (in the context of Paul's letters to the Corinthians) is: Albert L.A. Hogeterp (2006). Paul and God's Temple : A Historical Interpretation of Cultic Imagery in the Corinthian Correspondence. Paris: Peeters Publishers. The book is a published version of his 2004 University of Groningen doctoral disseratation. He argues that early Christian religion, as community, became a metaphorical substitution for the concrete temple. To Hogeterp, it was the verbal and mental imagery of the temple and its cleanliness that became more important than the actual temple itself. Although I think it was not Hogeterp's intention, he ended up establishing an argument that BOTH temple imagery (symbolism) and the physical temple are essential Christian components.

While scholars can debate about how Christians made use of the temple, there is little debate about Jewish concerns. Early Jews were compulsively focused on ritual cleanliness. The Law of Moses contained many rules about how one could become unclean and how long one must remain in an unclean state, depending upon the source of contamination. It also contained the rules about how to become clean again.

For example, one should not touch dead bodies, unless necessary for burial:

Numbers 19:11 - 13
11 ¶ He that toucheth the dead body of any man shall be unclean seven days.
12 He shall purify himself with it on the third day, and on the seventh day he shall be clean: but if he purify not himself the third day, then the seventh day he shall not be clean.
13 Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of separation was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness [is] yet upon him.

A woman having her monthly period was considered unclean (frankly speaking, this was a rule that was very oppressing and diminishing to women):

Leviticus 15:19 – 22
19 ¶ And if a woman have an issue, [and] her issue in her flesh be blood, she shall be put apart seven days: and whosoever toucheth her shall be unclean until the even.
20 And every thing that she lieth upon in her separation shall be unclean: every thing also that she sitteth upon shall be unclean.
21 And whosoever toucheth her bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe [himself] in water, and be unclean until the even [interpreted as “until the next evening”].
22 And whosoever toucheth any thing that she sat upon shall wash his clothes, and bathe [himself] in water, and be unclean until the even.

A woman having just given birth was unclean, but she was MOST unclean if she had just given birth to a girl!!

Leviticus 12:2 - 5
2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.
3 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.
4 And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.
5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.

The Jews literally had pages and pages of rules about how to avoid unclean things. Yet, these rules had nothing to do with righteousness. Perhaps the rules prepared Jews to understand baptism, but if they did, they did not do much more than that. Often the rules promoted prejudicial thinking. Thank goodness, Jesus made these rules obsolete.

Going back to the story of the Samaritan woman at the well, we need to understand that Jews believed that the Samaritans were unclean (a true form of racial prejudice).

John 4:9
9 Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.

It is not just that the Jews would have “no dealings” with or were segregated from the Samaritians. The Greek phrase being used here (v. 9) for “no dealings” was “ ou sugchraomai” (pronounced oo -- soong-khrah'-om-ahee; see Strong’s #G4798), which also had the meaning “not to use jointly.” Why do I raise this issue?

When Jesus took a drink from the Samaritan woman, he would be drinking from the same container that she touched and out of which she drank. In other words, Jews did not share drinks with Samaritans. To deal or share with this woman was to be “contaminated” and would require ritual bathing. Jesus saw through the nonsense in all of this. (He saw clearly!!!!)

Here is the Jewish mentality of the unclean:

Numbers 19:22 [brackets mine]
22 And whatsoever the unclean [person] toucheth shall be unclean; and the soul that toucheth [it] shall be unclean until even [that is, until the next evening].

But Jesus rejected this mentality, or at least, he made it obsolete. He rejected rules like, “unclean hands makes a person spiritually unclean.” Here is what Jesus thought:

Bible in Basic English: Mark 7: 1 – 23 (condensed; brackets mine)
1 And there came together to him the Pharisees and certain of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem,
2 And had seen that some of his disciples took their bread with unclean, that is, unwashed, hands.
3 Now the Pharisees, and all the Jews, do not take food without washing their hands with care, keeping the old rule which has been handed down to them:
4 And when they come from the market-place, they take no food till their hands are washed; and a number of other orders there are, which have been handed down to them to keep--washings of cups and pots and brass vessels.
5 And the Pharisees and the scribes put the question to him, Why do your disciples not keep the rules of the fathers, but take their bread with unwashed hands? …

14 And turning to the people again, he [Jesus] said to them, Give ear to me all of you, and let my words be clear to you:
15 There is nothing outside the man which, going into him, is able to make him unclean: but the things which come out of the man are those which make the man unclean. …

18 And he said to them … Do you not see that whatever goes into a man from outside is not able to make him unclean,
19 Because it goes not into the heart … .
20 And he said, [It is] [t]hat which comes out of the man, that makes the man unclean.
21 Because from inside, from the heart of men, come evil thoughts and unclean pleasures,
22 The taking of goods and of life, broken faith between husband and wife, the desire of wealth, wrongdoing, deceit, sins of the flesh, an evil eye, angry words, pride, foolish acts:
23 All these evil things come from inside, and make the man unclean.

Again, it is evil thoughts and actions that make a person unclean, not what we eat and touch.

*****The Adulterous Woman and Stoning*****

Blind obedience to religious rules does not make one righteous, moral or anything else. Again, it is the contents of your heart that matters. Jesus was constantly trying to teach this lesson to the Pharisees.

The Pharisees believed they were good people because they tried to keep all the rules. They disliked Jesus because he did not respect their rules. One of their rules was to throw stones at adulterous women and kill them. Here is a bit of the story:

My Paraphrase and Interpretation of John 8: 1-11:
One day Jesus was teaching at the Temple in Jerusalem. The Pharisees had arrested a woman for adultery and brought her to Jesus.

Trying to embarrass and trick Jesus, they said to him, “This woman was arrested for adultery and was caught in the very act. Now the Law of Moses says such people should be stoned to death. What do you say?”

Jesus stooped down and started writing something in the dirt with his finger as though he had not heard their question. (In my imagination he wrote, “God loves us all.”) The Pharisees continued to pester him. After a moment he stood up and pointed at the Pharisees with his very dirty finger (now ritually unclean and impure) and said, “He that is without sin among you, let him be first to cast a stone at her.”

The Pharisees were stunned by the challenge because they had just been convicted by their own consciences. Slowly, all of the accusers left, leaving Jesus and the woman alone.

Jesus ignored the men as they left. Trying to clean his finger, Jesus stooped down and brushed it again in the dirt. With his finger cleaned off, he lifted himself up and said to the woman, “Woman, where are those accusers? Did no man condemn you?

With tears in her eyes, the amazed woman said with just a touch of faith, “No man, Lord.” Jesus exclaimed to her, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and sin no more.”

As we can tell from this story, Jesus was none too pleased with the Pharisees, who thought of themselves as “righteous.” Blindly following rules does not make one moral. Further, with just a touch of faith, all of us can be forgiven, even if the rest of society thinks we are the dregs.

It is my theory that Jesus got his finger dirty and held it up to the crowd to represent sin. He did stoop over twice and put his finger in the dirt, just as I told in the story.

Some might theorize that Jesus stooped down as if he was going to get a rock to throw at the woman. But, the Book of John clearly states that Jesus put his finger into the dirt and moved his hand around as if he were writing something. I don’t think he was searching for a rock or even trying to suggest that he was the only one qualified to throw a rock. (However, the poor woman might have wondered what he was doing as he stooped).

Another theory might be that Jesus was merely ignoring the Pharisees to allow them to save face. He was purposely not looking at the Pharisees so that they could leave without embarrassment. This might have been true the second time he stooped, but I am unsure that such a view accounts for the first stoop.

I still like my theory the best (given in the summary above) because it explains why Jesus stooped and put his hand in the dirt twice – the first time to get the dirt to stick to his finger and the second time to get the excess dirt off of his finger. (Oh, well, that is how I would film the scene if I were a moviemaking director).

*****Bapstism as Cleansing*****

When one has completed the first four principles of the gospel, then one has received forgiveness for sins of the past. The practice of baptism is merciful because it means that a person does not have to hang their head in shame for the rest of their life. It means that a wayward person can do an about-face and then pursue righteousness with the very best in the Church.

There is nothing magical about baptism:

Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.296 FORGIVENESS
Mere performance of the formal rite or ordinance of baptism, standing alone and without full compliance with the law on the part of the converted persons, does not put the Lord's cleansing power into operation.

James E. Talmage, The Vitality of Mormonism, p.75
How can water wash away sin? In answer be it said, water cannot remove the stain of guilt; nevertheless, obedience to the law of baptism as required by Jesus Christ is truly a means of securing forgiveness. Obedience, not water, is the cleansing unction.

Bruce R. McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, Vol.1, p.115
No unclean thing can enter the celestial kingdom, and without repentance and baptism no accountable person is free of sin. (3 Ne. 27:19-21.) Such was the eternal law, and the Jews knew it. John's procedure was not new to them. Baptism had been performed by them and their forebearers for four thousand years. It was a well known ordinance which of itself caused no stir among them.

I am sure that the key recipe for obtaining forgiveness begins with good faith (just a tiny seed), a sincere attempt at repentance, a determination to improve one’s life for a lifetime, and a willingness to rely on God and his enabling power.

Baptism matters NOT, if we do not commit ourselves to a life that helps others. We cannot help everyone, but we can help some. We can do hometeaching. We can visit the sick and elderly. We can attend to the welfare of others. We can seek honorable occupations that help better the world and keep our economy strong.

We must get to the core of the gospel. We must teach the optimistic gospel of hope for all of us who want to be cleansed of our past and start anew. We are all like the woman about to be stoned, and then with just a tiny touch of faith comes forgiveness almost out of the blue.

*****Haggai*****

Ancient cultures, like the early Jews, always struggled with the concept of ritual purity. What does it mean to be clean or unclean? In the famous verse below, some of these struggles are expressed:

Bible in Basic English: Haggai 2: 11-14
11 These are the words of the Lord of armies: Put now a point of law to the priests, saying, 12 If anyone has some holy flesh folded in the skirt of his robe, will bread or soup or wine or oil or any other food be made holy if touched by his skirt? And the priests answering said, No. 13 Then Haggai said, Will any of these be made unclean by the touch of one who is unclean through touching a dead body? And the priests answering said, It will be made unclean. 14 Then Haggai said, So is this people and so is this nation before me, says the Lord; and so is every work of their hands; and the offering they give there is unclean.

Let me paraphrase what I think these verses are saying: The Lord of Armies asked Haggai, the prophet, to question the temple priests about the laws on cleanliness. Haggai asked, “If you are carrying a holy sacrifice (meat), and you brush up against bread, soup, wine, oil, or anything else, will it become holy too?” The priests replied, “No, holiness is not passed from one item to another from touching.” Then Haggai asked, “If you touch a dead person and become ceremonially impure and then brush up against one of these things, will it become unclean?” “Yes,” said the priests. Then Haggai taught a great lesson speaking for the Lord: “You temple priests and this nation have contaminated your ceremonies and offerings to me because of your sins and imperfections.”

The problem raised by Haggai was a continuous problem until Jesus. It would take a sinless Savior to serve as the ultimate sacrifice. The Great Atonement was always needed. The early temple ceremonies of the followers of Moses were a shadow of things to come.

*****Conclusion*****

Ancient peoples, like the Jews of the Old Testament did not have a bacterial theory of disease. Yet, sanitization of body parts, particularly hands, was just as important then as now. Some religious practices as described above in this essay were just reminders to primitive peoples that they ought to wash their hands before they eat. But, there were larger issues. The Jewish people had concepts of both physical cleanliness and moral cleanliness, and these concepts ultimately were differentiated. Eventually, these peoples began to realize that ritual purity was contaminated by their own evil tendencies, not just by the dirt on their hands.

In the search for cleanliness, the Pharisees developed a long list of rules to live by. Mistakenly, they began to believe themselves to be more righteous than everyone else. Jesus told them point blank that they were still flawed and that they misunderstood scripture. To Jesus, there were many Samaritans who were closer to God than the Pharisees. Jesus taught a new way.

By ourselves, on our own, we cannot make ourselves morally pure and clean. Instead, we must find strength through Jesus. Perfection is not an attainable earthly goal. Even so, there are positive steps we can take. In this life, we cleanse ourselves through the sacrament, which represents the flesh and blood of the atonement. We do this almost weekly because we need it weekly. Taking the sacrament renews our covenants (even those we make in the temple) and cleanses our souls. We are NOT sinless, but Jesus has provided a way to remain clean.

*****

Bible in Basic English
-- Public Domain.
The Bible In Basic English was printed by Cambridge Press, 1965.

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

The Two Moronis

Remarks to a Lonely Soldier in the Desert

Six months ago, I wrote these words to my soldier son who was stationed in a Middle East desert – far, far away seemingly from everything.

*****

As you continue your work in the lonely desert remember the prophet Moroni [pronounced "more-own-I"], who spent the last 30+ years of his life wandering the lands by himself alone while trying to protect the metallic scriptural plates. There were two Moroni characters in the Book of Mormon. The first Moroni was Captain Moroni who was head of the Nephite armies between 74 and 57 B.C. His life is mainly described in the Book of Alma, and he was a deeply spiritual man. The prophet Moroni at the end of the Book of Mormon is the second Moroni, and he was likely named after Captain Moroni. This second Moroni, a prophet, lived between the fourth and fifth centuries A.D., and he was the last author to write in the Book of Mormon. He was the angel to appear at the bedside of Joseph Smith centuries later.

The prophet Moroni lived an unbelievably important but lonely life. By reading Mormon chapters 8 and 9 along with the book of Moroni, one can get a sense of both his importance and his overall loneliness. As the last one of his people he had to wander the wilderness alone for more than three decades. One of the subtleties of his writings is that he ended them twice – as if to say (strictly paraphrasing), "I am now going to end this book," and then later he basically said, "I changed my mind, and I am going to write a little more." Why would a work of fiction do that?

His teachings are among the best taught in the entire Book of Mormon. Given his great sacrifice and great loyalty, it is no wonder that he was given the privilege of being the first prophet to teach Joseph Smith.

We sometimes think of Joseph Smith being uneducated. He was in the formal sense, but in the spiritual sense, he had one the best teachers in existence -- Moroni.

*****

Note to Reader: I think my son, while in the middle of nowhere, reacted very positively to the words of Moroni. Moroni's life reminded him that people can endure unusual circumstances.

Yes, there were two Moronis -- the Captain Moroni and the prophet Moroni, but in my mind the two Moronis in my title above, were the prophet and my son.

A bit of advice: If you have been reading the Book of Mormon for the first time and have been wondering whether to quit before finishing, then please end your reading by going to Mormon chapters 8 and 9, along with the short book of Moroni. Read those chapters with the understanding that Moroni was the last of his culture wandering alone in the Americas with the ancient records of his people. His words are a great source of comfort to us, especially when one realizes that he was writing, in part, to comfort both us and himself.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Exaltation Requires Mastery of Principles:

Mere Membership Goes Nowhere without Faithful Action

There is no place for the frame of mind that Mormons are favored by God and everyone else is going to Hell. Everything taught in the temple and in the scriptures stands against that attitude. God's purpose is "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of [all]" (Moses 1:39).

*****The Lord Esteemeth All Flesh *****

To Jesus, it was the “good Samaritan” (a non-Jew) who was more righteous than the Sadducees or Pharisees, groups who thought they were living the letter of the law. Righteousness trumps membership.

Hugh Nibley makes the same point:

Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol.8, Ch.17, p.336 - p.337 [emphasis mine]
You will notice that every time the dedication of the people to the cause of God is mentioned, it is followed immediately by a qualifying clause, proclaiming that the people who enter the covenant are not to be considered righteous simply by virtue of party affiliation. They do not represent the Good People as opposed to the Bad People: their own transgression can spoil everything at any time; they are quite as capable of sinning and incurring destruction as their enemies; they can bring down upon themselves the same calamities as the dissenters; their garments can be rent along with the most wicked; and they can be as completely destroyed as the Jaredites of old, for there is no guarantee that they are the Good People. This is an extremely important lesson driven home repeatedly in the Book of Mormon, that righteousness does not consist in being identified with this or that nation, party, church, or group.

Nibley in the same chapter cites:

1 Nephi 17:33-35
3 And now, do ye suppose that the children of this land, who were in the land of promise, who were driven out by our fathers, do ye suppose that they were righteous? Behold, I say unto you, Nay.
34 Do ye suppose that our fathers would have been more choice than they if they had been righteous? I say unto you, Nay.
35 Behold, the Lord esteemeth all flesh in one; he that is righteous is favored of God. …

The Church is called to a great work – to build a righteous people to prepare the way for the Second Coming of Christ. It is a necessary work, particularly baptism, the sacrament, and the temple ordinances of the priesthood. However, all of that being true does not negate the meaningfulness of other non-LDS people’s lives. The Lord “esteemeth all flesh in one.” Everyone lives a meaningful life, which can be made even more meaningful by righteousness.

What is my point? Mormons have no right to brag. We are a choice people only by virtue of our obligations. To be truly favored requires righteousness, which is available to all peoples.

We need to stop thinking “It’s them against us.” All are God’s children. This is why Jesus taught to love thy enemy. We are taught to proceed with love and kindness in our hearts, and to see the good in all people, or at least see the potential for good.

Psalms 84:11
11 For the LORD God [is] a sun and shield: the LORD will give grace and glory: no good [thing] will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.

Deuteronomy 10:12
12 ¶ And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all his ways, and to love him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul,

Micah 6:8
8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what [is] good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?

*****The Firstborn*****

Mere Church membership does not carry one to exaltation. In this section there are some quotations on the topic of “Church of the Firstborn.” I have tried hard to handle this topic appropriately and with significant respect. My sources are from the scriptures, the Ensign and writings from General Authorities that are very much in the public domain.

Joseph Smith had this vision in 1832:

D&C 76:50, 54-56 [emphasis mine]
50 And again we bear record--for we saw and heard, and this is the testimony of the gospel of Christ concerning them who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just …
54 They are they who are the church of the Firstborn.
55 They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things--
56 They are they who are priests and kings, who have received of his fullness, and of his glory;

Larry E. Dahl, a BYU religion professor, provides a nice definition of the term "firstborn" as it relates to the Savior:

Larry E. Dahl, “‘The Morning Breaks, the Shadows Flee’,” Ensign, Apr 1997, 12
If indeed “it is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God,” then it is vital to know the true nature and proper relationship of God the Father and his Son, Jesus Christ.

The Firstborn. In Paul’s letter to the Colossian Saints, he writes of Jesus Christ as “the firstborn of every creature” (Col. 1:15). Three verses later, however, the Savior is called the “firstborn from the dead” (Col. 1:18). Many do not see the double meaning of the word firstborn as it is used in these verses. Modern revelation helps make it clear. To the Prophet Joseph, the Savior said, “I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn” (D&C 93:21). Also, we are taught in 1 Nephi 10:11 [1 Ne. 10:11] that “after he had been slain he should rise from the dead” and in 2 Nephi 2:8 [2 Ne. 2:8] that following his death, he took up his body again “by the power of the Spirit, that he may bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, being the first that should rise.” Jesus Christ is the Firstborn, then, in two senses of the word—he is the first spirit child born to God the Father in the premortal world, and he was the first one on this earth to be resurrected, or born from the grave. As Firstborn, he led the way toward mortal life for all of us, and as Firstborn, he made it possible for each of us to be resurrected. Those of us who believe on his name in mortality are baptized, keep the commandments, and are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise are “the church of the Firstborn …

“Church of the Firstborn” is a term that relates to those individuals who will obtain the highest form of eternal life:

Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, p.9 [emphasis in original]
Eternal life is life in the presence of the Father and the Son. Those who receive it become members of the "Church of the Firstborn" and are heirs as sons and daughters of God. They receive the fullness of blessings. They … are joint-heirs with Jesus Christ.

Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol.2, p.42 [emphasis in original]
So being ordained an elder, or a high priest, or an apostle, or even President of the Church, is not the thing that brings the exaltation, but obedience to the laws and the ordinances and the covenants required of … members of the Church of the Firstborn… . We are all members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints by being baptized and confirmed, and there are many who seem to be content to remain such without obtaining the privileges of exaltation.

President Joseph Fielding Smith was saying that exaltation is not predicated upon one’s office but upon faithfulness. Such a blessing is not just reserved for the General Authorities, but is extended to any who have mastered the principles. He was saying do not become complacent because one is Mormon. Instead, strive to live so that one can eventually become part of the Church of the Firstborn. Read on:

Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith, p.337
[The Church of the Firstborn] … is the church among those for whom the family unit continues in eternity. … As baptism admits repentant souls to membership in the earthly church, so celestial marriage opens the door to membership in the heavenly church.

The purpose of the church on earth is to prepare us for an inheritance in the church in heaven. Those who so obtain having overcome all things, shall … enter into their exaltation. "They are they who are the church of the Firstborn. … " (D&C 76:54-59.)

As baptism is the initiating ritual for entrance into the earthly Church, so is eternal temple marriage an initiating ritual into the Church of heaven.

*****

Those who seek worldly glory and pleasures in this world may find it. If they do, such rewards will be short-lived and ultimately unsatisfying. To be part of the Church of the Firstborn one must see clearly, and show extraordinary faithfulness. Specious rewards are the trappings of the secular world. Instead, we must seek eternal rewards.

As a follow-up, I recommend my essays on Theosis or Eternal Marriage and Exaltation.

*****
Postscript: For this particular post I am turning public comments off. If you have comments you wish to make to me, feel free to write to my email, which can be found below or in my profile.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

In Times of Trouble:

Words of Comfort to a Deployed LDS Solder

In December of 2007, I wrote the following to my Army son who was deployed to the Middle East. The passages below may have some applicability to us all.

*****

In times of trouble, it is useful to remember the advice of Jesus:

John 14: 27 – "Let not your heart be troubled,
neither let it be afraid."

When Gordon B. Hinckley was a young man about to leave on a mission for the Church, his father said to him, “I want to give you only one verse of scripture.” The verse was:

Mark 5: 36 – “Be not afraid, only believe.”

Life requires boldness, whether one serves in the armed services in a combat zone of the Middle East or whether one serves on a Church mission in the calm of Salt Lake City. No matter how we serve, we must remember that our ultimate cause is peace and liberty, especially the kind that comes from Christ.

Jesus cited the following mission statement from Isaiah 61: 1-2 in Luke 4:18:

Luke 4:18 – 19
18 The Spirit of the Lord [is] upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

Regarding the phrase " acceptable year of the Lord " used in verse 19, Elder McConkie wrote the following:

Bruce R. McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, Vol.1, p.161 - 162
“The acceptable year of the Lord:” The proper, designated, approved, appointed, or accepted time, in the divine order of things, for a particular work to be done. Thus Isaiah, speaking of Messiah's coming, says that "in an acceptable time" he shall "say to the prisoners, Go forth." (Isa. 49:8-9) Thus also Paul taught that his day was "a time accepted," a time when salvation had been made available to men. "Now is the accepted time," he wrote, "now is the day of salvation." (2 Cor. 6:2) Accordingly, in using this expression, Jesus is saying, `This is the time and the day of Messiah's coming; this is the acceptable year; this is the time designated by the Father for his Only Begotten to minister among men, and I am he.'

We all have our appointed times to be serving. Therefore, you may go forth and serve without fear. Even so, it is prudent to keep your mind on safety issues.

The "acceptable year of the Lord" also has reference to the Jubilee year. It was a holiday or Sabbath of Sabbaths – after seven groups of seven years. It was a time when debts were cancelled; it was a time when lives were restarted from the beginning. Christ would be the greatest of all debt cancellers. Jubilee is described below:

New Century Version : Leviticus 25:10
10 Make the fiftieth year a special year, and announce freedom for all the people living in your country. This time will be called Jubilee. You will each go back to your own property, each to your own family and family group.

*****

From time memorial servants of the Lord have gone through many trials and tribulations. You are NOT exempt. Joseph Smith taught:

Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 184-185
The truth, like the sturdy oak, has stood unhurt amid the contending elements, which have beat upon it with tremendous force. The floods have rolled, wave after wave, in quick succession, and have not swallowed it up. . . . Stand fast, ye Saints of God, hold on a little while longer, and the storm of life will be past, and you will be rewarded by that God whose servants you are. . . . Your names will be handed down to posterity as Saints of God and virtuous men.

While at times it may seem like your role is small, you need to know that we at home appreciate your sacrifice, which is considerable. Further, I think you need to know that your perceptions of greatness versus smallness may be wrong. For example,

1 Nephi 16:29
29 … And thus we see that by small means the Lord can bring about great things.

D&C 64:33
33 Wherefore, be not weary in well-doing, for ye are laying the foundation of a great work. And out of small things proceedeth that which is great.

Therefore, proceed in your work with diligence. Remain mentally strong. See clearly.

Keep your head up. Be alert. Be appropriately cautious. Now, “go forth” and serve with pride.

*****

Scripture taken from the New Century Version®. Copyright © 2005 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Church History is NOT Church Testimony:

Used Properly, History Only Provides Perspective

Preface: Becoming complacent about the gospel is a mistake. Only Jesus fully mastered living the gospel. For the rest of us, there is more to the gospel than we can learn and master in a lifetime.

One should NOT conclude having taken a Seminary or Institute class, for example, that one has mastered the content of the Bible, Book of Mormon, or Church History. The proper lesson to have learned would be: "I can study this topic for a lifetime and still be gaining NEW knowledge!!"

Learning is unavoidable if we are living the gospel. There is a principle worth remembering: As we learn new truths, our testimonies should strengthen, not weaken. Embrace new truths and discard falsehoods. This is the lifelong process.

*****New Views Require New Perspectives*****

Some peoples’ convictions fail when they discover a surprising point in Church history. Some people become angry because their original conceptions of Church history were wrong. Yet, when we learn, our misconceptions must give way to better understandings.

For example, it is a common misperception that Joseph Smith handled and examined the ancient gold plates as he "translated" the reformed Egyptian on the Book of Mormon. Instead, Joseph Smith may have "translated" portions of the Book of Mormon using a seer stone in a hat. (See: Russell M. Nelson, “A Treasured Testament,” Ensign, July 1993, 61; and also my fellow blogger: Tim Malone's essay). Well, Joseph may have used such a device, but we have no first-hand account. Read the following, giving attention to the very first phrase:

Richard Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, N. Y.: Knopf, p. 71-72.
Neither Joseph nor Oliver explained how translation worked, but Joseph did not pretend to look at the “reformed Egyptian” words, the language on the plates, according to the book’s own description. The plates lay covered on the table, while Joseph’s head was in a hat looking at the seerstone which by this time [with Cowdery as transcriber] had replaced the interpreters [the Urim and Thummim].

We should not presume how prophets work. Even the above quote is just a best guess. Again, we have only second-hand accounts of the process of translation. (Joseph and Oliver would be the only possible first-hand sources).

Here is one more example: Many LDS members believe that Joseph was thrown into Carthage Jail for trumped-up reasons. Why was Joseph really thrown in jail? The main reason was that he ordered the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor press, a local newspaper that was exposing polygamy in the Church. Was that a good thing to do? Maybe not according to some.

Below is an excerpt from the Expositor. The statement is by William Law who was in the First Presidency as a counselor, but who dissociated himself from the Church when he learned of polygamy. Having left the Church, he helped found the Expositor. The news building was right next door to the Nauvoo temple. See excerpt below:

*****Excerpt*****

NAUVOO EXPOSITOR.
--THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.--

VOL. I. ] NAUVOO, ILLINOIS, FRIDAY, JUNE 7, 1844 [ NO. 1. …

AFFIDAVITS.
I hereby certify that Hyrum Smith did, (in his office,) read to me a certain written document [now Section 132], which he said was a revelation from God, he said that he was with Joseph when it was received. He afterwards gave us the document to read, and I took it to my house, and read it, and showed it to my wife, and returned it next day. The revelation (so called) authorized certain men to have more wives than one at a time, in this world and in the world to come. It said this was the law, and commanded Joseph to enter into the law. -- And also that he should administer to others. Several other items were in the revelations, supporting the above doctrines.

WM. LAW.
     
     

*****

Note that the paper appeared on Friday. On the following Monday, the Nauvoo city council, led by Joseph Smith, ordered the press destroyed immediately. It was.

The Laws and others registered complaints in the county seat, Carthage. Ultimately, these complaints caused Joseph Smith to be arrested, placed in jail, and martyred.

From a religious perspective, it is not easy for Latter-day Saints to believe that Joseph Smith made a mistake in destroying the Expositor. Joseph Smith knew that when polygamy became public knowledge that would be the beginning of the end of Nauvoo. He also probably knew that it was the end of him.

Early Mormon history is very colorful, and like any history the flaws of people are exposed. Joseph Smith, although VERY inspired, was NOT perfect. Why? He was human.

At the same time, we need to appreciate that our written history is itself flawed. When we read history we should never think we are reading THE full truth. The very best history books are probably only 70 to 80 percent accurate? Why? Because history is very hard to reconstruct.

Occasionally, one reads blogs critical of the Church that seem to be claiming, “I know more history than you.” Such arguments are based in intellectual arrogance.

"Thinking" Mormons need to be operating on a MORE FIRM FOUNDATION. We need to be prepared to handle controversial issues as we study and learn. In this context, we need to keep the following issues in mind:

1. Historians do not know everything, but they know some things.
2. History CANNOT test gospel truthfulness. No academic field can.
3. We are a Church of revelation, prepared to receive new light.
4. We embrace all truth, regardless of where it is found.
5. Our enthusiasm for a topic should NOT overwhelm appropriate skepticism.
6. Conversely, our skepticism should NOT block our way to truths.
7. We will always be required to make leaps of faith.
8. Our faith is never going to be fully logical.
9. We cannot convince the arrogant.
10. We must pray and be guided by the promptings of the Holy Ghost.

Learning any new topic, even outside of religion, involves some discomfort. New information requires verification and validation. But, life-time learners should never hesitate to seek the discomfort of an expanded mind. In the end, only truth matters, and we are NEVER required to believe falsehood.

*****The Early View of Priesthood*****

History does not teach us theology but it does teach us perspective. Too many misunderstand the life of Joseph Smith, believing that the "restoration" happened all at once – fully developed. Did Joseph Smith have a "full understanding" when the Church was established in 1830? History does NOT verify that view.

Take for example the concept of priesthood. To us today, priesthood is a central concept. We cannot imagine the Church without it. Of course, we operate with the benefit of hindsight, which is always 20-20. Joseph Smith had no such advantage. In the beginning of the Church his revelations on priesthood did not make complete sense to him. He had never been to a Church where priesthood played a role. What was priesthood??

Richard L. Bushman, a tremendous historian from Columbia University and a Church Patriarch, has recently published what I think will be the standard biography on Joseph Smith. This is what his relatively new (2005) book says:

Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, p. 202
Most Protestants, and certainly the radical visionary sects most akin to Mormonism, put little stock in priesthood; it was papist, hierarchical, and insidious. Their impulse was to reduce and dilute priesthood, spreading it thinly among all Christians.

Priesthood figured in Joseph’s theology from the time of the June 1831 conference when elders were ordained to the Melchizedek Priesthood, but a year passed before he grasped the central role priesthood was to play in the Church. In November 1831, he was told to appoint a “President of the high Priesthood.” In time this office was recognized as the highest in the Church – the Mormon equivalent of the pope – but its importance eluded him for six months. Joseph was sustained as President of the High Priesthood at the Amherst Conference in January 1832, but his later history failed to mention the fact. He only noted that “considerable business was done to advance the kingdom.” In a similar lapse, Joseph failed to record the date of the visit by Peter, James, and John to restore the apostleship, nor did he include the event in the first edition of his revelations. For years, priesthood appeared only dimly in his thinking.

Again, the point is, that it is easy for us to see the importance of priesthood now, but in those days it was practically a new concept. “Americans” did not have priests and priesthood – they abhorred such concepts. Consequently, Joseph Smith had to figure it out from scratch.

From the beginning of the Church, Joseph had figured out that there would be teachers, priests, and elders. So, men in the Church were licensed with those titles. However, Joseph only figured out later that “priesthood” should be tied into those titles!! Here is what Bushman has to say on the subject:

Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, p. 157-159
Because priesthood was an alien concept to Yankee Christians, Joseph may have considered it prudent to say nothing about priesthood in the early years, or possibly he did not understand it himself. So far as can be told now, before 1831 men were called to church offices – elders, priests, and teachers – given authority, and licensed without reference to a bestowal of priesthood. At the June [1831] conference, the word “priesthood” was used and priesthood was bestowed as if it was an addition to previous authority. …

Because he knew so little about priesthood at the beginning, Joseph could no more grasp its meaning than he comprehended the full significance of the First Vision as a teenager. Although he understood such Church offices as teacher and elder, it took time to comprehend that the powers of priesthood were included in the authority that went with those offices.

It is, therefore, presumptuous of us modern Latter-day Saints to think that Joseph knew everything about priesthood when he was ordained by Peter, James, and John. At the time of the vision he knew something important had happened but he probably did not understand its full significance or even how it fit into the Church.

Such historical findings teach us how Joseph operated as a prophet. He operated by the method of line upon line and precept upon precept. Church organizational principles were not just handed to him on a platter. Instead, they were given to him little by little. In fact, Bushman argues that Joseph had to ponder his revelations after he received them. Only after much struggle did Joseph begin to grasp the central importance of priesthood and its connection to authority and Church office.

*****Modern Applications*****

Let's switch the context to modern prophets. What conceptual issues do they struggle with? Let me give an example. For years and years it was thought that temples had to be expansive and expensive buildings like the Salt Lake Temple. As a result only a few temples were built. Then, in the late 1970s the Brethren, under the direction of Spencer W. Kimball, began to toy with the idea of having smaller temples. Finally, under Gordon B. Hinckley this policy went into full swing – and now we have the Winter Quarters temple and dozens upon dozens like it.

What other visions await??? What other great doctrines and policies have yet to come forth???

Church revelations are NOT magic!! Each revelation represents a prophet’s struggle with some issue, often one that is not fully understood. Even after the revelation is given, most of the time the Lord has the Church leadership work out the remaining details. Very little, if anything, is handed to the Church on a platter.

Joseph Smith said the design of the Nauvoo temple was a revelation from the Lord. When it came time to restore the temple in our own time, why didn’t the Lord just reveal the details to Gordon B. Hinckley like he did to Joseph Smith??? Why?? The answer is probably because we had the capacity to find out the necessary information on our own through the study of historical documents.

The Lord did provide the way, it would seem. In 1948 (yes, that’s right 1948) two missionaries were tracting and happened to knock on the door of the grandson of William Weeks who was the architect of the original Nauvoo temple. The grandson offered the missionaries between 20 and 30 original blueprint drawings, which were then handed over to the Church. Those drawings were the basis for the restoration of the new Nauvoo temple.

Modern lesson: We should not be surprised to learn that the early Church was different from our modern one. Prophets must be allowed to learn. Revelations do not reveal everything. Almost always, revelations leave work to be done by us. It is as if the Lord gives strong hints, but not the full answer, especially when we have the capacity to figure it out ourselves.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Grace as a Lifting Force

What Does Grace Mean to You?

I am one of those Mormons who strongly believes in GRACE. That is, I believe there are MANY gifts to the gospel. Further, the gospel is all about repentance and FORGIVENESS.

We are saved by having faith in Jesus; but, believing in Jesus means FOLLOWING his example. To me, "faith" is a word of action, not inaction.

The concept of grace reminds me that I NEED all the help I can get. I need the atonement in my life. I need repentance. I need forgiveness. I need baptism and the sacrament (every week). I need prayer. I need the blessings provided by the priesthood and true authority of Church officers. I need spiritual connections with the temple. I need my wife and my sons (always and eternally). I need to be associated with fellow Latter-day Saints and other Christians. I need Home Teachers, and this list probably could fill pages and pages. But, all of these gifts are BLESSINGS of CHRIST.

The good news is Jesus saves me, but he does so in many wonderful and beautiful ways. The word "SAVE," like its companion "faith," is a word of continuing action. It is not just a moment of conviction. Rather, it is a force of action that LIFTS me every moment toward the heavens. It is truly an ENABLING POWER.

So, if someone were to ask me, "Are you saved by grace?" My answer is ABSOLUTELY. Grace is the essence and purpose of my life; it is the substance that gives it meaning.

What does "grace" mean to you?

*****

I recommend the following essays:

1. Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians, about Paul's advice to beginning Christians.

2. The Cross of Jesus is Essential.

3. Grace.


*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Paul's First Letter to the Corinthians:

His Advice to Beginning Christians

If one looks at a map of Paul's missionary journeys, such as Map 13 (site #22) in the LDS Bible (1979), then one can notice that Corinth was a coastal city of Greece. At the time of Paul, Corinth had a new and growing Christian church, without a strong background in Judaism.

From the beginning of Paul’s "first" letter to the church at Corinth, he made it clear that there were gospel standards:

1 Corinthians 1:10 – 11 [emphasis is mine]
10 ¶ Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them [which are of the house] of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

Members of the Church need to teach the same gospel, be harmonious, and work together. However, as one reads Paul’s letters, one can really sense his fear of apostasy and contentions in the church. The issue came up time and again.

Paul reminded the Corinthians that they must be spiritually in tune:

1 Corinthians 2:13 - 14
13 … we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

In the verses above, Paul reminded the members of Corinth that spiritual matters must be taught using the Spirit. Further, a person without the Spirit cannot be taught spiritual matters.

Paul realized that he should not teach the Corinthians the deeper doctrines for they were “babes in Christ” (3: 1). Therefore, he taught them only the basics:

1 Corinthians 3:2 - 3
2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able [to bear it], neither yet now are ye able.
3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas [there is] among you envying, and strife, and divisions… .

Paul described himself as a masterbuilder (v. 3:10), laying only the foundation. Then, he said:

1 Corinthians 3:11, 16
11 ¶ For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. …
16 ¶ Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

Our lives will be a house of Christ, if we build correctly and carefully.

*****

In Chapter 8, Paul briefly alluded to the Godhead. He says:

1 Corinthians 8:5 - 6
5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
6 But to us [there is but] one God, the Father, of whom [are] all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom [are] all things, and we by him.

Notice that he did NOT say there was “One God, the Father Jesus Christ.” Jesus is always the Son in the New Testament. Only the Book of Mormon bestows upon Jesus the title “Father.” Let me detour for a moment with a few quotes from this book. The emphasis is mine:

Mosiah 3:8
8 And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning; and his mother shall be called Mary.

Helaman 14:12
12 And also that ye might know of the coming of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and of earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning; and that ye might know of the signs of his coming, to the intent that ye might believe on his name.

3 Nephi 9:15
15 Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. I am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name.

Mormon 9:12
12 Behold he created Adam, and by Adam came the fall of man. And because of the fall of man came Jesus Christ, even the Father and the Son; and because of Jesus Christ came the redemption of man.

Ether 3:14
14 Behold, I am he who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold, I am Jesus Christ. I am the Father and the Son. In me shall all mankind have life, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and my daughters.

Ether 4:7
7 And in that day that they shall exercise faith in me, saith the Lord, even as the brother of Jared did, that they may become sanctified in me, then will I manifest unto them the things which the brother of Jared saw, even to the unfolding unto them all my revelations, saith Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of the heavens and of the earth, and all things that in them are.

While it is appropriate to equate Jesus with “Father,” the terminology can get confusing. It is not easy for a reader new to the Book of Mormon to conclude that members of the Godhead are separate identities . The New Testament is clearer on this particular topic, but obviously even it has produced centuries of debate. Thus, there is an essential need for living prophets to clarify the sense in which Jesus is Father. (See Book of Mormon Reference Companion, p. 457-458; 461-462).

In all of this theological wrangling, let’s not miss the big point: We worship but one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ – just as Paul said in Chapter 8 verse 6.

*****

In 1 Corinthians 9: 13-14 Paul taught something that is rarely quoted, but should be:

1 Corinthians 9:13
13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live [of the things] of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?
14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

I do not know how Paul conceptualized the temple. The Jews had temple practices that revolved around the Aaronic / Levitical priesthood. Later, Jesus probably taught something similar to the modern endowment based in the Melchizedek priesthood. Did Paul know about the Melchizedek-based temple? I suspect so. Regardless of Paul’s conceptions, the temple was something of great value to him. Shouldn’t we expect the Gospel of Christ to have temples??

Later in the same chapter, Paul used a sports analogy that I just love:

1 Corinthians 9:24 - 25
24 ¶ Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain.
25 And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they [do it] to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.

Paul was saying: All runners run, but only one wins the prize. Run so as to win the prize. Now, everyone who strives for the championship is moderate in living. In most races the runners seek the corruptible honors of men, but we seek an immortal crown that lasts forever.

In chapter 10 Paul gave a most famous and consoling thought:

1 Corinthians 10:13
13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].

Thus, no matter how rough our lives get, we can withstand it. This is quite a statement, considering how much pain there is in the world. However, my life experience suggests Paul is ultimately correct. Perhaps there are a few exceptions. Only God can be the judge of that.

In Chapter 12 Paul talked about the gifts of the spirit and the organization of the Church. He said:

1 Corinthians 12:27 - 31
27 ¶ Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
28 And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues.
29 [Are] all apostles? [are] all prophets? [are] all teachers? [are] all workers of miracles?
30 Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret?
31 But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.

The next verse is very famous:

1 Corinthians 13:1
1 ¶ THOUGH I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become [as] sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

Outward show and mere belief do nothing unless supported by charity and other good works. The words of Chapter 13 may be one of the greatest in all of scripture, and they probably are the greatest words ever delivered by an Apostle.

*****

Below, I have taken the liberty of putting a portion of Chapter 13 into my own words, reflecting my own understanding. Some misuse these verses to argue that prophets and prophesy have become obsolete since Christ. Paul did NOT make that argument. Here is what I believe he was saying:

My Conceptual Translation: "1 Corinthians 13: 4-13"
[4] Love has long patience, and is kind; love is sincere and not artificial; love shows respect and is not rash or puffed up.

[5] Love does not behave in an unseemly manner, is not quickly provoked, and does not attribute evil to others.

[6] It does not rejoice at evil but rejoices with the truth.

[7] Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things.

[8] Love never fails; unlike prophecies, which shall be done away; or tongues, which shall cease; or imperfect knowledge that shall be done away.

[9] For we know incompletely, and we prophesy incompletely:

[10] but when we are resurrected, that which is incomplete shall be done away.

[11] When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I reasoned as a child; when I became a man, I was finished with what belonged to the child.

[12] For we see now through a dim window obscurely, but then later we will come face to face with God. Now I know God partially, but then later I shall know God just as I have been known by God.

[13] And now abide faith, hope, love; these three things are lasting; and the greater of these is love.

*****

In Chapter 14 Paul discussed the problems of having so many members of the Church acting as prophets. In response, he gives a famous phrase (v. 33) well worth remembering: “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.”

In Chapter 15 Paul discussed the resurrection of Christ. He gave a detailed list of evidences. One of the evidences was that (v. 7): “he was seen of James.” Fine, but the claim that the resurrected Jesus was seen by the Apostle James is not supported elsewhere in scripture.

Another evidence of the resurrection is the following:

1 Corinthians 15:29
29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

This passage has embarrassed non-LDS theologians for centuries. What Paul was saying is, “If we don’t believe in the resurrection, then why are people wasting their time doing baptisms for the dead?”

Then, there are the famous passages indicating different types of resurrection:

1 Corinthians 15:39 - 42
39 All flesh [is] not the same flesh: but [there is] one [kind of] flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, [and] another of birds.
40 [There are] also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial [is] one, and the [glory] of the terrestrial [is] another.
41 [There is] one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for [one] star differeth from [another] star in glory.
42 So also [is] the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:

LDS divides the resurrection into three basic categories: Celestial (sun), Terrestial (earth), and Telestial (stars).

*****

Without doubt there is cross-fertilization among the scriptures. Actually, the hybridization of scripture is rather beautiful, and when one recognizes it, then one is prompted to study all scripture further. The Book of Mormon is powerful because it makes one want to understand all scripture, not just part.

Chapter 15 gives a good example of the kind of cross-fertilization that I am talking about. Let’s look at verses 53 through 55, paying further attention to the verses in brackets:

1 Corinthians 15:53 – 55
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality. [cf. Mosiah 16: 10]
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. [cf. Isaiah 25: 8]
55 O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory? [cf. Hosea 13: 14; Mosiah 16: 7-8]

(See my detailed analysis of the above verses in: Ancient Quotations in the Book of Mormon).

When the prophets speak it is often difficult to tell what is old and what is new. Across the ages similar ideas and wording have been used again and again. This is true in the Bible and we should expect no less of the Book of Mormon.

*****

One of the last verses in First Corinthians is the following:

1 Corinthians 16:22
22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

The King James translators considered this verse to be one sentence, but it was probably two, changing the meaning slightly:

(1) If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed (anathema, an English word derived from Greek and Latin).

(2) Our Lord cometh (a translation of “Marantha,” an Aramaic phrase from the language spoken by Jesus).

If you look up the term “maranatha” (probably pronounced mah-ran a-TAH in Aramaic) in the LDS Bible Dictionary, one learns that it may have been an early Christian watchword or prayer. Remember that Paul was writing to the Greek Corinthians. For him to use an Aramaic term, maranatha, suggests that his audience was very familiar with the foreign term and its meaning.

Early Christians believed they were in the last days. They believed that the second coming of Christ was imminent.

*****

As you read 1st Corinthians, what do you think were Paul's central messages to these Greek Christians? What were the basic points for these beginners in the Gospel?

My summary above should NOT discourage anyone from reading the entire book and coming to his or her own conclusions. However, I would like to stress that I think the Corinthians were lucky to be guided by an Apostle, who could give detailed advice specific to their situation. Are we NO longer in such need? Was Jesus resurrected only to abandon us?

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Orson F. Whitney: Scholar and Apostle

Preface: Yesterday, in a High Priest group meeting in my Ward we read the following quote out of the lesson manual:

Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, Chapter 13: Obedience: “When the Lord Commands, Do It," (2007), pp. 158–70
Kirtland resident Newel K. Whitney was one of the first to welcome the Prophet, as described by his grandson Orson F. Whitney:

About the first of February, 1831, a sleigh containing four persons, drove through the streets of Kirtland and drew up at the door of Gilbert and Whitney’s mercantile establishment. … One of the men, a young and stalwart personage, alighted, and springing up the steps, walked into the store and to where the junior partner was standing.

‘Newel K. Whitney! Thou art the man!’ he exclaimed, extending his hand cordially, as if to an old and familiar acquaintance.

‘You have the advantage of me,’ replied the [storekeeper], as he mechanically took the proffered hand—a half-amused, half-mystified look overspreading his countenance—‘I could not call you by name, as you have me.’

‘I am Joseph [Smith], the Prophet,’ said the stranger, smiling. ‘You’ve prayed me here; now what do you want of me'?

Upon completion, I asked the men, "Who was Newell K. Whitney?" The men answered correctly that he was one of the first Bishops of the LDS Church. He was also a Presiding Bishop (1847-1850). Then, I asked, "Who was his grandson, Orson F. Whitney (quoted above)?" That question got much less of a response. So, I thought it would be useful to post the following essay.

Two of the truly great intellectual writers of the Church in the early twentieth century were Orson F. Whitney (serving as an Apostle from 1906 to 1931) and B. H. Roberts (serving in the 1st Counsel of Seventy from 1888-1933). Both of these individuals wrote volumes of information. Whitney was an eclectic lover of knowledge. He loved poetry, writing, theology, history, journalism and many other subjects. B. H. Roberts’ interests were comparatively narrower (if you consider the following narrow) in that he wrote only on theology, history, politics, and science. This essay will focus on Orson F. Whitney.

*****Elder Whitney*****

Orson F. Whitney (1855-1931) served as a Salt Lake Bishop for 28 years. He was a renowned speaker, and may have been the only Bishop who was repeatedly invited to speak at Conference. Nearly everyone expected him to be an Apostle some day. He studied at the University of Deseret (now Univ. of Utah). He served three missions, wrote a four volume history of Utah (still a classic), wrote several biographies and several books of poetry. His most famous poem is “Elias, An epic for the ages” (selected stanzas quoted below). He was active in local politics, and was a democrat later in life. He was ordained an Apostle in 1906 at the same time as George F. Richards and David O. McKay.

Whitney believed that Mormonism had a tremendous intellectual vitality that was not recognized by the rest of the world. In the passage below he refers to two different visits of non-LDS intellectuals to Utah. The first, Horace Greeley, was a famous New York editor, one of the originators of the Republican Party, and helped nominate Abraham Lincoln to become President. The second visitor is an unknown personality.

Orson F. Whitney, Conference Report, October 1924, p.19-20
Many years ago a famous and prominent personage came to Utah. It was in the days of the stage coach and the pony express, before the transcontinental railroad had crossed the country, before there was even a telegraph line between the Missouri and the Pacific. He was the founder and editor of a great newspaper--the New York Tribune. His word was more influential than that of the President of the United States. Whatever Horace Greeley said was accepted by the American people almost as the word of God. He came here and spent a week or more, had several long interviews with President Brigham Young, and after returning East wrote and published a book entitled "Across the Continent" [Actually the title was “An Overland Journey to San Francisco in the Summer of 1859” (1860)]. In it he praised the "Mormon" people for their sobriety and industry. He did not believe that they were robbers and murderers, as he had been told. They were sincere and honest, he said, and had done a wonderful work in peopling the waste and redeeming the desert. But he had not a word to say concerning the glories of our religion, Why was it?

I bear in mind another noted visitor, a great scholar, who came here many years after the advent of the railroad. I became well acquainted with him, and we had more than one conversation together. I admired his vast erudition. He seemed to know all about law, literature, science, philosophy, and had a dozen languages at his tongue's end. He said to me one day: "You Mormons are all ignoramuses. You don't even know the strength of your own position. It is so strong that there is only one other position tenable in the whole Christian world, and that is the position of the Roman Catholic Church. The issue is between Mormonism and Catholicism. If you are right, we are wrong. If we are right, you are wrong. And that's all there is to it. These Protestant sects haven't a leg to stand on; for if we are right, we cut them off long ago as apostates; and if we are wrong, they are wrong with us, for they were part of us and came out of us. If we have the apostolic succession from St. Peter as we claim, there was no need of Joseph Smith and Mormonism; but if we have not that succession, such a man as Joseph Smith was necessary and Mormonism's position is the only consistent one. It is either the perpetuation of the gospel from ancient times, or the restoration of the gospel in latter days."

I replied: "Doctor, I agree with you in almost everything that you have said; but don't deceive yourself with the notion that we 'Mormons' do not know the strength of our own position. We know it better than you do; we know it better than any other people can know it. We have not all been to college; we cannot all speak the dead languages, and we may be ignoramuses as you say, but we know we are right, and we know that you are wrong." I was just as frank with him as he had been with me.

As an aside, what are the unique ideas that Mormonism brings to the field of religion? The funny thing is that there are very few unique ideas. As a restored Gospel most of our ideas are present in Christianity in one way or another. However, Mormonism brings great clarity to notions of pre-existence, the plan of salvation, priesthood, temple ordinances, modern revelation, the atonement, and the nature of the Godhead. (I will not elaborate further in this essay). These “unique” ideas were favorite topics of Whitney in his various writings and speeches.

In Utah, Whitney was a noted poet. His poems celebrated his favorite Mormon ideas. The following stanzas from his great poem “Elias” describes the Council of Gods in pre-mortal existence:

From "Elect of Elohim"
in: Elias, an Epic of the Ages

In solemn council sat the Gods;
From Kolob's height supreme,
Celestial light blazed forth afar
O'er countless kokaubeam;
And faintest tinge, the fiery fringe
Of that resplendent day,
'Lumined the dark abysmal realm
Where earth in chaos lay.

Silence self-spelled; the hour was one
When thought doth most avail;
Of worlds unborn the destiny
Hung trembling in the scale.
Silence o'er all, and there arose,
Those kings and priests among,
A Power sublime, than whom appeared
None nobler 'mid the throng.

A stature mingling strength with grace,
Of meek though Godlike mien,
The love-revealing countenance
Lustrous as lightning sheen;
Whiter his hair than ocean spray,
Or frost of alpine hill.
He spake;--attention grew more grave,
The stillness e'en more still.

"Father!"--the voice like music fell,
Clear as the murmuring flow
Of mountain streamlet trickling down
From heights of virgin snow.
"Father," it said, "since one must die,"
Thy children to redeem,
Whilst earth, as yet unformed and void,
With pulsing life shall teem;

"And thou, great Michael, foremost fall,
That mortal man may be,
And chosen Saviour yet must send,
Lo, here am I--send me!
I ask, I seek no recompense,
Save that which then were mine;
Mine be the willing sacrifice,
The endless glory, Thine!

At about the age of 21 Whitney was sent on a mission to the Eastern United States. At first his mind was less on his mission and more about his ambitions to become an actor in New York City and a journalist. Whitney abandoned these dreams when he experienced the following vision that literally altered the course of his mission experience.

Through Memory's Halls: Life Story of Orson F. Whitney, pp. 81-83, Quoted in: Spencer W. Kimball, Faith Precedes the Miracle, pp. 26-28
There must be innumerable experiences that the Brethren have had which are considered too sacred to relate or publish. But we have the published experience of Orson F. Whitney. Though serving on a mission he was spending much of his time as a correspondent for the Salt Lake Herald.

Then came a marvelous manifestation, an admonition from a higher source, one impossible to ignore. It was a dream, or a vision in a dream, as I lay upon my bed in the little town of Columbia, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. I seemed to be in the Garden of Gethsemane, a witness of the Savior's agony. I saw Him as plainly as ever I have seen anyone. Standing behind a tree in the foreground, I beheld Jesus, with Peter, James and John, as they came through a little wicket gate at my right, leaving the three Apostles there, after telling them to kneel and pray, the Son of God passed over to the other side, where He also knelt and prayed. It was the same prayer with which all Bible readers are familiar: "Oh my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt."

As He prayed the tears streamed down his face, which was toward me. I was so moved at the sight that I also wept, out of pure sympathy. My whole heart went out to him; I loved him with all my soul, and longed to be with him as I longed for nothing else.

Presently He arose and walked to where those Apostles were kneeling -- fast asleep! He shook them gently, awoke them, and in a tone of tender reproach, untinctured by the least show of anger or impatience, asked them plaintively if they could not watch with him one hour. There He was, with the awful weight of the world's sin upon his shoulders, with the pangs of every man, woman and child shooting through his sensitive soul -- and they could not watch with him one poor hour!

All at once the circumstances seemed to change, the scene remaining just the same. Instead of before, it was after the crucifixion, and the Savior, with the three Apostles, now stood together in a group at my left. They were about to depart and ascend into Heaven. I could endure it no longer. I ran from behind the tree, fell at his feet, clasped Him around the knees, and begged Him to take me with Him.

I shall never forget the kind and gentle manner in which He stopped, raised me up, and embraced me. It was so vivid, so real. I felt the very warmth of his body, as He held me in His arms and said in tenderest tones: "No, my son; those have finished their work; they can go with me; but you must stay and finish yours." Still I clung to Him. Gazing up into His face -- for He was taller than I -- I besought him fervently: "Well, promise me that I will come to you at the last." Smiling sweetly, He said: "That will depend entirely upon yourself." I awoke with a sob in my throat, and it was morning.

"That's from God," said Elder Musser, when I related to him what I had seen and heard. "I do not need to be told that," was my reply. I saw the moral clearly. I had never thought of being an Apostle, nor of holding any other office in the Church, and it did not occur to me even then. Yet I know that those sleeping Apostles meant me. I was asleep at my post -- as any man is who, having been divinely appointed to do one thing, does another.

But from that hour, all was changed. I was never the same man again. I did not give up writing; for President [Brigham] Young, having noticed some of my contributions to the home papers, advised me to cultivate what he called my "gift for writing. "So that you can use it," said he, "for the establishment of truth and righteousness." I therefore continued to write but not to the neglect of the Lord's work. I held that first and foremost; all else was secondary.

Such sacred experiences are rare, especially for 21-year old missionaries. However, Whitney was taking a track seldom pursued by the ordinary LDS Elder. Thereafter, his life was never the same. Later, Whitney reflected:

Collected Discourses, Vol.2, Orson F. Whitney, April 6, 1890
On returning from my mission, some of my young friends predicted that I would get over my religious feelings, and be as I had been before, but I had prayed fervently to the Lord that I might never lay off the Gospel harness. It has ever since been my desire to labor for the advancement of the kingdom of God, and this I have done, though well aware of my shortcomings and imperfections.

Clearly, Whitney was a changed man. His commitment had changed from himself to a focus on God. Most do not learn this lesson in their early twenties.

Bishop Whitney (prior to 1906) loved to speak on the BIG ideas of Mormonism at Conference. The following quotes will give you some sense of what he spoke:

Journal of Discourses, Vol.26, p.196, Orson F. Whitney, April 19, 1885
The earth upon which we dwell is only one among the many creations of God. The stars that glitter in the heavens at night and give light unto the earth are His creations, redeemed worlds, perhaps, or worlds that are passing through the course of their redemption, being saved, purified, glorified and exalted by obedience to the principles of truth which we are now struggling to obey. Thus is the work of our Father made perpetual, and as fast as one world and its inhabitants are disposed of, He will roll another into existence, He will create another earth, He will people it with His offspring, the offspring of the Gods in eternity, and they will pass through probations such as we are now passing through, that they may prove their integrity by their works; that they may given an assurance to the Almighty that they are worthy to be exalted through obedience to those principles, that unchangeable plan of salvation which has been revealed to us.

Collected Discourses, Vol.3, Orson F. Whitney, May 6, 1892
Mormonism teaches that God was once just like ourselves; that the eternal part of Him was enshrined in mortal flesh, subject to mortal ills and earthly pains and toils. I do not now refer to the experience of the Savior in the meridian of time. I mean that in the far away aeons of the past God once dwelt upon an earth like this, and that through its trials and vicissitudes and the experience they afforded He became a more intelligent being than before, ascending finally by obedience to certain principles, ennobling and exalting in their nature, to the plane which He now occupies. These truths, forming the ladder up which He climbed to celestial heights, up which we too are expected to climb from earth to heaven, from mortality to immortality, from a world where grief and sorrow reign, to a better and brighter sphere where sorrow and suffering are unknown--these truths are self-existent and eternal. God did not create them. Intelligence, the light of truth, cannot be created. But by means of His superior intelligence, which is his glory and which makes Him God He instituted laws whereby the rest, the lesser intelligences, might advance like Himself. These laws we call the Gospel, the plan of salvation, formulated in the heavens before this world was, and revealed again and again to the children of Adam for their salvation. We hold that men are literally the sons and daughters of God; that He intends we shall become like Him; and it is certainly reasonable to expect that the child will eventually develop to the status of the Parent. We are divine beings in embryo, and it is only a question of time when we shall blossom in perfection.

One cannot underestimate the importance of the Abrahamic Covenant. Consequently, I was impressed with the following quotation:

Orson F. Whitney, Conference Report, April 1927, p.100
Our relationship with Abraham, I have already touched upon. We are among his descendants, and are actually taking part in the fulfilment of the promise made to him by Jehovah, that in his seed should all the nations of the earth be blessed. Are we not blessing the nations by carrying to them the gospel, and by administering its sacred ordinances for the living and the dead? The great fuffilment of that covenants in Jehovah himself, who came through the lineage of Abraham, to be the Savior of the world. But a part fulfilment is in the world-dispersion of the children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the blood of Israel, the blood that believes, supplemented by the present-day gathering of Israel, whose right it is to prepare the way before the God of Israel who is coming to reign.

In his last Conference speech before death, Elder Whitney addressed the concept of tithing:

Orson F. Whitney, Conference Report, April 1931, p.64
Many years ago, when I was a Ward Bishop, I was sitting with my counselors one evening for the settlement of tithing. A brother who was a member of the Ward came in, tossed a roll of bills upon the table, and when asked the usual question, "Is this a full tithing?"-a question necessary at such times, in order that the reports may be full and accurate--he answered, "No it is not; but you may be thankful to get that much."

"Thankful," I echoed, "What makes you think I ought to be thankful for it? You are not paying it to me. I am only an agent to receive and pass it on to the higher authorities. I am glad, of course, to know that you pay your tithing even in part; but I do not see why I should thank you for it. I pay my tithing in full, but nobody thanks me, nor do I want any thanks for it. I esteem it a privilege."

Conclusions: The name Orson F. Whitney is one we should always remember. All his life he pursued knowledge, but his greater pursuit was the furtherance of the gospel. He had no expectation of ever being made Apostle. Yet, he jumped from Bishop to the Council of Twelve! I am especially impressed with how Whitney changed his life as a young missionary.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Ancient Quotations in the Book of Mormon:

A "Mark" Mystery that is Remarkable

Part of a page from the original MS of the Book of Mormon (1 Ne. 8:11-23). Source: Teachings of the Presidents of the Church:
Joseph Smith, p. 114.

Preface: If one examines the original manuscript of the Book of Mormon handwritten by Oliver Cowdery as dictated by Joseph Smith, one will see a series of words with little or no punctuation marks, page after page. Latter-days Saints aware of this historical point must wonder if the lack of punctuation in this manuscript is related to the lack of punctuation in ancient manuscripts. For example, ancient Hebrew and Egyptian have little or no punctuation. How do these findings affect the modern Book of Mormon, which is very well punctuated?

*****

The Ancients did not use quotation marks. They also did not have strict rules about borrowing from other authors' words. Consequently, quotes sometimes come out of nowhere in the scriptures, and sometimes the reader does not always know where a quote begins or ends.

Nowhere is the quotation problem more evident than in the following passage by Paul:

1 Corinthians 15:53 – 56
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?
56 The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.

Notice that the only hint that Paul might be quoting from the Old Testament is his phrase “then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.” This is a quotation or paraphrase from:

Isaiah 25:8
8 He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces… .

Paul’s awkward use of quotations creates a problem for the Book of Mormon. How? Examine the following verses from the Book of Mosiah:

Mosiah 16: 7 - 10 [emphasis mine]
7 And if Christ had not risen from the dead, or have broken the bands of death that the grave should have no victory, and that death should have no sting, there could have been no resurrection.
8 But there is a resurrection, therefore the grave hath no victory, and the sting of death is swallowed up in Christ.
9 He is the light and the life of the world; yea, a light that is endless, that can never be darkened; yea, and also a life which is endless, that there can be no more death.
10 Even this mortal shall put on immortality, and this corruption shall put on incorruption, and shall be brought to stand before the bar of God, to be judged of him according to their works whether they be good or whether they be evil–

In the same awkward manner, Mosiah appears to be quoting from Paul (who is in the wrong time period) or from Isaiah (who is in the correct time period). Notice that verse 7 (see above) parallels 1 Corinthians 15: 55 (see above); verse 8 parallels 1 Corinthians 15: 54 and Isaiah 25:8; and verse 10 parallels 1 Corinthians 15: 53. In other words, Mosiah appears to be quoting backwards (v. 55, 54, & 53) from Paul (or from some other source like Isaiah).

One might too easily conclude that Joseph Smith merely was plagiarizing from 1 Corinthians. But, it now appears probable that Paul and Mosiah were quoting from the same ancient source, an older version of Isaiah. Could that be possible? The answer is yes.

First of all, realize that chapters 14 & 15 of Mosiah quote Isaiah extensively, especially Isaiah 53 and 52, in that order. These chapters are all about the earthly mission and atonement of Christ. Therefore, it is quite appropriate for the following chapter, Mosiah 16, to discuss death and resurrection in the context of Isaiah.

Second, we need to remember the science of scriptural change and evolution. That is, over time corruptions were introduced into the copying or transcription process. Ancient copyists omitted words, introduced words, left out entire passages, introduced entire passages, etc. Although Biblical literalists and fundamentalists will not admit to this scientific fact, it is true, and this finding has been shown over and over by Bible scholars (e.g., B. D. Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus, New York: Harper Collins, 2005).

Sometimes we find ancient authors citing passages from Isaiah that are not present in the King James Version of Isaiah. The following is taken from a mid-fourth century document known as the Gospel of Nicodemus:

Gospel of Nicodemus 16: 9-12,
in: The Lost Books of the Bible, New York: Bell, 1979. [italics mine]
After this another prophet, namely, holy Isaiah, spake in like manner to all the saints, did not I rightly prophesy to you when I was alive on earth? The dead men shall live, and they shall rise again who are in their graves, and they shall rejoice who are in earth; for the dew which is from the Lord shall bring deliverance to them. And I said in another place, O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting? When all the saints heard these things by Isaiah… .

Notice the sentence beginning with the phrase “The dead men shall live” appears to come from the passage below:

Isaiah 26:19
19 Thy dead [men] shall live, [together with] my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew [is as] the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.

Further, the Gospel of Nicodemus attributes the phrase “O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?” to Isaiah. Of course, in the King James Version this phrase only appears in 1 Corinthians 15: 55, as if authored by Paul.

The findings from the Gospel of Nicodemus and the Book of Mormon suggest a possible punctuation for the following:

A proposed new punctuation for 1 Corinthians 15:53 – 56

“For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal [must] put on immortality. “ [see Mosiah 16:10]

[Paul’s commentary:] So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written,

“Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?” [see Gosp. of Nicod. 16: 11-12; Mosiah 16: 7-8]

[Paul’s commentary:] The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.

Now, of course, I recognize that maybe I have just introduced error into the scriptures with these conjectures. Whether my proposed punctuation is correct or not, the Gospel of Nicodemus reminds us that apparent quotations from Paul in the Book of Mormon may be illusory. Instead, both Paul and the Book of Mormon may have borrowed from common ancient sources, particularly an ancient version of Isaiah.

*****

Some uninformed critics of the Book of Mormon have argued that the book does not have internal quotations. That is, some critics claim the Book of Mormon does not quote itself like the Bible does.

The correct answer is that it does quote itself. Of course, we have to contend with the fact that ancient authors quoted poorly and awkwardly. In the following, I will show you a number of passages to illustrate how the Book of Mormon uses internal quotations.

We will begin with one of Lehi’s visions. I love the following passage. Maybe the claim is true, but sometimes we LDS hear that the dead do not sit in the clouds and sing praises to God. Well, I wonder (with a smile and out loud sometimes) if Lehi would agree?

1 Nephi 1:5, 8
5 Wherefore it came to pass that my father, Lehi, as he went forth prayed unto the Lord …
8 And being thus overcome with the Spirit, he was carried away in a vision, even that he saw the heavens open, and he thought he saw God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels in the attitude of singing and praising their God.

Notice the very clear reference by Alma to the same vision using identical wording:

Alma 36:22
22 Yea, methought I saw, even as our father Lehi saw, God sitting upon his throne, surrounded with numberless concourses of angels, in the attitude of singing and praising their God; yea, and my soul did long to be there. [See also, Mormon 7:7].

In the following, King Benjamin created a notable designation for Jesus, with the hope “that salvation might come” (v. 9) with repentance and faith (v. 12):

Mosiah 3:8
8 And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning… .

The prophet Samuel, evidently drawing from King Benjamin, used the same designation for Christ, and he encouraged others to “believe on his name [and] repent of all your sins” (Helaman 14:13) “that salvation may come” (v. 15):

Helaman 14:12
12 And also that ye might know of the coming of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of heaven and of earth, the Creator of all things from the beginning… .

Perhaps it is not coincidental that Jesus used a similar designation as he announced his arrival in the Americas:

3 Nephi 9:15
15 Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. I am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name.

King Benjamin also taught the following moral formula:

Mosiah 2:13
13 Neither have I suffered that ye should be confined in dungeons, nor that ye should make slaves one of another, nor that ye should murder, or plunder, or steal, or commit adultery; nor even have I suffered that ye should commit any manner of wickedness, and have taught you that ye should keep the commandments of the Lord, in all things which he hath commanded you—

Somehow the moral formula was reduced to five major sins:

Alma 23:3
3 And thus they might go forth and preach the word … that they ought not to murder, nor to plunder, nor to steal, nor to commit adultery, nor to commit any manner of wickedness.

This basic formula gets repeated in Mos. 29:36; Alma 1:32; 30:10; Hela. 3:14; 6:23; 7:21; and gets inserted by Moroni into Ether 8:16.

*****

Another possible quotation may have been taken from 1 Nephi:

1 Nephi 15:34
34 But behold, I say unto you, the kingdom of God is not filthy, and there cannot any unclean thing enter into the kingdom of God… .

Notice that Alma introduces the quote with “he hath said,” as if to refer to Nephi:

Alma 11:37 [emphasis mine]
37 And … he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? … .

Lehi seemed to be quoting some unknown passage (or the Lord) when he said:

2 Nephi 1:20 [emphasis mine]
20 And he hath said that: Inasmuch as ye shall keep my commandments ye shall prosper in the land; but inasmuch as ye will not keep my commandments ye shall be cut off from my presence.

In any case, this simple moral formula was oft repeated by the prophets of the Book of Mormon. For example,

Alma 9:13
13 Behold, do ye not remember the words which he spake unto Lehi, saying that: Inasmuch as ye shall keep my commandments, ye shall prosper in the land? And again it is said that: Inasmuch as ye will not keep my commandments ye shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord.

See also: Jarom 1:9, Omni 1:6, Alma 36:1, 30, 37:13 for just a few usages of that quotation.

In another example, Nephi gave this prophecy:

1 Nephi 2:21
21 And inasmuch as thy brethren shall rebel against thee, they shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord.

Later, Nephi noted the fulfillment of this prophecy:

2 Nephi 5:20
20 Wherefore, the word of the Lord was fulfilled which he spake unto me, saying that: Inasmuch as they will not hearken unto thy words they shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord. And behold, they were cut off from his presence.

*****

Another important use of quotation in the Book of Mormon comes from the following verses:

Helaman 5:9 - 10
9 O remember, remember, my sons, the words which king Benjamin spake unto his people; yea, remember that there is no other way nor means whereby man can be saved, only through the atoning blood of Jesus Christ, who shall come; yea, remember that he cometh to redeem the world.
10 And remember also the words which Amulek spake unto Zeezrom, in the city of Ammonihah; for he said unto him that the Lord surely should come to redeem his people, but that he should not come to redeem them in their sins, but to redeem them from their sins.

The following verse is the original source for verse 9 above:

Mosiah 3:17
17 And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.

The following verses are the original source for verse 10 above:

Alma 11:34 - 37
34 And Zeezrom said again: Shall he save his people in their sins? And Amulek answered and said unto him: I say unto you he shall not, for it is impossible for him to deny his word.
35 Now Zeezrom said unto the people: See that ye remember these things; for he said there is but one God; yet he saith that the Son of God shall come, but he shall not save his people--as though he had authority to command God.
36 Now Amulek saith again unto him: Behold thou hast lied, for thou sayest that I spake as though I had authority to command God because I said he shall not save his people in their sins.
37 And I say unto you again that he cannot save them in their sins; for I cannot deny his word, and he hath said that no unclean thing can inherit the kingdom of heaven; therefore, how can ye be saved, except ye inherit the kingdom of heaven? Therefore, ye cannot be saved in your sins.

I hope the reader thoroughly is convinced that the Book of Mormon has NO lack of internal quotations.

*****

Sometimes the Book of Mormon quotes from unknown passages authored by unknown prophets, such as the ancient prophet Zenos:

1 Nephi 19:12
12 And all these things must surely come, saith the prophet Zenos. And the rocks of the earth must rend; and because of the groanings of the earth, many of the kings of the isles of the sea shall be wrought upon by the Spirit of God, to exclaim: The God of nature suffers.

Note the phrase “The God of nature suffers” and that the context of this passage is the crucifixion of Jesus. Deep down we may believe that Zenos said such a thing, but until we can find supporting ancient documents, we should not delude ourselves.

The phrase “The God of nature suffers” was relatively common in the day of Joseph Smith, and it was only given in the context of the crucifixion of Jesus. Other than Zenos, the phrase is most often attributed to Dionysius the Areopagite, a pagan convert of Paul’s (see Acts 17: 34; see also, Edward Grant, 1974, A Source Book In Medieval Science (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, p. 451). Take for example this passage from an 1830 American protestant sermon:

If the sufferings of the Godhead should cause convulsions in nature, then surely Christ the God-man must have suffered. Were not the most extraordinary convulsions and miracles exhibited at the time of Christ’s crucifixion? The earth quaked, the rocks burst, the veil of the temple at Jerusalem was rent, and the sun totally eclipsed. Dionysius Areopagita [sic] a heathen philosopher; he, when in Egypt, saw an eclipse of the sun, contrary to nature, at the passion of our Saviour Christ and said, "Aut Deus naturoe patitur, aut mundi machina dissolvetur." [Properly, the phrase should be: “Aut Deus naturae patitur, aut mundi machina dissolvitur.”] That is, "Either the God of nature suffers, or the frame of the world is about to be dissolved." [A better translation would be: Either the God of nature suffers, or the mechanism of the world is dissolved.] (See: David Henkel, 1830, A Treatise on the Person and Incarnation of Jesus Christ, etc., linked at www.christianheritageworks.com)

The same basic reference to the phrase is given in John Wesley's (1703 – 1791) “Notes on the Gospel” (commentary on Matthew 27:1-54), and John Gill’s (1697 – 1771) “Exposition of the Entire Bible” (commentary on Acts 17:34).

Alexander Campbell in his famous critique of the Book of Mormon was well aware of the phrase, and he took good pleasure in poking fun at it. He said, “Nephi 2400 years ago hears the saying of a Pagan [clearly referring to Dionysius the Areopagite] who lived 634 years after him - 'The God of nature suffers.'” (See: Campbell’s “Delusions: An Analysis of the Book of Mormon with an Examination of its Internal and External Evidences, and a Refutation of Its Pretenses to Divine Authority,” February 7, 1831, first published in the Millennial Harbinger, Bethany, Virginia.)

Thus far, the evidence is clear that Joseph Smith very likely was exposed to the phrase “The God of nature suffers,” but there is no evidence external to the Book of Mormon linking the phrase to Zenos.

*****

The problem of sourcing in the Book of Mormon, Bible, and other ancient documents is immense. Critics of the Church are welcome to their premature conclusions, but we know this much: Ancient authors did not use quotation marks, and often they did NOT hint that they were quoting other sources. Consequently, phrases that appear to be anachronistic (out of place and time) may easily be mislabeled as such. The absence of punctuation marks in the past produces mysteries in the present. Readers beware.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

There are No Flaxen Cords Around Mormon Necks:

Mormons are Lovers of Freedom

Mormons have a valuable religion. As modern adherents, we should never be content with the derogatory labels others sometimes impose upon us, such as "cult." What is a cult? In previous essays I have defined cult as "the other guy's religion." A second best definition might be the following: A cult is an organization that adopts excessive and sometimes secret practices that break the boundaries of acceptable behavior by the society at large, including the government. Cultists are counter-culturalists and anti-establishment. By contrast, Mormons are activists who try to improve culture and society. Mormons wish to participate in the world, even if they wish to be "NOT OF" it.

Mormons are all about freedom and are NOT about attaching a flaxen cord around anyone’s neck (see 2 Ne. 26: 22). There should be NO secret combinations, NO hidden agendas, and NO oaths that break societal laws and contracts.

King Lamoni of the Book of Mormon taught the following:

Alma 21:22
22 And he also declared unto them that they might have the liberty of worshiping the Lord their God according to their desires, in whatsoever place they were in, if it were in the land which was under the reign of king Lamoni.

Even Korihor (a very negative character in the Book of Mormon) was able to preach against Christ because in the Nephite culture “there was no law against a man’s belief” (Alma 30: 11).

The Great #134 and #121

D&C 134 is the great Section that indicates how our Church stands in relation to government:

D&C 134:2
2 We believe that no government can exist in peace, except such laws are framed and held inviolate as will secure to each individual the free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life.

D&C 134:10
10 We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members for disorderly conduct, according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them this world's goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb, or to inflict any physical punishment upon them. They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship.

What Section 134 means is that the authoritative domain of Church leaders is limited in its powers. For example, governmental powers (executive, legislative, and judicial) are outside of that domain.

And, then, there is the great Section 121. Church leaders should have every word of the following etched permanently in their hearts and brains:

D&C 121:36
36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. …

D&C 121:39-43 [italics mine]
39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.
41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile--
43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

Saints govern themselves using correct principles

In the Mormon newspaper, Millennial Star, November 1851, Elder (and future President) John Taylor was quoted as saying:

Millennial Star, “The Organization of the Church,” Nov. 15, 1851, p. 339; see also: Messages of the First Presidency, comp. James R. Clark, 6 vols., Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1965-75, 3:54. [emphasis mine]
Some years ago, in Nauvoo, a gentleman in my hearing, a member of the Legislature, asked Joseph Smith how it was that he was enabled to govern so many people, and to preserve such perfect order… . Mr. Smith remarked that it was very easy to do... . “How?” responded the gentleman; “to us it is very difficult.” Mr. Smith replied, “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.”

If dictators were required in this Church, then there would be no need to consult with the Lord:

Alma 37:37
37 Counsel with the Lord in all thy doings, and he will direct thee for good; yea, when thou liest down at night lie down unto the Lord, that he may watch over you in your sleep; and when thou risest in the morning let thy heart be full of thanks unto God; and if ye do these things, ye shall be lifted up at the last day.

Local LDS leaders must learn to make their own decisions within the domains of their callings. We are advised to be attentive to heavenly guidance. However, our agency allows us to ignore such guidance (to our peril, sometimes). I am reminded of the phrase in Alma 10: 6, “[F]or I was called many times and I would not hear.” At the same time, the Church and our scriptures tell us to use our minds and think:

D&C 58:26
26 For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.

Our agency to act in freedom is viewed as a gift from god:

D&C 101:78
78 That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment.

Moses 7:32
32 The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency;

Mormonism is NOT about turning people into robots or leading people with flaxen cords around their necks. It is about maximizing human freedoms within the constraints of morality and human dignity.

What do Latter-day Saints stand for?

What are we fighting for and standing for? The words of Captain Moroni apply as much as any others that could be quoted:

Alma 46:12-14 [italics mine]
12 And it came to pass that he rent his coat; and he took a piece thereof, and wrote upon it--In memory of our God, our religion, and freedom, and our peace, our wives, and our children--and he fastened it upon the end of a pole.
13 And he fastened on his head-plate, and his breastplate, and his shields, and girded on his armor about his loins; and he took the pole, which had on the end thereof his rent coat, (and he called it the title of liberty) and he bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land--
14 For thus were all the true believers of Christ, who belonged to the church of God … .

The Book of Mormon teaches to never allow others to immerse us in anything like the following:

2 Nephi 26:22
22 And there are also secret combinations, even as in times of old, according to the combinations of the devil, for he is the founder of all these things; yea, the founder of murder, and works of darkness; yea, and he leadeth them by the neck with a flaxen cord, until he bindeth them with his strong cords forever.

I have taught my boys (I have no girls) to NEVER be lead by a flaxen cord, and to keep their agency, while respecting the agency of others. I have taught them to always follow their conscience, and never to become voiceless.

Latter-day Saints believe in the following principle:

D&C 26:2
2 And all things shall be done by common consent in the church, by much prayer and faith, for all things you shall receive by faith.

Here is a good description of the principle of common consent that reflects my understanding:

Encyclopedia of Mormonism, Vol. 1, Common Consent
Common consent is a fundamental principle of decision making at all levels in The Church Of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In selecting new officers and making administrative decisions, Church leaders are instructed to seek the will of God. Once the Lord makes his will known and a decision is reached, the matter is brought before the appropriate quorum or body of Church members, who are asked to sustain or oppose the action. This process provides for direction of the Church by revelation, while protecting the agency of the members to verify in their own minds whether decisions have been proper and made according to the will of God.

There are NO secret doctrines, and there are no official teachings that deviate from standard practice.

Bruce R. McConkie (1989): Doctrines of the Restoration, Bookcraft, p. 231
There are no private doctrines. All of the doctrines and practices of the Church are taught publicly. There are no secret doctrines, no private practices, no courses of conduct approved for a few only (Isa. 45:19; 48:16; 2 Ne. 20:16; D&C 1:34). The blessings of the gospel are for all men. Do not be deceived into believing that the General Authorities believe any secret doctrines or have any private ways of living. Everything that is taught and practiced in the Church is open to public inspection, or, at least, where temple ordinances are concerned, to the inspection and knowledge of everyone who qualifies himself by personal righteousness to enter the house of the Lord.

Thus, we can be extremely suspicious of claims that General Authorities secretly run the government of Utah. They do NOT. We are NOT a secret society, and we must always work to keep it that way. But further, we LDS must portray ourselves to others as citizens in the pursuit of God-ordained FREEDOM.

Those who wish to ignorantly castigate us only remind us why there should NEVER be impingements on religious beliefs or even practices that adhere to the fundamental constraints placed upon all human behavior, religious or not.

*****Best Sources of Traffic*****
I want to thank those sites that have been referring visitors to "Mormon Insights." According to Google Analytics, I have received the following traffic over the past 31 days:

1. Google (search) -- 750 visitors

2. Mormon Archipelago -- 370 visitors

3. Mormon Insights (bookmarked or direct) -- 130 visitors

4. Yahoo (search) -- 82 visitors

5. Latter-day Commentary -- 68 visitors

6. Temple Study -- 34 visitors

I hope I am returning the favor in getting some traffic to #5 and #6, which are especially meaningful and important blog sites.

The numbers reported above are a little higher than average. My blog essay "The Vision of Gabriel" has been attracting hundreds of visitors in just a few days. This is because the general topic has been in the international news.

What matters to me the most is NOT how many readers this blog gets. Instead, I am primarily interested in making sure that Mormons and the LDS Church are properly and fairly portrayed on the Internet, countering much of the nonsense that is out there. I think the LDS links I have provided on my sidebar provide both a fair picture and a diverse picture of Mormons in general.

In any case, thanks to both referrers and readers.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Challenges of the Heart:

How We Made It Through June

Preface: Why do we have challenges in this life? It would seem that the complexities and tests of life are much more than just to see what religion we will join. Besides, acceptance of the gospel does NOT ward off all problems, trials, and tribulations. Does God love His children? In the middle of a severe challenge it is natural to wonder.

Actually, Latter-day Saints believe that ALL peoples everywhere live meaningful and purposeful lives that will prepare them for the afterlife, regardless of their religion (1 Cor. 15:29; 1 Pet. 4:6). Even so, gospel principles do improve lives, and eventually must be accepted either in this life or the next.

But, I am allowing myself to get distracted.

Late May and the entire month of June was especially challenging to my family in both good and bad ways.

Below I will briefly describe three challenges we faced – all affecting the "heart" in one way or another. Interestingly, much of the strain was divided among our three sons, which I will explain. We have all survived, and we have become better as a result. In many ways I am grateful for both the good and bad – but I am ready for a reprieve.

*****

Challenge #1: My Son #3, now 14, was born with a heart defect known as a coarctation of the aorta, including a valve abnormality. Specifically, he was born with a narrowing of the aortic artery, which feeds the lower body with oxygenated blood. Further, the aortic valve, which normally opens three ways (tricuspid), opens only two ways (bicuspid) in my son's heart. For a nice picture of the difference between a tricuspid aortic value and a bicupid valve see this site.

In the picture below, Location "C" (coarctation) shows a narrowing of the aorta, similar to my son's.

Shortly after baby Son #3 was born, he started having heart attacks. He nearly died. Eventually, the doctors discovered that his heart had enlarged (hypertrophy) because it was overworking trying to get blood to circulate to the lower body. At 3 months of age, the doctors discovered the coarctation and performed surgery. The narrowed portion of the artery was removed and the normal portions were spliced back together.

The surgery saved his life, and Son #3 had no further heart attacks. However, we were told at that time that he probably would have to have another surgery during his teenage years to further widen the artery, since scarred artery tissue does not grow at the same rate as normal artery tissue.

Fast forward to age 14: This June the doctors needed to perform a catheterized heart procedure to determine what further surgical work was needed to be performed on the heart.

Although Son #3 has a LOT of energy, he does NOT have the stamina of other boys. This kind of finding is expected in coarc patients. We were told by the doctors that the catheterization might result in a stent being put in the scarred aorta in order to widen it. Another possibility was angioplasty, which would simply widen the artery without leaving a permanent stent. All of the proposed procedures (including the possibility of full-scale open heart surgery) were scary, especially for over-protective parents.

Figure: The catheterization involves putting a tube in the femoral artery in the groin area, and then pushing the tube up the aorta and into the heart. This procedure allows exploration of the heart, and the placement of stents, if necessary.

Just prior to the surgery, the doctors told us that given our son's overall situation, there was a one to two percent chance of NOT surviving the procedure. I am NOT going to get into the details of our personal reactions to this news, except to say we needed all the prayers we could get.

The good news is that during the heart exploration the doctors discovered the heart was working great. They showed me films of my son's heart. I could see the entire heart pumping, and I could see every working part. The narrowed portion of the aorta was NOT very narrow at all, and blood was flowing through it in an excellent manner. Also, with dye injection procedures, they were able to show me that the bicuspid valve was NOT leaking at all.

The doctors concluded: If it ain't broken, then don't fix it. They did nothing, and my Son #3 was out of the hospital in four hours. Nonetheless, it was a challenge and an ordeal. (As a sidenote, I received the doctors' bills today, and be assured the amount of money they charged for this procedure that fixed nothing would have bought a medium sized house in the 1950s).

Challenge #2: Just a few days after Son #3's hospital procedures was Son #1's marriage on June 11th in Nauvoo. There were two wedding receptions in two different states. Money flew out of my hands. Happiness was everywhere. There is nothing like the romantic heart. But, at the end of the whole affair, my wife and I were exhausted, despite our fulfilled emotions and overflowed hearts.

Challenge #3: Not all overflows are good. In the national news were the Midwest floods. Many of the major rivers in the Heartland flowed past their banks for days. Billions of dollars of damage was done. Our house survived (easily), but too many others were not as fortunate. My #2 Son spent much time in Cedar Rapids helping with some of the clean up. It was a time of considerable stress, especially as it continued to rain after the rivers were already flooding. The Heartland will recover but it will NOT be the same for years.

The Good News:
As noted, despite the strains on the heart, we survived. My 14-year old boy has recovered well from his procedures, happy to know his heart is working good. My oldest boy is now happily married to a returned missionary, the love of his heart. And, my #2 Son did his part in the Heartland recovery process.

Our family now appreciates life and our lifestyle a little bit more than before. We have taken too many things for granted. But, as challenges appear and disappear, we learn to appreciate and be grateful for our times of normality, and the goodness in the hearts of others.

All this "heart" symbolism reminds me of a favorite scripture:

Psalm 24:3-5
3 Who shall ascend into the hill of the LORD? or who shall stand in his holy place?
4 He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.
5 He shall receive the blessing from the LORD, and righteousness from the God of his salvation.

Life is one great challenge, even the challenge to ascend into the hill of the LORD. But, the ultimate good news is that our yokes can be made light. See yesterday's post: The Lord Knows Us. Here is the comfort:

Matthew 11:29-30
29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.
30 For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

Now my heart can rest – for awhile.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54@gmail.com; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

The LORD Knows Us

The Lesson of D&C Section 126

The LORD is aware of our sacrifices. He knows us personally, and he knows our needs. In the D&C this message of a personal God comes through time and time again.

Section 126

Take for example, D&C Section 126. It is just 3 verses and it would be easy to miss its import. Read the following:

Doctrine & Covenants 126
Date: July 9, 1841 [Almost exactly 167 years ago]
Place: Nauvoo, Illinois
1 DEAR and well-beloved brother, Brigham Young, verily thus saith the Lord unto you: My servant Brigham, it is no more required at your hand to leave your family as in times past, for your offering is acceptable to me.
2 I have seen your labor and toil in journeyings for my name.
3 I therefore command you to send my word abroad, and take especial care of your family from this time, henceforth and forever. Amen.

Brigham Young had been ordained an Apostle in February of 1835. Since that period he had been particularly active in distant missionary work. For example, between 1839 and 1841 he had been serving a mission to Great Britain. The words cited above were given shortly after his return from that mission. Those words said in effect: Slow down and spend more time with your family.

Thus, D&C 126 teaches that families are important even as we do Church or Military service.

Section 126 is NOT the most famous and well-known of the revelations in the Doctrine & Covenants. Many readers might miss the point even if they read it. Yet, the Section remind us of how the Lord is mindful of the sacrifice of missionaries, soldiers, Bishops, Stake Presidents, (etc.) and their families.

We each do NOT need a personalized Section 126, such as Brigham Young received. The scriptures are for our benefit and we are privileged to liken them unto ourselves (1 Ne. 19: 23; 2 Ne. 6: 5).

*****

The Apostle Peter recognized that the law of Moses had become "a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear" (Acts 15:10). Simply trying to follow a bunch of rules without the spirit gets us nowhere. None of us can meet the standard of perfection, at least in this life. Thus, we all must become reliant upon the atonement.

Here are some thoughts from a 1999 BYU Women’s Conference by Camille Fronk (for the entire talk, click on the link below):

Camille Fronk, Dept. of Ancient Scripture, BYU; "The Cost of True Discipleship"
The Father did not send us to earth to learn how to escape burdens and responsibility. He sent us … to divest ourselves of that extra baggage, and [to learn] how to successfully carry our God-given loads. … The Lord's yoke not only enables us to carry the load he has called us to assume but it allows us to carry it for as long as he requires. …

I have identified five things that make the Lord's burden light when we use his yoke.

1. Dispose of unnecessary baggage. … Sins against God are the heavies that first come to mind. Once we repent … we will be amazed at how light the overall load suddenly becomes. …

2. Sustaining power through covenants. Covenants are the primary source of power in our lives (M. Russell Ballard, Ensign, May 1999, 86). When we make covenants with the Lord, he promises us his strength to support us in carrying our loads, making our burdens lighter. … In all reality, we could not possibly handle the total weight of mortality without the Lord's support.

3. Mutual support from others. The covenant of baptism also includes the promise that we will watch out for each other and help whenever there is a need. …

4. The Lord makes us stronger. … The Bible Dictionary teaches us that through the grace of Jesus Christ, … we actually "receive strength and assistance to do good works that [we] otherwise would not be able to maintain if left to [our] own means" (LDS edition of the Bible, s.v. "grace").

5. Christ teaches us how to carry burdens. … Jesus is our teacher when we wear his yoke. What does he want us to learn from him on the subject? How to be meek and lowly of heart.

*****

A few years ago, Elder M. Russell Ballard said at April Conference: "Each wagon and handcart was heavily laden with faith—faith in God, faith in the Restoration of His Church through the Prophet Joseph Smith, and faith that God knew where they were going and that He would see them through" ("You Have Nothing to Fear from the Journey," Ensign, May 1997, 60).

The Lord revealed to Brigham Young: "My people must be tried in all things, that they may be prepared to receive the glory that I have for them, even the glory of Zion; and he that will not bear chastisement is not worthy of my kingdom" (D&C 136:31). If Christ sometimes asks us to give up things like family, then it is only temporary. Ultimately, the point of the gospel is to bring families closer together in this life and the next.

This is why I like D&C 126 so much. It reminds us that families are important to God, and that sacrifices that remove us from family are only temporary – even in this life.

*****

According to Google Analytics, my most read essays over the past 30 days (4, 125 page views by 1,031 unique visitors) has been:

1. Vision of Gabriel

2. Temple Marriage: Personal and Up-close

3. The Cross of Jesus is Essential

4. Eternal Marriage and Exaltation

5. Jesus on the Footsteps of the Temple

6. Born in the Covenant

7. Mormons are thinkers

8. Alma's Advice to Missionaries

9. Ancient Metal Writing

10. Do Mormons Worship Jesus?

Be sure to visit the sites listed on my left side-bar under: "My Reading List" and "Other Important LDS Links. I believe the effort will be worth it.

The official Church page is listed at: LDS.org.



*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Pure Religion:

What Mormons are Really All About…

Few things about our religion can be proved in a scientific sense. Latter-day Saints must operate on faith and inspiration. We have a good faith, a “do-good” humanitarian faith. We try to follow the admonition of James, who defined for us true religion. He simply stated:

James 1:27
27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, [and] to keep himself unspotted from the world.

As such, the LDS Church involves both activism and the pursuit of purity.

The Church has been in the news, and some of our doctrines have been misrepresented and made negative. It is easy to get depressed about these things, especially when one knows what happens in the Church behind the scenes that never gets much publicity.

*****

Last year, I attended a wedding reception that attracted a large number of members across our Stake (a region like a Dioceses) and well beyond. While at the reception I spoke for 20 minutes with a "priesthood officer" who presides over an "urban" congregation. (I am being a bit vague, intentionally). I asked him how the Church welfare assistance program worked in his congregation.

He said that every Sunday night he is at his computer ordering groceries. He places the order at the Bishop’s Storehouse (in the Midwest). He orders long lists of groceries organized by family. Then, Monday and Tuesday the Storehouse “shops” for each family. Then, a big truck delivers those groceries on Wednesday, again organized by each family in need.

I asked the "presiding officer," “Is there anything that the Church won’t do for these people?” He said, “No.” He said that some of the families have food stamps from the government, and therefore do not need help from the Bishop’s Storehouse. Even so, the families are still short on money. Therefore, the "presiding officer" will pay their electric bills, car payments, or whatever the specific need is. The only requirement is that the "presiding officer" must think the need is legitimate.

He said that he works with each family to get them off welfare, and he said that he has had success. On the other hand, he said there were families that are in chronic need and that will always be on welfare. No matter, the Church continues to help whenever there is need.

*****

As I thought about this great lesson about the Welfare Program, I also thought about all the negative publicity the Church has been getting over the past year. So, as we Latter-day Saints are accused of being members of a cult, this “cult” is actually taking care of its poor, doing what the Apostle James would call the “pure religion.”

Readers: Please know Mormons are NOT members of a cult. We are Christians, and we are committed to practicing the truths of Christianity. Mormons are committed to provident living. End of story.

Well, not quite. It is true that the author of this blog is a bit cranky and could probably make a few more visits to the fatherless and the widows, but it takes all kinds to make a Church.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

Eisenhower at Camp Meade:

A Source of His Inner Strength

Source: U.S. Govt. Archives: 5-Star General Dwight D. Eisenhower,
Supreme Allied Commander on February 1, 1945.

One of Dwight Eisenhower’s first assignments after graduating from West Point was Camp (now Fort) Meade, between 1919 and 1922. He was to be an officer in one of the nation’s very first tank corps. He served with George Patton at Camp Meade, too. Eisenhower served with the 65th Engineers.

Early in Dwight Eisenhower's military career there were several life-shaping incidents at Fort Meade that helped prepare him for leadership in World War II. (Information for this essay was obtained in: D. D. Eisenhower (1969), In Review, Garden City: Doubleday. Page numbers cited below come from this book).

At Fort Meade Eisenhower and Patton were trying to improve the new light tank. It had trouble getting over some steep hills and ravines. So they tied their tank to another more powerful vehicle by means of a steel cable. Well, as the tank was being tugged the cable snapped and whirled around at bullet speed just missing their heads by inches but snapping off branches and saplings like they were butter. Later, after dinner, Patton had asked Eisenhower (who went by “Ike”) “Ike, were you as scared as I was?”

If the two ever got afraid, it did not seem to show. One time their men were practicing with their machine guns and one of the guns got overheated and stopped firing. Patton and Eisenhower walked toward the gun, even in front of it, to try to get it to fire again. In those few seconds it cooled down enough that the gun started firing on its own. Both of them were almost shot down (see p. 27-28).

Source: U.S. Govt. Archives: George Patton and Dwight D. Eisenhower (center, second row) at Camp Meade in 1921. For full picture, see: Archives.

At that time Eisenhower and his wife, Mamie, had a son that they had named (Icky, pronounced Ike – eee). He was something like 3 years old, but thoroughly enjoyed watching the tanks, despite their noise. He even had a baby Army uniform. But tragedy was to set in.

Icky caught scarlet fever. Eisenhower writes: “We did everything possible to save him. The camp doctor brought in specialists. Hour after hour, Mamie and I could only hope and pray. In those days, before modern medicine eliminated scarlet fever… hope and prayer were the only possibilities for parents” (p. 28). Icky died.

Eisenhower wrote: “I do not know how others have felt when facing the same situation but I have never known such a blow. During the days of his illness, the doctor had not allowed me into his room [because scarlet fever is contagious]. But there was a porch on which I was allowed to sit and I could look into the room and wave to him. Occasionally, they would let me come to the door just to speak to Icky. I haunted the halls of the hospital but within the week he was gone. I didn’t know what to do” (p. 28).

Aftering retiring as President of the United States, he wrote: “Today when I think of it [Icky’s death], even as I write of it, the keeness of my loss comes back to me as fresh and as terrible as it was in that long dark day soon after Christmas, 1920” (p. 29). Eisenhower and Mamie knew how to carry on.

Every person on earth encounters tragedy as some point or points in his or her life. It is inescapable. The issue is not can we escape tragedy, but how will we handle it when it comes. Do we have the character and the faith to continue to make life meaningful and rich?

Life is so valuable that it ought not be squandered. We must live and live to its fullness. And, in so doing bring more good to the world than we take from it. That is the responsibility. Tragedy will come, but it cannot overwhelm us. We must overcome.

Quitting is the easy thing to do. Fighting-on is hard. But, it is the fight that brings life.

For all the fun found in life, it is still important to find the deeper meaning of life that will carry us through the hard times. Imagine losing a child and then carrying on with a thoughtful smile.

Eisenhower did not give the evil of death even a glimmer of victory. Instead, he shaped the world.

*****

For more public domain photographs of Dwight Eisenhower see: Eisenhower Presidential Library

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

The Vision of Gabriel:

A Dead Sea Scroll on Stone?

A few days ago the New York Times reported the existence of a three foot tall stone containing 87 lines of ink-based Hebrew inscriptions that probably date just a few decades prior to the time of Christ. (See: Ethan Bronner, "Tablet ignites debate on messiah and resurrection," July 5, 2008). The article calls the artifact "a Dead Sea Scroll on stone." A. Yardeni and B. Elitzur, the first scholars to formally report on the stone, have named the inscription the Vision of Gabriel (Hazon Gabriel). A new report on the stone inscriptions published in the prestigious The Journal of Religion by Israel Knohl provides a translation that indicates that someone (most likely a "prince of princes") is given an order from the angel Gabriel “by three days, live/ be resurrected!”

[For references, see: Ada Yardeni and Binyamin Elitzur, “Document: A First-Century BCE Prophetic Text Written on a Stone; First Publication,” Cathedra 123 (2007): 155–66 (in Hebrew); and Israel Knohl, "By Three Days, Live”: Messiahs, Resurrection, and Ascent to Heaven in Hazon Gabriel," The Journal of Religion (2008) 88: 147-158. The provided link in the reference is a PDF of the full article. See also, Hartman.org of the Shalom Hartman Institute.].

For a drawing of the Hebrew inscriptions see here.

Although these findings are exciting, several caveats are in order: 1) The essential aspects of the provenance of the stone are unknown. However, Knohl states, "The authenticity of the inscription was recently checked and confirmed by Yuval Goren of Tel Aviv University." The Goren report, however, has yet to be published. 2) The stone is in bad condition, and the ink on the stone is highly faded and indecipherable in places. The Knohl translation involves some educated conjecture. 3) Knohl is known for his book, The Messiah before Jesus: The Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls (translated in English, 2000, University of California Press), which describes the early historical context of the Jewish concept of a slain Messiah. His natural biases to the "pre-Jesus Messiah" thesis possibly could have predisposed his interpretations of the Hazon Gabriel text. 4) Knohl makes it clear that the "prince of princes" in the text is NOT identified as Jesus. However, portions of the text do appear to have a prophetic tone. 5) Scholarly analysis of the stone and its text is at the beginning stages, and there will be much debate over the Knohl translation.

Regardless of these caveats, the article is extremely well prepared, scholarly, and forthright about existing weaknesses. The article is a critical contribution to the literature.

For a picture of the stone, see here or here.

*****

Knohl is quoted in the New York Times article as saying: "This [finding] should shake our basic view of Christianity.” On this point, I disagree.

Everything is shaped by history. Why should we be surprised that the concept of Jesus and his resurrection was shaped by history? Latter-day Saints are neither surprised nor shaken.

LDS theology since 1830 has been based upon the idea that there was an extremely strong prophetic Messiah literature prior to the time of Christ.

The following citations come from the Book of Mormon, first published in 1830. The verses are significant because they also claim to address ancient details of a slain and resurrected Messiah PRIOR to the time of Jesus. (All dates associated with the verses come from the Book of Mormon itself).

Helaman 14:20 [about 6 BCE; emphasis mine]
20 But behold, as I said unto you concerning another sign, a sign of his [Christ's] death, behold, in that day that he shall suffer death the sun shall be darkened and refuse to give his light unto you; and also the moon and the stars; and there shall be no light upon the face of this land, even from the time that he shall suffer death, for the space of three days, to the time that he shall rise again from the dead.

Alma 33:22 [about 74 BCE; emphasis mine]
22 If so, wo shall come upon you; but if not so, then cast about your eyes and begin to believe in the Son of God, that he will come to redeem his people, and that he shall suffer and die to atone for their sins; and that he shall rise again from the dead, which shall bring to pass the resurrection, that all men shall stand before him, to be judged at the last and judgment day, according to their works.

Mosiah 13:35 [about 74 BCE; emphasis mine]
35 Yea, and have they not said also that he should bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, and that he, himself, should be oppressed and afflicted?

2 Nephi 26: 1-3 [about 559 - 545 BCE; emphasis mine]
1 AND after Christ shall have risen from the dead he shall show himself unto you, my children, and my beloved brethren; and the words which he shall speak unto you shall be the law which ye shall do.
2 For behold, I say unto you that I have beheld that many generations shall pass away, and there shall be great wars and contentions among my people.
3 And after the Messiah shall come there shall be signs given unto my people of his birth, and also of his death and resurrection; and great and terrible shall that day be unto the wicked, for they shall perish; and they perish because they cast out the prophets, and the saints, and stone them, and slay them; wherefore the cry of the blood of the saints shall ascend up to God from the ground against them.

There are many other verses in the Book of Mormon that predict and prophesize of the death and resurrection of the Christ (see e.g., Jacob 4:11, 6:9; Mosiah 15:20-21, 16:7-8, 18:2; Alma 16:20, 40:18-19).

Of course, one could make the same argument by citing select verses from the Old Testament, such as these from Isaiah:

New King James Version: Isaiah 53: 3-5
3 He is despised and rejected by men, 

A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.
And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him;
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. 

4 Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; 

Yet we esteemed Him stricken, 

Smitten by God, and afflicted. 

5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, 

He was bruised for our iniquities; 

The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, 

And by His stripes we are healed.

In LDS theology most critical Christian concepts were established from the beginning. Thus, Latter-day Saints are NOT surprised by the existence of sophisticated pre-Christian concepts of temple ceremonies, baptisms, and priesthood. Doctrines such as Messiah, atonement, and resurrection are held as timeless as well. The Knohl paper reviewed above scratches the surface, but is an important start.

*****

Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.




Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.

*****
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.

General Powell's Rules for Success

My American Journey (1995), New York: Random House

One of my favorite books is My American Journey by Colin Powell (1995, New York: Random House). I am sorry he had to serve in such troubled times as Secretary of State, but he is one of my favorite Army Generals.

He concluded his book (p. 612) by saying, “My responsibility, our responsibility as lucky Americans, is to try to give back to this country as much as it has given us, as we continue our American journey together.”

He had a set of 13 rules (p. 613) that he tried to live by. I will list each rule followed by my own commentary.

1. “It ain’t as bad as you think. It will look better in the morning.”

Take Basic Combat Training (BCT) for example: Most soldiers look back on BCT with fondness, bragging to all their friends about how well they got through the training. The same applies to LDS mission service. Missionaries love to recall for decades the challenging incidents during their mission service. Conclusion: Things look better with time.

2. “Get mad, then get over it.”

Grudges can eat me up. They are not worth it. If I get mad and I have made my point to whomever I am mad at, then I let life go on. I carry few grudges, if any at all. However, I have a related rule: “Don’t make the same mistake twice.” When I KNOW something is a mistake because I have made it before, I always tell myself: Don’t be foolish. Usually I don’t, but I am NOT perfect.

3. “Avoid having your ego so close to your position that when your position falls, your ego goes with it.”

We might be convinced that around the bend of the mountain road is a continuation of the road. But what if around the bend is a cliff – a drop-off? We can argue all day with the cliff-believers, but whatever is around the bend is around the bend. We need to have just enough doubt about our beliefs that you can go cautiously around the bends of life. If we go hell-bent, then we can fall off the cliff. All I am really saying is: "Look before you leap."

In life we are always jumping over one more hurdle. Life is not a piece of cake, but the challenges of life make us better people. It’s a trite phrase but it is true: “When the going gets tough, the tough get going.” Any successful person has endured extreme hardships.

We do NOT live in an ideal world. Peace comes at a cost. The peace is preserved at a cost. The cost is the military. I am of the opinion that young men should serve their country or their church for a couple of years.

4. “It can be done!”

Many things in life look impossible. When we were just children, becoming an adult looked impossible. I am typing on a computer that I never expected to see in my lifetime. I saw the movie “2001” in about 1968. I remember the computer “HAL” playing chess with an astronaut. I just laughed. “They’d never be able to teach a computer to play chess.” Yet, it’s done all the time now.

I have benefited by setting challenging but reachable goals. When I have a target in life, I know I can reach it. With no target, I wander aimlessly.

5. "Be careful what you choose. You may get it."

As I have gotten older I have come to realize that: "The old man has to live with the decisions of the young man." By that phrase I mean that decisions I made in my youth still influence me decades later. Years and years ago as a young man I moved away from my parents who live in Southern California. At that time I loved to be away from home and I thought I was in heaven. However, since that time, my natural progression of jobs has kept me away permanently. As an academic vagabond who has lived across the United States, I have come to realize that I have never lived in any place better than Southern California, even with its smog. My parents, now in their eighties, still have a fulfilling life in that region.

6. "Don’t let adverse facts stand in the way of a good decision."

General Eisenhower had to m