Double-0 Heaven (Part #2)

James … the Book of James

[See: Part #1]

The Apostle James is a faithful ACTION hero (a "double-0 heaven"). James understood that true faith compels good actions. Faith in Christ and righteous actions go hand-in-hand. Christian faith is not just a frame of mind, it is a frame for action.

James wrote these words:

James 2:14 – 17
14 ¶ What [doth it] profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be [ye] warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what [doth it] profit?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

There must have been a little tension between the Apostles Paul and James. I am not sure they were eye-to-eye on theology. For example, James said,

James 2:21 - 24
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

But, Paul appears to have said just the opposite:

Bible in Basic English: Romans 4: 2-3
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God.
3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness. …

13 For the promise that he should be the heir of the world was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Both James and Paul in the passages above quoted from Genesis 15:6: "And he [Abraham] believed in the LORD; and he [the LORD] counted it to him for righteousness." James argues that Abraham was justified by faith realized by works, and Paul seems to argue that faith was righteousness unto itself.

A favorite passage for Mormons to cite is the following:

James 2:26
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

Faith without operational works yields not much more good than meditation. Faithful works enlivens the spirit. But, let us remember the following equation:

GRACE + our works = EXALTATION

Let us remember that God’s grace is infinite and human works are finite. To quote Elder Hartman J. Rector (BYU Devotional, May 3, 1983), “God doesn't love us because we are good; he loves us because he is good."

Another one of my favorite passages in all scripture is the following, and it also contains my favorite phrase “meekness of wisdom.”

James 3:13 - 18
13 ¶ Who [is] a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him shew out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.
14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but [is] earthly, sensual, devilish.
16 For where envying and strife [is], there [is] confusion and every evil work.
17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, [and] easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
18 And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.

These words above (I would like to think) came directly from the mouth of Jesus.

For clarification, I must address two archaic words. The first is “endued” from verse 13, which is now “endowed.” When I read the passage out loud I even pronounce endued as endowed. The second archaic term is “intreated” in verse 17. The modern spelling is “entreated.” The phrase “easy to be intreated” just means: easy to request urgently from God.

The lesson of James 3:13-18 is an essential one. Speakers of truth teach in peace and NOT in contention. LDS missionaries must practice this principle.

The famous verses from chapter 4 are:

James 4:8
8 Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse [your] hands, [ye] sinners; and purify [your] hearts, [ye] double minded.

James 4:17
17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin.

In the following verse, James uses the phrase " entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth," which just means "heard by the Lord."

James 5:4
4 Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth.

The phrase “Lord of sabaoth” means Lord of hosts, and the hosts are the armies of Israel (see LDS B.D. under “Sabaoth,” p. 764). Similar language is sometimes found in the Doctrine & Covenants (D&C), such as the following:

D&C 95:7
7 And for this cause I gave unto you a commandment that you should call your solemn assembly, that your fastings and your mourning might come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, which is by interpretation, the creator of the first day, the beginning and the end.

The Old Testament uses “LORD of hosts” dozens and dozens of times (e.g., 1 Chron. 17:24; Ps. 84:12; Isaiah 1:24), the transliteration of which is Yahweh Sabaoth. Yahweh in addition to meaning “the eternal I am” also means “He creates” or “He causes to exist.” In some sense Yahweh Sabaoth means “He creates the divine armies.” The title Yahweh Sabaoth is often associated with the military themes in the Old Testament (e.g., I Sam. 15:2-3; II Sam. 5:10).

Note how well the term Lord of hosts fits into the following:

D&C 87:7
That the cry of the saints, and of the blood of the saints, shall cease to come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, from the earth, to be avenged of their enemies.

James ends his epistle with a note on patience for the Second Coming and sickness.

James 5:7 – 8, 11
7 Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.
8 Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh. …
11 Behold, we count them happy which endure. Ye have heard of the patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy.

A common phrase in colloquial language is to “Have the patience of Job.” I am far too impatient, and this is an element that I must work on and work on.

Even James knew that everyone was impatient for the coming of the Lord. All Christians have been. It is nothing new. We Latter-day Saints know we are in the latter days, but in reality all we know is that it has been about 2,000 years since the death of Christ and he has NOT returned. Is the wait hundreds of years, decades, years, or months? My guess is later and not sooner.

Finally, James encourages the sick to seek the elders:

James 5:14
14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

Elders do NOT work magic, but instead, they work faith. The blessings of Elders are a pure expression of faith. Faith precedes the miracles. If miracles come, then I am happy to receive them.

Conclusion: The Book of James is a blessing to all. It is the "Proverbs" of the New Testament.

*****

1949/1964 Bible in Basic English
-- Public Domain.
The Bible In Basic English was printed in 1965 by Cambridge Press in England.

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

Double-0 Heaven (Part #1)

James … the Book of James

Preface: Both James Bond and the Apostle James are "double-0 agents" and ACTION heroes. James Bond, a double-0 seven, has a license to kill and works to find danger. The Apostle, a "double-0 heaven," gives a license to live and turns faith into works of heavenly safety.

At the risk of being accused of being an unorthodox teacher, I have taught my boys that in order to understand the Book of James in the New Testament, one must first understand some quotes from the movies.

Here are some favorite movie lines:

From the comedy movie Airplane! (1980), the pilots have this exchange while their passenger jet is having some mechanical troubles:

Striker :"Surely you can't be serious."
Rumack: "I am serious…and don't call me Shirley."

From the movie Goldfinger (1964), while James Bond’s arms and legs are tied down on a stone slab table with a giant laser gun slicing the table and threatening to cut him in half, he says to his nemesis:

James Bond [A little nervously]: "What do you expect me to talk? "
Goldfinger [Smirking]: "No Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!"

From the movie Dr. No (1962): As the movie begins its first scene, Bond is in a casino playing a card game, Baccarat Chemin de Fer, against other guests.

James Bond: "I admire your courage, Miss...?"
Sylvia Trench: "Trench. Sylvia Trench. I admire your luck, Mr...?"
James Bond: "Bond. James Bond."

*****The Book of James*****

Surely, James Bond has his admirable points, but if there were such a thing as an anti-James Bond book, then, SURELY, it would be the Book of James. And, I apologize for calling you Surely.

The Apostle James expects us to do more than talk. He expects us to walk the walk. Who is he? The brother of Jesus – JAMES, the brother of Jesus. At least, tradition has ascribed authorship to this particular James, despite the many to choose from in the New Testament.

There are about four different James in the New Testament, and it is NOT precisely clear which James wrote this book. However, most “James” in the N.T. had qualifiers beside their names, such as James the less or James the son of Alphaeus. Usually, if not always, the single name “James,” without qualifiers, meant James, the brother of Jesus. In commentaries, this James is sometimes called “James the Just.”

This essay will be based upon the assumption that the author of the Book of James is the Lord’s brother, and that he was an Apostle (see Gal. 1: 18-19).

The Apostle James began his epistle this way:

James 1:1
1 ¶ JAMES, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

From this greeting, we know that James wanted to communicate with a broad audience, all over the world. The “twelve tribes” is an idiom for “everyone.”

This book is sometimes called the “Proverbs” of the New Testament. Clearly, the author was intimately familiar with the sayings and teachings of Jesus. This fact, at least sentimentally, increases my hope that James the brother of Jesus was the author. In any case, there is no big running theme throughout the book. Instead, the verses jump from topic to topic and from tidbit to tidbit.

One of the most famous passages in Mormon culture is associated with the first vision of Joseph Smith:

James 1:5
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all [men] liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

This is a promise given to any person, regardless of religion and regardless of priesthood. Do we really believe this scripture? If we do, then we MUST respect the wisdom of men & women found in other faiths. Mormons have no monopoly on wisdom or truth.

I am not suggesting that all religions are equal, but I am suggesting that most religions have great value, and that many people in those religions are highly inspired. Why? God gives his wisdom liberally to those who ask, and many do ask. See also, Mormon 9:21; James 4:8; D&C 88:63).

We Latter-day Saints, of all people, should give deep and abiding respect to the leaders and people behind other Christian faiths and other world religions, especially Judaism. (See: Article of Faith #11).

Latter-day Saints are NOT in a battle with other faiths! We simply offer new light to old truths. Further, we should always keep in mind that those faiths have much to teach us as well.

Then James argued:

James 1:8
8 A double minded man [is] unstable in all his ways.

Surely, James Bond as a "double-0" spy was a bit instable in some of his ways. Such a man does not have an eye single to the glory of God. James Bond sometimes changed his morals (but not his patriotism!) for the expediency of the moment.

Then the Apostle James spoke on enduring to the end:

James 1:12 – 13
12 Blessed [is] the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.
13 ¶ Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

We need to be stable in our testimony and sure in our actions. If we make a mistake, we cannot blame it on God.

Then, notice a little phrase in verse 17:

James 1:17
17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

God does not change like the shifting of shadows cast by the sun or the moon. One should never underestimate how phrases in the Bible influence wording in the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon is loaded with subtle phrasing that might be missed by its readers.

Read Alma 7:20 and see if you can find a connection with James 1:17. Then read Mormon 9:9-10 and see if you can find another connection.

In the cited verses we find the phrases “shadow of turning,” “there is no variableness neither shadow of changing,” and “shadow of changing,” respectively. Please note that “shadow of changing” is not Biblical but is just a variation of “shadow of turning,” which is.

All of these terms were a common part of the vocabulary of theological works around the time of Joseph Smith. (See, for example, John Bunyan (1689) in his essay “The Work of Jesus Christ as an Advocate; and John Gill (1769), “Doctrinal Divinity,” Book 1, chapter 7).

Evidently, Joseph Smith was a theological sponge capable of picking up innumerable Biblical phrases and employing them in entirely new sentences in perfectly appropriate ways. Joseph Smith was NOT just a speaker of English but was a master of the language in the King James Bible. The evidence of this claim is the literally hundreds and perhaps thousands of Biblical phrases found in the Book of Mormon, as well as in his recorded speeches. (For the latter, a good starting place is: Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith).

What this means to us as Latter-day Saints is that Joseph Smith was prepared to “translate” the Book of Mormon. He needed to be thoroughly familiar with King James English.

*****

James gives us a bit of Christian wisdom that is seldom practiced in Christian nations:

James 1:19 – 20
19 ¶ Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:
20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.

We need to become GOOD listeners and less sharp tongued. We need to think before we speak. Anger may have its place, but it should come only with difficulty.

The author reminds us that the rules of true religion are about liberty not restriction:

James 1:25
25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth [therein], he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

The blessings of God are almost always greater liberty: e.g., freedom from addiction and drunkenness; greater ability to think and solve problems; improved ability to make a difference in this world; and freedom from depression. Obedience to the laws of heaven lead to happiness.

There are two major classes of religions in the world: 1) those that emphasize moral purity of the self, and 2) those that emphasize moral action and service to others. In one of my favorite verses in the Bible, James tells us that we need to be both purists and activists:

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.

There is great profit in home teaching. It provides service to those in need.

There is a difference between humanitarian service (for the public good) and simply being friendly. It is nice to be friendly, but we need to watch for the larger humanitarian needs. Humanitarian service is NOT doing yard work for a healthy family with their own means to complete the job. Humanitarian service is NOT helping a family move out of their apartment when they have the means to accomplish the job on their own. (Editorial: I am resistant to the idea of Elders Quorums or male missionaries being turned into routine moving companies for the Ward, but such service can be appropriate).

Humanitarian service is giving to those who are truly needy. It is changing lives by teaching true principles. It is giving comfort or a priesthood blessing to the sick. It is serving a meal to the starving or to the ill. It is becoming a foster parent to a child without ties and direction. It is working in a half-way house for battered-wives. It is fighting AIDS in Africa. It is befriending the persecuted. It is giving assistance to the mentally ill. It is joining forces with other Churches to render aid to disaster areas.

End of Part #1. See Part #2.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

How Did We Get the King James Bible?

The King James Bible is an amazing book, and it is a wonder to read. Part of the wonder is that it has survived as well as it has. Joseph Smith was ahead of his time when he said in 1843:

Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 6:57–58; Oct. 15, 1843, in Nauvoo, Illinois; reported by Willard Richards; cited in Chapter 17: Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, (2007), p. 206
I believe the Bible as it read when it came from the pen of the original writers. Ignorant translators, careless transcribers, or designing and corrupt priests have committed many errors. …

Despite Joseph Smith's rather unique position for his time, it must be admitted that some great early scholars recognized the same facts. For example, Erasmus, the scholar of Greek of the 15th and 16th centuries, said:

Epistle 337, Collected Works of Erasmus, Vol. 3
"But one thing the facts cry out, and it can be clear, as they say, even to a blind man, that often through the translator’s clumsiness or inattention the Greek has been wrongly rendered; often the true and genuine reading has been corrupted by ignorant scribes, which we see happen every day, or altered by scribes who are half-taught and half-asleep."

It is now a well established historical fact that the ancient manuscripts of the Bible, particularly for the New Testament, show evidence of thousands of changes, most minor, but some major (see e.g., Bart Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus, 2005, New York: HarperCollins).

In an essay posted on the New Testament Baptist Church website, Pastor (Dr.) Jim Ellis makes a heroic defense of the King James Bible, arguing that modern translations are too often based upon "corrupt Egyptian" sources, instead of the Greek Textus Receptus, the ultimate source of the New Testament in the King James Version of the Bible.

Pastor Ellis is bothered that modern translations are based in the Egyptian Codices Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (Aleph), leading to awkward translations, such as found in Mark 1:2. Many modern versions of this verse refer to "Isaiah the prophet," instead of the more generic reference of the King James Version: "As it is written in the prophets." The Pastor's concern makes sense in this context, because the last phrase in the verse is a quotation from Malachi 3:1, not Isaiah.

Textus Receptus is a Greek source, explained below, which greatly influenced the King James Bible. This source is sometimes said to fall within a class of "majority texts," which represent agreement among most ancient sources. The so-called Alexandrian (or Egyptian) texts are sometimes called the "minority texts." However, these minority texts are often viewed by scholars as closest to originals that we have.

Controversies abound because there are so many types of texts with so many types of disagreements or possible errors.

Latter-day Saints (LDS) regard the King James Version as authoritative. The Bible is taught with great emphasis. Although the Church recognizes the theoretical possibility of errors in the King James Version, the emphasis is on its overwhelming truths.

Because we respect the Bible, and because we know it traveled a rocky road to get into our hands, we need to study its history. From where did we get our Bible? What is its origin?.

Some Critical OLD TESTAMENT Manuscripts:

In the following are some brief descriptions of important ancient manuscripts that have shaped the current debates about the Bible, especially the Old Testament.

The Septuagint (LXX):
The Septuagint (pronounced sep-tua-gent) refers to a Greek translation of the Old Testament (translated from Hebrew) that dates to about 270 BCE. Ptolemy II (282 – 246 BCE) commissioned the translation. About 72 elders translated it, and thus the manuscript was abbreviated “LXX,” the Roman numeral for seventy. This is the main Bible of the Eastern Orthodox.

The Codex Vaticanus, or Codex B:
This manuscript is dated circa 350, and it is thought to be the oldest “nearly complete” Greek Bible (Old + New Testaments) in existence.

Vaticanus does not have Genesis 1.1 through Genesis 46:28; 2 Kings 2:5-7, 10-13; Psalms 105:27 through 137:6; Matthew 16:2,3; Romans 16:24; the Pauline Pastoral Epistles (I and II Timothy, Titus); Epistle to Philemon; everything in Hebrews after 9:13; and Revelation. Some of these parts were lost due to damage to the front and the back of the book. Lost parts in the middle just seemed to not exist or were not recognized in this Bible.

Although it has been in the Vatican Library since about 1475, it was not available to scholars until later in the 19th century. It was not available for the King James translation.

This manuscript falls within the Alexandrian (or Egyptian or minority) class of texts.

Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph): is a Greek script that was discovered in an Egyptian monastery in the mid-1800s. It is thought to be a circa 350 manuscript. It contains all of the New Testament and portions of the Old. It also has the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas. It should be noted that many modern English translations of the Bible rely heavily upon the Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, as they are thought to be the oldest manuscripts for the New Testament. As indicated in the beginning of this essay, not all Bible scholars believe in the wisdom of that decision.

Masoretic Text (MT):
The MT is a Hebrew Bible from the Jewish tradition. An approximate date to the MT manuscripts is circa 900. These texts have special punctuation, the masorah, to represent vowels. Earlier Bible texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls, circa 200 BCE, were written without vowels. (Early Hebrew was a vowel-less language).

Vulgate:
This is a Latin translation of the Hebrew Bible, the finest version of which was made by the Catholic father Jerome circa 405 while living in Bethlehem. We do not know precisely the Hebrew texts that Jerome used for his translation. However, he could have used manuscripts related to Codex B, above.

Evolution of the English NEW TESTAMENT:

How did the New Testament evolve over time, and how were its books chosen?

Differing early authorities and counsels decided on different numbers of books as the new Christian scripture – the Gospels and Apostles. Clement of Rome (an early Church father around year 95) cited 22 books from the New Testament. Ignatius of Antioch (around year 115) referred to 7 books, Polycarp (circa 108) referred to 17, Irenaeus (circa 185) referred to 21, and Hippolytus (around year 200) referred to 22 books.

For an excellent summary table, see the Glenn Davis site.

PRE-KING JAMES Chronology

The so-called Muratorian Fragment (circa 170) is the oldest known list of books in the New Testament (see Ludovico Antonio Muratori, ed., Antiquitates Italicae Medii Aevi, v. 3, 1740). For a translation, see the Glenn Davis site. It indicated what books were being read in the Christian church at the time. It included all the current books in the New Testament, except Hebrews, James, and one of the letters of John. Interestingly, it included the "Shepherd of Hermas," although it admitted that Hermas was not of the same status as the Prophets (Old Testament) and the Apostles.

363: the Catholic "Council of Laodicea" evidently granted full acceptance of the 27 books currently designated as the New Testament in its last Canon the 60th, which may not be genuine to the original document.

367: Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, identified the 27 books of the New Testament in his 39th Paschal (Easter) letter.

405: Jerome's Latin Vulgate contained 80 books (39 Old Testament , 14 Apocrypha, 27 New Testament).

Circa 995: Anglo-Saxon (old English) translations of the New Testament were produced. One example is the Wessex Gospels.

1384: Wycliffe was the first person to produce a hand-written copy of the Bible in English. It had 76 books. He was chastised by the Catholic Church for making this translation.

1455: Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press and the first mass-produced Latin Bible was printed, known as the Gutenberg Bible.

1516: Erasmus produced a Greek/Latin Parallel New Testament. The Greek text became known as the “Textus Receptus,” based upon approximately six Greek manuscripts, most from the 12th century.

1522: Martin Luther translated the Greek New Testament (Textus Receptus) into German. His translation of both testaments is known as the "Luther Bible."

It is worth mentioning that Luther was not particularly concerned with the issue of authenticity of authorship in the Bible. Bruce M. Metzger (The Canon of the New Testament, 1997, p. 243) states the following:

"Luther judged that every book of the New Testament which inculcates and promotes … Christ is apostolic, quite independent of its authorship… . [Luther's] most basic criterion for canonicity is a theological evaluation."

It should be noted that Luther had a tremendous influence on William Tyndale and his translation.

1526: William Tyndale translated the Greek New Testament (Textus Receptus) into the English Language. For this crime he was imprisoned and burned at the stake by Henry the 8th.

1535: Myles Coverdale's Bible was the first complete Bible printed in English (O.T. & N.T. & Apocrypha).

1537: The Matthew Bible was the second complete Bible printed in English. "Thomas Matthew" (a pseudonym for John Rogers) printed a combination of the Coverdale Bible with the completed translations of Tyndale.

1539: The "Great Bible" was the first printed English Bible approved for the public. It was a slight variation of Matthew's Bible.

1560: The Geneva Bible was a printed English Bible that added numbered verses. It was the Bible of the American pilgrims of the Mayflower.

1568: The Bishops’ Bible was produced by the Church of England and a later 1602 edition became the basis for the King James version. It was an adaptation of the Great Bible.

KING JAMES Chronology

1611: The King James Bible was printed.

King James-I called for a new translation of the Bible in 1604. The work started in earnest in 1606. Over 50 Bible scholars were divided into six committees, each with their own translation assignment. The committees were:

First Westminster Company, translating from Genesis to 2 Kings: (about 10 scholars).

First Cambridge Company, 1 Chronicles to the Song of Solomon: (about 8 scholars).

First Oxford Company, translated Isaiah through Malachi: (about 7 scholars).

Second Oxford Company, Gospels, Acts, and Revelation: (about 8 scholars).

Second Westminster Company, translated the Epistles: (about 7 scholars).

Second Cambridge Company, translated the Apocrypha: (about 11 scholars).

The committees had several operating rules. They were to stick with the translation of the 1602 Bishops’ Bible, if at all possible. If the Bishops’ Bible was not satisfactory for a particular verse, then they could refer to the Matthew (Tyndale), Coverdale, the Great Bible, and the Geneva. They were not to refer to the Vulgate (because it was Catholic, and King James was Protestant).

The scholars could refer to the Masoretic Text (MT) for the Hebrew Old Testament. They could refer to the Greek “Textus Receptus” New Testament as published by Erasmus. Words implied but not actually present in the text were to be indicated in italics.

CONCLUSIONS

Note that many of the texts used in producing the King James Version were very late in origin. This means that there were many opportunities for errors. The problem is that the earlier Alexandrian texts seem to be full of errors as well.

We Latter-day Saints use the Bible as scripture, but we also recognize that physical processes introduced many opportunities for error. We recognize the scientific fact that the Bible has errors. Further, we do not believe in scriptural infallibility. Even so, Latter-day Saints rarely talk about error in Bible scripture, as the clear emphasis is the overwhelming truth in it.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

A Child's Prayer

Dog's Prayer (widely posted on the web; original source unknown)

My wife and I have had three sons, and we know all about children's bedtime prayers. However, our Son #3 seemed to have a special talent for communicating with God in ways not shown by our other sons.

When Son #3 was eight years old, his prayers were full of creativity and surprise. That is, we just never knew what he was going to say.

One evening I was more prepared than usual and I wrote down one of his bedtime prayers verbatim:

“Heavenly Father, thank you for this day. Wish that we had a good time together. Wish we could drive home safely. Wish we could read the scriptures, and be on missions someday. Wish that our family could stay healthy and everybody else too. Wish that we could not do drugs in the 3rd Ward. Wish that we could look out for each others. In Jesus name, Amen.”

That is a child’s prayer, and it is good enough for me. Especially, I will be on the watch for that drug-using 3rd Ward. Regardless, I could not have expressed my sentiments to God any better or more effectively.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

Mormon Provident Living Learned the Hard Way

"The best way to offset failures is to teach your children
not to repeat your mistakes." – S.Faux

If one goes to the ProvidentLiving.org page published by the LDS Church, one can learn any number of wise pieces of advice. Regarding the topic of family finances there is a First President Message which states the following:

We urge you to be modest in your expenditures; discipline yourselves in your purchases to avoid debt. . . . If you have paid your debts and have a financial reserve, even though it be small, you and your family will feel more secure and enjoy greater peace in your hearts.

The page includes links to a "Online Financial Course" and even "Online Financial Calculators."

The general principles of provident living taught by the Church are summarized in a lesson "Applying the Principles of Self-Reliance and Preparedness" from the teachings of President Spencer W. Kimball.

If one does not want to read the entire lesson linked above, then a single verse from the Book of Mormon captures the essence:

2 Nephi 5:17
17 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cause my people to be industrious and to labor with their hands.

*****

The following are points related to provident living that I have learned largely the hard way. Fortunately, I do eventually learn. (These points are mine, and I do NOT mean to imply that the Church would endorse every point).

1. We are a lay church. Serving as a Bishop (a local pastor) requires about 30 hours per week (plus or minus). Other offices in the Church can be quite demanding as well. This means in practical terms that it is useful to have one's income obtained from a flexible 40-hour workweek.

It should be stated that most Church leadership positions are associated with counselors or assistants. Fortunately, the burdens of responsibility are seldom placed upon a single individual.

2. In the LDS Church, women can be anything they want to be: doctors, lawyers, teachers, truck drivers, piano mechanics, etc., and they often are. LDS women have NO lack for ambition. I have often attended Church with such professionals. This having been said, there is no occupation on earth that is seen as being more important than a mother's. Latter-day Saints pay high respect to mothers. Consequently, it is nice when husbands can earn enough to give their wives the flexibility they need when children are born. Further, it is nice when a husband and a wife can work together as a team toward prudent living: living within a budget, not overspending, avoiding excessive luxuries, etc.

3. Prudent living means staying within one's financial means. It means avoiding materialism. If one can afford only one car and its associated gas bill, then drive only one car, not two. Further, a super fancy house is NOT a necessity or a priority. Children are NOT being deprived if they must share bedrooms.

4. Avoid credit cards like the plague. If one must have a credit card, then avoid spending on credit. Pay off credit card expenses completely each month. Stay out of debt, except for house payments. Pay cash for everything else. (Church officers are not allowed to be in heavy debt). Serving on a mission after retirement requires financial stability.

5. Have a systematic savings program. Plan for retirement the day you begin to work for money.

6. If you have young children, then plan their financial futures, especially college and missions. This often means starting when the child is born.

7. Never stop having Family Home Evenings. Short ones can sometimes be more meaningful than long ones. Have daily scripture study, either personally or with the family. Have family prayer. Exercise priesthood blessings with the family. The goal is to build a home having the serenity of the temple – and yes, that is a VERY challenging goal. (My boys are yelling at one another right now). Provident living is prudent living.

8. Live so that you can always have a Temple Recommend. Attend the Temple when possible, and learn Temple procedures. I hope my boys will make it a goal to be a Temple Sealer by the time their children or grandchildren get married in the Temple. It is a great blessing to perform the Temple Marriages.

9. Don’t take Home Teaching or Visiting Teaching for granted. Just do it and love the families assigned to you.

10. When disasters strike (and they will), be strong and faithful. Be the example for your family and to those over whom you have authority.

11. Don’t put your full trust in the teachings of man, only Jesus. Be appropriately skeptical of human sales schemes.

12. Love your spouse. Love is active, not passive. Love is something you DO, not something that happens to you. “Falling in love” is mere passion, not enduring love. Successful marriages transition from the passion stage to the enduring love stage. Enduring marriages are founded in provident living.

13. Church leadership is foreordained and it is not achieved in the normal sense of the word. We may climb the Church “organizational ladder,” but we never have a right to be prideful about it. Our standing before God is NOT based on the offices we have held.

14. Commercial products sold by Latter-day Saints do NOT necessarily come with a "grander" guarantee. These words still apply: Caveat Emptor.

15. Love the youth of the Church, even with their frailties and failings. Praise their successes and gently admonish their shortcomings while enshrouding them with love. Teach them spiritual principles, which include Provident Living.

Fifteen points is a good place to stop.

Feel free to add your own points in the comments section.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

Genealogies and the Status of Jesus:

Modern Temples Teach We are ALL Children of God

"Nauvoo Temple" by C. Faux (Son #2), Copyright 2005, used by permission. All Rights Reserved. Click on to zoom.

Ancient Jews sometimes argued amongst themselves about who was most closely related to the ancient prophets Moses & Abraham. Regarding such unproductive debates, Paul warned about becoming prideful over genealogy (see also, 1 Timothy 1:4):

Titus 3:9
9 ¶ But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

Modern Latter-day Saints do genealogies, but NOT because of some flawed desire to demonstrate the superiority of one's family lines over others. Instead, we recognize the importance of ALL humans as part of God's family. As such, ALL family lines are equally important. Yet, ancient peoples sometimes had opposite views.

*****

The Pharisees and Sadducees became prideful of their Abrahamic ancestry by thinking they had special status before the eyes of God. John the Baptist corrected them:

Matthew 3:6-9 [italics and brackets mine]
6 And [the faithful] were baptized of [John the Baptist] in Jordan, confessing their sins.
7 ¶ But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham [for our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

James E. Talmage gave this interpretation of the above verses:

James E. Talmage, Jesus the Christ, Ch.10, p.115 - 116
John's forceful assertion that God could raise up, from the stones on the river bank, children to Abraham, meant to those who heard that even the lowest of the human family might be preferred before themselves unless they repented and reformed.

Jesus also was unimpressed by mere claims to special heritage. He said the following to his Jewish believers:

John 8:37 - 40
37 I know that ye are Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.
38 ¶ I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father.
39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.

Some of the more antagonistic Jews wondered out loud about the ancestral heritage of Jesus.

Bible in Basic English: John 8: 48
48 The Jews said to him in answer, Are we not right in saying that you are of Samaria and have an evil spirit?

Jesus may have had some ancestors outside of Judaism!! So, in the following verse Jesus only denied that he had an evil spirit:

Bible in Basic English: John 8: 49
49 And this was the answer of Jesus: I have not an evil spirit; but I give honour to my Father and you do not give honour to me.

But, then Jesus said:

John 8:56 - 59
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw [it], and was glad.
57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself … .

Jesus was saying, to paraphrase, “It matters not how I derive from Abraham, because before Abraham was, I am.”

*****

The genealogy of Jesus through his step-father Joseph is complex and interesting. His royal descent from King David was a Messianic necessity. The Messiah needed to be a scion of David (e.g., 1 Chron. 17:12-13), but how was Jesus connected to David? The genealogical details are given in Matthew 1, which goes back to king David and the prophet Abraham. This genealogy is predominantly patrilineal (father to son), but there are a few women named who appear to be non-Jewish ancestors of Jesus (see: Richard Bauckham, Gospel Women , Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, May 2002, chapter 2, especially p. 42). These women are:

1) Tamar or Thamar, daughter-in-law of Judah (1 Chron. 2:4; Matt. 1:3): She had an ethnicity that was ambiguous at best (Bauckham, p. 33). The sordid story of Tamar and Judah (see Genesis 38) appears to take place in a Canaanite town, Adullam. Therefore, the best guess to her ethnicity is Canaanite.

2) Rahab or Rachab (Matthew 1:5): She was a repentant harlot (Joshua 2:1) who helped two Israeli spies escape from Jericho. Some traditions (but NOT the Old Testament) relate one of the spies as being Salmon (an ancestor of David and Jesus), who Rahab is said to have married (see: Bauckham, p. 37). (Other traditions indicate Rahab was married to Joshua). Because Rahab was from Jericho, she is often referred to as a Canaanite.

3) Ruth (Matthew 1:5): She clearly is identified as a Moabite (e.g., Ruth 1:3).

4) Bathsheba (Matthew 1:6): She is presumed to be a Hittite, since she is identified as being the wife of Uriah the Hittite (e.g., 2 Samuel 11:3).

*****

From the details given above, it is likely that Jesus had some non-Jewish ancestors at least through his stepfather Joseph. Of the four possibilities mentioned above, it was Ruth who had the most unambiguous ethnicity.

Jesus was a descendant of Ruth. Ruth married the wealthy Boaz, and they had a son Obed, who was the father of Jesse, and Jesse was the father of King David (LDS Bible Dictionary: "Jesse," p. 713; "Obed," p. 739; "Ruth," p. 764). Boaz was a prince of the House of Judah through his father, Salmon (or Salma). His mother was presumably was the Old Testament character of Rahab (or Rachab in Matthew 1).

As alluded above, Rahab had her own interesting story (see Joshua 2 and 6). In the battle for Jericho, Rahab saved two of Joshua’s spies. When the city fell, Rahab and her family were saved (see Joshua 6:17).

The Apostle Paul recounted the story of Rahab:

Hebrews 11:30 - 31
30 By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, after they were compassed about seven days.
31 By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.

Rahab and her family were then incorporated into the tribe of Judah, where she may have married Salmon to give birth to Boaz (Ruth 4:21; 1 Chron. 2:11; Matt. 1:5). To put things bluntly, Boaz, a prince and a possible son of a former prostitute, married Ruth, a despised Moabite foreigner.

The stories of "Judah and Tamar" (Genesis 38) and "David and Bathsheba" (2 Samuel 11) are Bible classics, primarily because of their "soap opera-like" details. To keep this essay's PG-13 rating, these stories will not be summarized.

These were the ancestors of Jesus. The lesson to be derived is that all people have the capacity to become part of God. Further, Jesus was an heir of David through his stepfather Joseph.

*****

Jesus had no concern for social status. Jesus stood for getting rid of prejudices, especially those based in race and heritage:

Spencer W. Kimball, Faith Precedes the Miracle, p.294 - p.295
The Lord would have eliminated bigotry and class distinction. He talked to the Samaritan woman at the well, healed the centurion's kin, and blessed the child of the Canaanitish woman. And though he personally came to the "lost sheep of the House of Israel" and sent his apostles first to them rather than to the Samaritans and other gentiles, yet he later sent Paul to bring the gospel to the gentiles and revealed to Peter that the gospel was for all. The prejudices were deep rooted in Peter, and it took a vision from heaven to help him cast off his bias.

Ancestry does not count as righteousness. All are equal before God. This having been said, there are elements of the priesthood that have an ancestral element. Consider the following:

Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 5: 216 - 217, September 6, 1856
Now, I will refer to brother Brigham, brother Heber, brother Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, Bishop N. K. Whitney, and lots of other men. Brother Joseph actually saw those men in vision; he saw us in a day when we were all together. We have been separated by marriage and thrown apart; but he saw the day when we all came out of one stock, and that was out of the aristocracy. Yes, we came directly down through the Prophets, and not only us, but lots of others--the whole Smith race. I could remember probably twenty or thirty that Joseph mentioned came down through that channel. …

There is another thing that brother Joseph said--viz., that we were positively heirs of the Priesthood; for he had seen us as such in his vision; yes, just as much so as my children are that have been born since I received my endowment. Our fathers were heirs to that Priesthood, which was handed down from father to son, and we came through that lineage.

The importance of bloodline (at least in this initial stage of Church history) parallels the significance of Davidic lineage necessary for the Messiah. The use of specific lineages as a source of leadership may be difficult for modern readers to understand, but the principle is taught in the Book of Mormon:

2 Nephi 3:6, 15
6 For Joseph truly testified, saying: A seer shall the Lord my God raise up, who shall be a choice seer unto the fruit of my loins. …

15 And his name shall be called after me; and it shall be after the name of his father. And he shall be like unto me;

Further, the Levitical priesthood has an inherited element.

Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p.88 BIRTHRIGHT
From Aaron to the coming of John the Baptist, the high priests in Israel served in their presiding offices (of the Aaronic order) because they were descendants of Aaron. The office of Presiding Bishop in the Church today is of comparable hereditary nature, although the Lord has not so far designated the lineage in which the right to such office rests. (D. & C. 68:14-24.) The right to hold the Levitical Priesthood anciently was limited to the sons of Levi, who thus gained their priesthood prerogatives by birth. In the meridian of time our Lord altered this system and spread this Aaronic order of authority among worthy male members of the Church generally. (1 Tim. 3:1-13.)

To be sure, family relationships in the Church have generated a royal priesthood:

1 Peter 2:9
9 But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Foreordained individuals often may come from a particular heritage. Is this something to brag about? No! Is lineage a necessary or sufficient qualification for modern leadership? No! Besides, Church leaders are servants, not dictators.

*****

Paul was clear that genealogy afforded no special privilege in the eternal scheme of things, because God’s grace extended to all who are faithful:

Romans 4:1
1 ¶ WHAT shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God.
3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

The verses above contain a quotation from the Old Testament given below:

Genesis 15:6
6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

We need to always remember that mere acts of faith are the first steps in righteousness. But, Paul was saying even more than this. He was saying even non-Jews should inherit the blessings of Abraham:

Galatians 3:6 - 9
6 ¶ Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.
8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, [saying], In thee shall all nations be blessed.
9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

Now days, we refer to being “adopted into the House of Israel.” I am sure Paul would have agreed with that language, at least in principle.

No matter how we are related to Abraham, literally or by adoption, we must do the same thing that Abraham did:

Hebrews 11:8
8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

Even though it is pretty clear that there was a “grace versus works” debate among the original Twelve Apostles, Paul, based on the verse above, might have partially agreed with James’ argument below:

James 2:21 - 24
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

The following two verses, ending the chapter, are as follows from a modern translation:

New Century Version : James 2:25-26
25 Another example is Rahab, a prostitute, who was made right with God by something she did. She welcomed the spies into her home and helped them escape by a different road.
26 Just as a person's body that does not have a spirit is dead, so faith that does nothing is dead!

Faith (meaning confidence in the LORD, grace, and atonement) mixed with human works transcends all earthly lineages, because such a formula transforms everyone into children of Christ (Mosiah 5:7).

*****

NOTE: In any Christian church we are taught the two great commandments: 1) Love God; and 2) Love thy neighbor as thyself (Matthew 22:36-37). Those specific ties are strengthened and sealed (made eternal) in modern operating Latter-day Saint temples, in which ordinances of the Melchizedek priesthood are performed.

Such ordinances include eternal marriage (a man to a woman); sealings (offspring to parents for eternity); and initiatory work on behalf of the dead. Such work builds love of families and neighbors, but there is a SINGLE overarching theme no matter where one is working in the temple: LOVE OF GOD.

For further information about temples, please see this official LDS site: The House of the Lord.

*****

"Nauvoo Temple" photo by C. Faux, Copyright 2005, used by permission. All Rights Reserved.

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

1949/1964 Bible in Basic English
-- Public Domain.
The Bible In Basic English was printed in 1965 by Cambridge Press in England.

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

Mover of History: Dwight D. Eisenhower

A Religious Man and a Friend to the Mormons

General Dwight Eisenhower, the man who beat Hitler

Which man had the biggest impact on the course of history in the 20th century? My argument would be for the man who beat Hitler: Dwight D. Eisenhower. Given the importance of the man, it is a good thing that religious prejudices were not allowed to hold sway.

For most of Dwight's childhood, he was raised as an early version of a Jehovah's Witness in "Watchtower" theology. (See a most fascinating paper by Jerry Bergman, PhD, "Why President Eisenhower Hid His Jehovah's Witness Upbringing"). His mother was an active Witness from about 1895 until her death in 1946. His father discontinued heavy involvement after 1915. Clearly, the religion did not "take" in Dwight, who pursued a military career, which violated the church doctrine of his parents.

One must wonder how Dwight's later prominence as a military General and as President would have fared under the scrutiny of a modern media. His religious upbringing would have received a constant barrage in the daily political talk shows now found on cable TV. Yet, in his own time, Eisenhower effectively hid the precise nature of his religious upbringing. His parents were described as Bible fundamentalists or "students." Although Dwight was not a Jehovah's Witness, the religion had a significant influence on him, especially in his early years.

[As an aside: Religious prejudices seem to be at a high pitch today. Can Latter-day Saint parents honestly teach their children that they could be President someday? It is a sad commentary.]

When Eisenhower was sworn into the office of the President of the United States, he took his oath on his "West Point Bible," which was opened to the following verse:

King James Version : Psalm 33:12
12 Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.

While President, he attended and joined the Presbyterian church. This was his first formal relationship with a religion since his childhood.

Perhaps because of his early religious upbringing, President, Eisenhower had an excellent relationship with the Mormons. His Secretary of Agriculture for eight years was Ezra Taft Benson. Also, serving for the duration of his Presidency was Ivy Baker Priest, as U.S. Treasurer. She also was a Latter-day Saint.

It is worth noting that Eisenhower's cabinet meetings began with prayer, and sometimes Ezra Taft Benson performed that service. In fact the Ensign gives credit to President Benson for instigating the practice in the Eisenhower administration. To me, our highest governmental leaders need all the prayers they can get.

On June 14, 1954, Eisenhower signed a bill adding the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance. He was not the creator of the idea, but he played a key supporting role.

*****

I cannot get enough good stories about Dwight Eisenhower. Previously posted on Mormon Insights is an essay about Eisenhower at Camp Meade, when he was a young military officer.

What follows are some of my favorite stories concerning his later adult years as a General and as a President.

*****

Story #1:

Dwight Eisenhower and his son military John Eisenhower had some fascinating interactions. John had just graduated from West Point when General Dwight Eisenhower was Supreme Commander of the military and allied forces in the European theater in WWII. General Eisenhower was not able to attend his son’s graduation because of D-Day, June 6th, 1944. The graduation was June 5th, so obviously General Eisenhower had other priorities. However, arrangements were made to have John come to Europe soon thereafter. When John arrived in London he was full of questions, and the testy responses of his father seemed to indicate the questions were bothersome. For example, John asked his father the following while they were on a walk together in headquarters: “If we should meet an officer who ranks above me but below you, how do we handle this?" He wondered out loud whether he should salute first, wait for the return salute, and then his father should salute last. The General snarled, “Son, there isn’t an officer in this theater who doesn’t rank above you and below me.” (See: Doug Wead, All the President's Children, New York: Atria, 2004, p. 216

Later, John was driving with his father on the beaches of Normandy only about a week after D-Day. Army vehicles were all over the place, it was bumper to bumper on the roads. “Dad, all this traffic violates the doctrines I was taught at Westpoint. A few planes with bombs could take out dozens of vehicles. You’d never get away with this if you didn’t have air supremacy.” His General dad barked back, “Son, If I didn’t have air supremacy I wouldn’t be here.” (See: S. E. Ambrose, D-day June 6, 1944, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994, p. 239 footnote; emphasis mine).

Story #2:

Why was Eisenhower a great general? One reason was that his soldiers were trained to think, although this quality was also a natural part of being an American.

Eisenhower made the critical decision for the allied expeditionary force to attack Normandy on June 6th, 1944, despite the very questionable weather. The decision changed the course of the war – partly by luck.

On that D-day, the German General Rommel was gone from Normandy to celebrate his wife’s birthday. When the U.S. attacked, the German Army could not maneuver because they had to wait for orders that never came. The German soldiers were taught obedience to such a degree that they could not act on their own. By contrast, when the American paratroopers were scattered for dozens of miles by wind and premature drops, the troops and their original plans became all mixed up. The heavy radio packs had been ripped off the backs of the soldiers as they jumped out of the planes into the wind. Now in small groups and without communications, these soldiers, as true Americans, merely reorganized on the ground. They knew they had to attack Germans. They did not wait for orders. They just formed new plans and attacked. Even groups consisting of only lowly Privates did this. Thinking minds always win.

About a month after D-day under General Eisenhower's direction, Normandy was full of troops – about a million soldiers (number of divisions included 13 American, 11 British and 1 Canadian). (See: In Review: Pictures I've Kept, New York: Doubleday, 1969, p. 69). The course of history was changed.

Story #3:

Dwight Eisenhower became President of the U.S. on January 21, 1953. He was a Republican and he was replacing a great President, Harry Truman, who was an avid Democrat. On Inauguration day the Presidents Eisenhower and Truman were riding in the same car along Pennsylvania Avenue. Eisenhower turned to Truman and asked, “Who ordered my son John back from Korea for the Inauguration?” (John was serving in the Korean war). Truman snapped back, “I did.” Truman was a class act. (See: In Review: Pictures I've Kept, New York: Doubleday, 1969, p. 129).

Story #4:

Late in the evening of the 22nd, President Eisenhower spent his first full day in the Oval Office of the White House. It was late in the evening when the President got a call from General Omar Bradley, now Joint Chief of Staff Chairman. They had served in the Army together since they were cadets at Westpoint. Eisenhower wrote (In Review: Pictures I've Kept, New York: Doubleday, 1969, p. 126):

Hanging up the receiver, I turned to my secretary, Mrs. Ann C. Whitman. “I’ve just learned a lesson from Omar Bradley,” I said. “He addressed me over the phone as ‘Mr. President.’”

My telephone conversation was not with a stranger or short-time acquaintance – it was with a man who for forty years had called me “Ike,” as I had called him “Brad.” His saluation put me on notice: from then onward, for as long as I held office, I would, except for my family, to a very definite degree be separated from all others, including my oldest and best friends. I would be far more alone now than when commanding the Allied Forces in Europe in World War II.

Salutations matter. That is, the titles that we use for officers are recognition of accomplishment and sacrifice. Such signs of respect have sometimes gone out of favor. By the way, my highest title and rank is “Dad.”

*****

[Side note: For a good picture of the son Lt. John Eisenhower, see: dwighteisenhower.com].

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

Melchizedek as a Type and Shadow

Melchizedek as a figure in the Bible is mentioned only a few times (e.g., Genesis 14: 17-24; Hebrews 5, 6 and 7), but a very important verse in Psalms using the name of Melchizedek gives this allusion to Christ and his priesthood:

Psalms 110:4
4 The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

There is an eternal priesthood connected to Melchizedek, but the Bible only teases us with hints. Is there more to be had?

*****

Ancient sources on Melchizdek from the Dead Sea Scrolls (containing both Biblical and non-Biblical texts) and the Nag Hammadi papers do NOT always have the authority or accuracy of canonized scripture, and yet it would be a very large mistake to ignore them. They often provide tidbits of convergent validity to both the Bible and Book of Mormon. The tiny evidences of support tend to add up, establishing important correlations in ancient theologies. Here is just one example:

Concerning the last days, 3 Nephi 20:40 from the Book of Mormon reads:

40 And then shall they say: How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings unto them, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings unto them of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion: Thy God Reigneth!

This verse is a citation of Isaiah 52:7, which is further quoted in the Dead Sea Scrolls in fragment 11QMelch, also known as 11Q13, which is about the coming judgment of Melchizedek, who will make a great atonement. This famous ancient fragment explains the Isaiah verse with this interpretation (A New Translation: The Dead Sea Scrolls by M. Wise, M. Abegg, and E. Cook, 2005, p. 592), “The mountains are the prophets, they who were sent to proclaim God's truth and to prophesy to all Israel.” (See also: Jin Yang Kim's excellent analysis in his essay: Melchizedek in 11Q13, which provides a translation of the fragment).

This ancient text makes clear the exalted roles of prophets and Melchizedek. The LDS Church proclaims fulfillment of the words found in 3 Ne. 20:40 and Isaiah 52:7.

In both the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammadi papers, Melchizedek is represented as an agent of eternal priesthood linked with God's deliverance. For example,

From "Melchizedek" in: James M. Robinson, ed., The Nag Hammadi Library, revised edition. HarperCollins, San Francisco, 1990. Translated by Søren Giversen and Birger A. Pearson
"For I have a name: I am Melchizedek, the Priest of God Most High; I know that it is I who am truly the image of the true High-Priest of God Most High… ."

11Q13 (A New Translation: The Dead Sea Scrolls by M. Wise, M. Abegg, and E. Cook, 2005, p. 592-593) describes Melchizedek as a type of Messiah:

Melchizedek will thoroughly prosecute the vengeance required by God's statutes. …

And "the messenger" is the Anointed of the Spirit, of whom Daniel spoke, "After sixty-two weeks, an Anointed One shall be cut off" [Dan. 9:26]. The "messenger who brings good news, who announces salvation" is the one of whom it is written, "to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor; the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all who mourn" [Isa. 61:2].

The Book of Mormon also recognizes the spiritual status of Melchizedek. For example:

Alma 13:14
14 Yea, humble yourselves even as the people in the days of Melchizedek, who was also a high priest after this same order which I have spoken, who also took upon him the high priesthood forever.

In the Book of Mormon, the book of Mosiah uses the phrase "type and shadows" (see 3:15; 13:10, 31; 16:14; see also, Colosians 2:17 and Hebrews 10:1). One verse in Mosiah reads:

Mosiah 3:15
15 And many signs, and wonders, and types, and shadows showed he [the Lord God] unto them, concerning his coming … .

Clearly, Melchizedek is a type and a shadow of the Messiah.

*****

Somehow, Joseph Smith in the early 1830s understood this connection. A Melchizedek priesthood was reestablished that contained duties and authorities that went well beyond the lower priesthood, called Aaronic and Levitical. This Melchizedek priesthood was defined in the following manner:

Doctrine & Covenants 107: 1-5
1 THERE are, in the church, two priesthoods, namely, the Melchizedek and Aaronic, including the Levitical Priesthood.
2 Why the first is called the Melchizedek Priesthood is because Melchizedek was such a great high priest.
3 Before his day it was called the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God.
4 But out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name, they, the church, in ancient days, called that priesthood after Melchizedek, or the Melchizedek Priesthood.
5 All other authorities or offices in the church are appendages to this priesthood.

For additional connections of this priesthood to the Son of God, see D&C 76:57 and 124:123.

*****

Latter-day Saints are not the only ones who understand the intimate connection between Christ and the Melchizedek priesthood. Of course, the connection is rather spelled out in Hebrews:

New Century Version: Hebrews 6: 19-20
19 We have this hope as an anchor for the soul, sure and strong. It enters behind the curtain in the Most Holy Place in heaven, 20 where Jesus has gone ahead of us and for us. He has become the high priest forever, a priest like Melchizedek.

Margaret Barker (the non-LDS theologian of Newtonian proportions) in her recent book Temple Themes in Christian Worship (London: T&T Clark International, 2007) states, p. 98:

The [earliest] Christians worshipped the LORD, the God of Israel. They knew … the ways of the original temple and restored them. They proclaimed Jesus as the great High Priest, the LORD, Melchizedek, the Son of God Most High, Immanuel, God with us.

Latter-day Saints share much knowledge with others, but within the Church is the great fulfillment, the authority, and the order of Melchizedek. The Church brings alive what can only be hinted elsewhere.

*****

Post Script:

My perspective on Melchizedek is narrow and limited. It is very useful to examine other LDS and non-LDS literatures. I highly recommend Margaret Barker's scholarship, but other fascinating non-LDS sources can be found at Virtual_Religion. Intriguing is the work of non-LDS theologian Paul Sumner of Hebrew-streams.org, who recognizes the importance of the heavenly council, and who distinguishes Jesus from God the Father. See his analysis of 11Q13 in a post entitled: Melchizedek: Angel, Man, or Messiah? Also, he has a interesting paper entitled: “Messianic” Texts at Qumran. I will leave it to better theologians to provide an analysis of these fascinating works.

*****

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 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

Intelligent Obedience:

Behavior that Comes from the Deepest Wells of Morality

Stain glass depiction of the Tree of Life from the LDS Conference Center. Also shown: the white fruit, the iron rod, and the mist of darkness.
See: 1 Nephi 8.

Mindless or blind obedience is not the kind of obedience that God is requesting. Latter-day Saints are expected to be informed citizens who behave intelligently and who use good judgment.

Neal A. Maxwell, We Will Prove Them Herewith, p.21-22
The Church does not desire blind obedience; rather, that we see things with the eye of faith. (Ether 12:19.) Elder John A. Widtsoe observed: "The doctrine of the Church cannot be fully understood unless it is tested by mind and feelings, by intellect and emotions, by every power of the investigator. . . . There is no place in the Church for blind adherence."

Besides, real obedience is not blind. It reflects the reassurances of previous tutoring experiences from the Lord, inducing us to trust Him and His prophets, again and again. … President Brigham Young put it bluntly: "I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way."

Some excellent quotations from General Authorities on the topic of intelligent obedience can be found at FAIR.

*****

Proper obedience comes from within the heart, the innermost parts of the person, and from preexisting moral foundations. Mindless obedience is simply saluting and acting upon an order without concern for the moral consequences and without receiving heavenly confirmation or disconfirmation.

Proper obedience is acting upon one’s conscience and is based upon the deepest wells of one’s morality. Mindless obedience has only one moral: “Do what you are told.”

If obedience to rules was all there were to life and religion, then there would be no need for the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit teaches us and guides us because every situation is a little different. We cannot be commanded in all things by rules that sometimes have exceptions.

Moses (prior to obtaining the 10 Commandments) killed an Egyptian:

Exodus 2:11 – 12
11 ¶ And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren.
12 And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that [there was] no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand.

Notice that he felt like he had to look “this way and that way.” Moses made a deliberate act on his own to save one of his brethren. Did he do the “right” thing? Probably yes, but Moses felt responsible for his action. He pursued a course in which he hoped no one was watching, and he hid the body in the sand.

Was it right for Nephi to kill drunk and unconscious Laban?

1 Nephi 4:7 – 18
7 Nevertheless I went forth, and as I came near unto the house of Laban I beheld a man, and he had fallen to the earth … drunken with wine.
8 And when I came to him I found that it was Laban.
9 And I beheld his sword, and I drew it forth from the sheath … .
10 … Never at any time have I shed the blood of man. And I shrunk and would that I might not slay him.
11 And the Spirit said unto me again: Behold the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands. …
12 And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me again: Slay him… ;
13 Behold the Lord slayeth the wicked to bring forth his righteous purposes. It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief.
14 And now, when I, Nephi, had heard these words, I remembered … : Inasmuch as thy seed shall keep my commandments, they shall prosper in the land of promise.
15 Yea, and I also thought that they could not keep the commandments of the Lord according to the law of Moses, save they should have the law.
16 And I also knew that the law was engraven upon the plates of brass.
17 And again, I knew that the Lord had delivered Laban into my hands for this cause--that I might obtain the records according to his commandments.
18 Therefore I did obey the voice of the Spirit, and took Laban by the hair of the head, and I smote off his head with his own sword.

Whether right or wrong, Nephi’s act was deliberate. He hesitated before the killing as if to ask himself, “Do I really want to go through with this?” (See: England, Eugene. “Why Nephi Killed Laban: Reflections on the Truth of the Book of Mormon.” Dialogue 22 (3) Fall 1989: 32-51).

J. W. Welch, "Hugh Nibley and the Book of Mormon," Insights, Neal A. Maxwell Institute, Brigham Young University
[Hugh Nibley] never wearied of telling how the Arab students [particularly those in the 1950s], to whom he taught the Book of Mormon at Brigham Young University, reacted favorably to cultural elements contained in this book of scripture. Sometimes their reactions were not even to be anticipated. For example, as the class one day read the account of Nephi's slaying of Laban, they became skeptical. It turned out that their interest was not in what had justified Nephi's slaying of Laban, an extraordinary act in the mind of most Westerners, but why he had waited and debated so long!

“Thou shalt not kill” is one of the 10 commandments, but there are times when other issues are more important. Even so, note that both Moses and Nephi acted upon their consciences, even to the point of hesitating before killing. They were not blindly following some order. They knew what they were doing and why they were doing it. As such, I presume they were also willing to suffer any consequences.

Please note: It takes an extraordinary set of moral circumstances in order for killing to ever be justified. Our scriptures say nothing less.

*****

There are NO perfect prophets. Peter denied Jesus three times. Paul, as Saul a non-Christian, persecuted the Church and possibly was an accessory at the stoning of Stephen:

Acts 7:57 – Acts 8:1
57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,
58 And cast [him] out of the city, and stoned [him]: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul.
59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon [God], and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.
60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
Acts 8:1
1 ¶ AND Saul was consenting unto his death.

Who knows how many deaths Saul (Paul) could have prevented? No wonder he was such a strong believer in grace. Grace fell all over him (like Alma the younger), and he needed every bit of it.

We do carefully listen to our Apostles and Prophets, but we do not worship them. Their office is to be respected, and their words as prophets are to be studied. However, only Jesus is our commander-in-chief. Only Jesus can fulfill that role.

*****

German soldiers during World War II blindly obeyed orders and gassed millions of Jews in concentration camps. When asked, the men who pulled the gas levers said they were merely obeying orders from their military superiors. The lever-pullers committed crimes and atrocities, even though they believed they were not responsible.

Being a follower does NOT absolve responsibility. We are always responsible, especially to God, for our actions. God expects us to use our FULL brains.

*****

Perhaps no one sees more death than a heart surgeon. Thus, it is fortunate for us that we have an Apostle who is a former surgeon. Read the following excerpt:

Excerpt: Carrie A. Moore, April 15, 2006, “Death is part of life, ex-surgeon says,” Deseret Morning News
Latter-day Saints who have heard Elder [Russell M.] Nelson's sermons will recall the analogy of the glove — which only comes to life when a person's hand fits snugly inside, much like he describes a distinct body and spirit. …

Those whose bodies have died have often described to the surgeon how they saw him "struggling over their body trying to bring them back, watching as though they were a third party. …

He has observed both patients and family members who have experienced what can only be described as visitations from deceased relatives shortly before their own deaths, and said he is absolutely certain his first wife not only lives in another realm, but she is often close by. There is no diminishing such experiences as mere imagining or wishful thinking, he said.

"I have felt her presence beside me on very sacred and special occasions. I don't have to hear a voice or see a face to know that someone is there."

Elder Nelson’s spiritual experiences are very similar to the way God communicates with us in general – by a still, small voice.

Look for the spiritual symbolism given below. God is ready and able to lead the way:

Exodus 13:21 [brackets are mine]
21 And the LORD went before them [the Children of Israel] by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:

Proverbs 6:23
23 For the commandment [is] a lamp; and the law [is] light; and reproofs of instruction [are] the way of life:

Isaiah 42:16
16 And I will bring the blind by a way [that] they knew not; I will lead them in paths [that] they have not known: I will make darkness light before them, and crooked things straight. These things will I do unto them, and not forsake them.

John 14:6
6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Alma 38:9
9 And now, my son, I have told you this that ye may learn wisdom, that ye may learn of me that there is no other way or means whereby man can be saved, only in and through Christ. Behold, he is the life and the light of the world. Behold, he is the word of truth and righteousness.

D&C 84:45
45 For the word of the Lord is truth, and whatsoever is truth is light, and whatsoever is light is Spirit, even the Spirit of Jesus Christ.

It only makes sense to me that we should move toward the light. If we are confused as to where to go, then we should pray.

*****

We should obey God, not men. Read below:

Acts 5: 29
29 Then Peter and the [other] apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

We know we need to obey governments, when they do not contradict God’s rules. Jesus would also say that governments should never give its people immoral orders. Read the following and its preceding verses:

Luke 20: 25
25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.

The meaning of Luke 20:25 is a little tricky. If you look at the preceding verses, Jesus asked for a coin, which had the printed image of Caesar and perhaps a declaration that Caesar was the son of God. Jesus then was saying, “Give back to Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and give back to God the things which are God’s. In effect, Jesus was reminding his listeners that all things are God’s. But, also he wanted his listeners to ask themselves the question, “Who is my God, Caesar or Father in Heaven?” I think in a subtle way Jesus was teaching to obey God rather than man.

*****

When we follow the Lord's commandments, our minds are expanded, not constricted. When we follow these commandments our powers of decision and our powers of wisdom are greatly increased, not diminished. In other words, the truth makes us free and non-truths bind us.

We are not on this earth to be mindless. We are on this earth to come to understand our Eternal Father, and to learn to be like him.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

My ALMOST Personal Interaction with Hugh Nibley

Eight point star by S.Faux inspired by
the sign of Melchizedek

When my wife and I were courting and starting to get serious in our dating relationship, it was in the late 1970s at BYU. I was a young graduate student, with a strong desire to be immersed in all things intellectual. Therefore, our first dates were of the highest order of the brain.

Our very first date was a birding trip. We drove out to Provo Lake early one morning with our binoculars and identified nearly 100 different bird species. We both seemed full of energy and dedication to ecology on the break of that day. We were trying to impress each other, no doubt. We have never gone birding since – so much for the airs of ecological commitment.

On another date, shortly after the birding trip, I learned for the first time that my future wife was completely uninhibited around professors in pushing her own agenda, a trait worth remembering for the last story about Nibley. We went together to hear the famous "Dinosaur" Jim Jensen speak on campus to a very small group of about a dozen people. Professor Jensen spoke of his work in paleogeology and his many dinosaurs fossil finds. At the end of the meeting while Jim Jensen was taking questions from the audience, my wife asked him out of the blue: "What do you think about the rumors of a Sasquatch or Bigfoot? Is there any chance there could be a second living hominid species besides humans?"

Well, I was astonished at the bravery of her question, but also maybe a little bit embarrassed. What did Bigfoot have to do with dinosaurs? I would have NEVER asked such a question. In any case, I learned a lesson. Jim Jensen answered her question in a most gentlemanly manner for about five minutes, explaining the lack of evidence but also what kind of evidence would be scientifically required to make a proper case. He was a most impressive man and LDS scientist.

*****

During the times I was not out on dates with my future wife, I was a serious doctoral student with plans to be a college professor some day. Although religion classes were not part of my graduate curriculum at BYU, I still enjoyed sitting in and listening to some of the top BYU religion professors. Naturally, I attended some of Hugh Nibley's classes. They were large and it was easy to blend in.

Professor Nibley gave his lectures without notes, although sometimes he would read brief passages from a book he had brought to class. Mostly, he quoted from the top of his head. That is, everything was memorized. He cited everything from ancient sources in Latin and Greek to the most recent Scientific American, which seemed to be a favorite read of his.

I loved his interactions with students. One day he returned students' essay papers. He told them, "After reading your papers only one word comes to mind: jejune." I had to go home and look up the word, and then I got the joke.

By the way, I am NOT counting these class visits as my one "ALMOST" personal interaction.

*****

Hugh Nibley was not just a "walking encyclopedia," he was a "walking Internet." It seemed that there was no question for which he did not have an intelligent response. Surely, he had his deficiencies, but they were not readily apparent to even the most advanced college student.

Another "data point" to my mental file on Hugh Nibley was recently added while reading TempleStudy.com by Bryce Hammond. Brother Bryce's site now has a series of fascinating posts on the topic of the "Seal of Melchizedek." Within TempleStudy is a discussion about how the San Diego Temple is configured around a simple symbol, which Nibley identified as a seal of Melchizedek.

[The seal is a regular star polygon with the Schläfli parameters of {8/2}. All possible eight-point stars can be seen here and here, but not all possibilities are necessarily consistent with seals of Melchizedek.]

Evidently, the temple designer created the symbol on his own as an architectural device, but others wondered if the symbol might have greater significance. The symbol was then shown to Nibley (according to Bryce Hammond's report), and Nibley said, “Oh sure, it is the seal of King Melchizedek.” Again, this is a must read over at TempleStudy.com.

When I read these words attributed to Nibley, it reminded me of my own story about him.

*****


A modern coin with Egyptian symbols

This story begins after my future wife and I had been dating for several months while at BYU. She became interested in a coin (something like the one shown above) given to me by an uncle who liked to treasure hunt using a metal detector. He had found the coin on the outskirts of Provo, and it bore some Egyptian symbols. He had given me the coin, and he told me if I should ever have a chance to show it to some of the Egyptian scholars on campus, then he would appreciate it. To placate him, I took the coin and said I might, but I did not think there was anything interesting about the coin. I did carry it around with me for a while.

On a Friday night, my future wife and I decided to go to the foreign film being shown. I am quite confident the film was "Dersu Uzala," which is a film every adult ought to see. Be forewarned that it uses subtitles. The film was being shown in one of the classroom auditoriums at BYU.

We arrived about 20 minutes early, and we were just sitting and were a bit bored. All of a sudden I turned around and noticed that Hugh Nibley was sitting behind us by about three rows. He was sitting by himself. I then informed my date (my future wife) that Nibley was behind us.

It is interesting what one learns about personalities while dating. I learned that my date had no hesitation to express her opinion about what I should do.

She said, "You need to take that coin and show it to Hugh Nibley, since we are just sitting here doing nothing. He isn't busy either."

I said, "No, I don't want to embarrass myself. The coin has no significance."

She said, "How do you know? Maybe it has a tie to the Book of Mormon?"

I said, "There is zero chance of that."

She said, "Well, if you are NOT going to talk to him, then I am. Besides you promised your uncle."

I said, "This I got to see." So, I pulled out the coin and gave it to her.

Within seconds she was seated next to Hugh Nibley, and they were having an intense conversation, going back and forth. Nibley held the coin up and examined both sides. I could tell both of them were chuckling and smiling, but I could not hear a word. There was too much noise from the growing audience members, and Nibley and my date were seated too far away. I began to feel left out.

I would say about five minutes past, and then she returned.

"What happened?" I asked.

She said, "Well, I told him we had this old Egyptian coin that was found underground here in Provo, and I wondered whether it was ancient."

"And what did he say?"

"He said, 'Oh, no, the coin is a few decades old, early 1900s. Carnivals used to give it away by the thousands.' "

Perhaps with a tone of superiority, I stated: "Told ya."

But, she retorted, "Yeah, but you did not have the guts to ask him."

Tou·ché.

And thus we got married.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

Prejudices Against the Mormon Handcart Pioneers

"Handcart Company," by a handcart pioneer:
C. C. A. Christensen (circa 1900)

Religious prejudice, like most any form of social discrimination, can be particularly debilitating. People long to be accepted, not rejected. In this context, it is particular impressive that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints survived in it earliest years in the 19th century. It not only survived, but it thrived. Some converts (usually called "Mormons") from Europe were even willing to travel part of the way pulling a handcart to get to their Zion in the Utah Valley. In this essay, a brief examination will be made of the treatment of the "handcart Mormons" as they outfitted and crossed the Iowa plains.

During 1856 to 1860 about 3,000 Mormons joined ten handcart companies, departing either from Iowa City, Iowa, (traveling 1,300 miles) or from Omaha (then Florence), Nebraska (traveling about 1,000 miles). The first seven companies of 1856-57 traveled by train to Iowa City where they were outfitted with handcarts and supplies before departing. These handcart Mormons were primarily converts from England and Scandinavia.

The handcarts were made of wood, usually carrying less than 100 pounds of baggage. There was roughly one handcart per family, about four or five people. Each company of about 300 people had about 65 handcarts and about 5 large supply wagons pulled by oxen.

They were a conspicuous bunch, not only because of their method of travel, but also because their handcarts often displayed banners with religious slogans declaring their earnest but bold intentions.

Social Perceptions of Mormons in 1856-57
Negative social perceptions followed the Mormon Church since its inception in 1830. By the 1850s anti-Mormon feelings had reached a fevered pitch. First, in 1852 the Mormons publicly announced its practice of plural marriage or polygamy (multiple wives to one husband). In 1856 Utah territory (then called "Deseret") applied for statehood, raising polygamy as a political issue in the presidential campaign then underway. About the same time the church came into direct conflict with the non-Mormon judicial system in Utah territory, convincing President Buchanan that Mormons were in a state of rebellion. To restore order, U.S. troops were sent on an expedition to Salt Lake City. By September of 1857 Brigham Young declared martial law in Utah. (On the 11th the horrendous Mountain Meadow Massacre occurred). It was in this context that the handcart pioneers made their way by train to Iowa City and then by handcart across Iowa.

This essay cannot unpack the social causes of prejudice. Objectively, Mormons were not all that different from their 19th century counterparts. Aside from the tendency to be a little clannish and their belief in scripture beyond the Bible, it was tolerance for polygamy that mostly set Mormons apart. Mormonism was seen as a fringe cult with marital practices that were a threat to society. For example, in April 25, 1857 the New York City’s Harper's Weekly, as the self-proclaimed "Journal of Civilization," argued: "The legalization of polygamy is fatal to the institution of marriage. Christianity will be practically excluded from every state which Mormonism is allowed to rule." In the same period (October 31, 1857) Harper's Weekly quoting a source described as an "escaped Mormon saint," discussed how Brigham Young sent Mormons missionaries "to conquer the world" by placing "slow" poisons in tea, liquor, and tobacco. Brigham Young, the President of the church, was viewed as an extremist and a dictator with evil intentions of bringing about ruination upon all peoples.

One must be impressed how often Iowa newspapers in 1856-57 were reporting on the movements and activities of Mormons. However, one simply looks in vain for any information about Mormons that was positive. The typical 1857 Iowa reader would not have been surprised by this report on an oration by Senator Stephen A. Douglas (Council Bluffs Nonpareil, June 27, 1857): "the Mormons [are] traitors, aliens, enemies, outlaws, lecherous scoundrels, &c., [and Brigham] Young [is] a murderer, outlaw, [and] rebel against the Union...."

Even though quiet, law-abiding, and just newly arrived from Europe, the handcart pioneers would be guilty by association because they labeled themselves Mormons. Given the social climate how could the handcart pioneers be viewed except suspiciously and disapprovingly? As one company of handcart pioneers ferried their baggage from Rock Island across the Mississippi, the local newspaper (Davenport Gazette, May 13, 1856) noted: "They were the lowest class of English, squalid and illiterate, just the kind of people that one would suppose the most apt to embrace the peculiar tenets of the Mormons."

The handcarts along with the weary appearance of the pioneers who pulled them merely added to the general problem of misperception. The Fort Des Moines Citizen (circa Sept. 18, 1856) said:

...about five hundred Mormons in silent procession [came] through our streets.... It was truly an inhuman sight to see women hitched like so many cattle to rude vehicles... while the men were walking along idle.... On their foremost waggon [sic] was perched their banner, bearing these words: "The chosen People of the Lord, bound for the promised Land."

If the typical Iowan of 1856-57 scorned Mormonism, then the handcart movement would have been one more target to express that scorn.

Treatment of the Handcart Pioneers in Iowa
While the handcart Mormons were generally treated well as they passed through Iowa, the reputation of their religion resulted in some differential treatment. A good example comes from the journal of William Woodward (July 25, 1856):

At night we were disturbed by a noise which we tho't to have come from disturbers. Some men came to search our company as they heard we had some person tied down in our wagons. The sheriff of Powisheik [sic] co. from Brooklin [sic] was authorized to look into our wagons, but found that they came on a foolish errand.

Many Iowans were worried that Mormons physically coerced some people to stay on the trek. In reality there was not the time, energy, or need for Mormons to give passage to the tied and bound. For example, Andrew Galloway's journal entry (June 20, 1856), written near Newton, conveys almost a sense of relief that one particular family absconded: "In the morning, John Lloyd, wife and family 'backed out.' He was very much given to drinking whiskey along the road."

Sometimes the worried attention of non-Mormons turned to threats. Peter Madsen noted in his diary (July 21, 1856 in Iowa County): "This evening some strangers tried to disturb us and by threats to drive us away...." Near present-day Redfield, Jesse Haven wrote (Aug. 10, 1856): "This morning we were disturbed by some people coming around us. We were insulted ... more than we had been since we left Iowa City." Given the social and physical stress, one can sympathize with those who dropped out.

Brief Conclusion
The handcart companies experienced both physical AND psychological stress. Although many people treated these handcart pioneers with kind sympathy, there were others who treated them like abhorrent scoundrels. Understanding the social context of the handcart pioneers gives renewed appreciation for their abilities to "endure to the end."

Some References:

Andrew Galloway diary (June 9 to July 9th, 1856). In: E. R. Harlan, “First Mormon handcart trip across Iowa,” The Annals of Iowa 20 (1936), 444 - 449.

Jesse Haven diary (Aug. 4 to Aug 19, 1856). Typescript of Ms 890, Vol. 4, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City.

Peter Madsen diary (July 10 to Aug. 11, 1856). Typescript of Ms 1451, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City.

William Woodward diary (July 22 to Aug. 11, 1856). Microfilm of holograph, Ms 8306, reel 4, no. 2E, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

What Manner of Mormon Will Ye Be?

In Isaiah 66:1 (American Standard Version) Jehovah asked, "[W]hat manner of house will ye build unto me?" The risen Lord asked, "What manner of men ought ye to be?" (3 Ne. 27:27; see also 2 Peter 3:11). Such questions need to be revisited and pondered from time to time.

From time to time in various letters to my older boys, I have asked them to think about the following questions. I have NOT put words in their mouths. Instead, I have let them merely ponder the questions and reach their own answers.

Here are the questions:

1) Will you have your feet grounded on terra firma (earth) or will your head be in the ephemeral clouds of the magician and mystic?

2) Will your understanding of the scriptures be deep or will it be superficial?

3) Will you be a scholar of the gospel or a mere body taking up a seat in Sunday School?

4) Will you have the flexibility of Jesus or the rigidity of the Pharisee?

5) Will you be able to forgive those who seek to harm you or will you crush them in retribution?

6) Will you truly love all godly brothers and sisters or will you love only the LDS?

7) Will the spirit that guides you be one of wisdom or one of specious expediency?

8) Will you be able to say “NO” when it is easier to say “YES?”

9) Will your prayers come from the heart or only from your mouth?

10) Will you be devoted to speaking to God, or will you be content to let others speak for you?

Here are some brief responses of my own.

1. I believe faithful LDS members can be scientists as well as saints. There was much magic and phrenology that were fads in the 19th century. I prefer to be a 21st century Mormon. I believe in continuing revelation, which refers to advancing in all spheres of knowledge, especially religion.

2. Daily scripture study should be as essential as eating. Yes, sometimes we go on a diet, but we should never be permanently removed from the source.

3. It is easy to fall into the trap of believing that there is little LDS theology left to learn. However, a little curiosity and creativity quickly reveals vast reservoirs of knowledge that need to be tapped – for a lifetime.

4. If we needed to be commanded in all things, then there would be no need to learn from the Holy Spirit.

5. To forgive is to fore-give or pre-give, which is to bestow a blessing BEFORE it is fully deserved or earned. The atonement was the ultimate and infinite exercise in forgiveness.

6. I am intrigued by LDS blogger Ardis Parshall's post about her niece who converted from being a Latter-day Saint to being a Muslim. Ardis states, "She is my niece, and I love her." On the whole I am pleased by the comments she received on that post. Our 11th Article of Faith indicates that we respect others decision to worship what or how they may.

7. A refreshing piece of advice comes from President James E. Faust's "Communion with the Holy Spirit." Proper use, according to President Faust, requires "rules and guidelines," which involve honesty, keeping commandments, being spiritual attuned, humility, fervent prayer, and unwavering faith.

8. Obedience has its place, but so does assertiveness. To all things there is a time and place. The key is knowing when and where.

9. It is easy to offer thoughtless prayers; thought-filled prayers involve effort and sometimes hurt.

10. To Latter-day Saints, one purpose of existence is to learn to come face to face with God.

*****

How would you respond to any of the questions above?

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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 Little Miracles that Change Lives:

A Testimony Derived from Grandpa Nunally's Death

'Go into the darkness and put your hand into the hand of God
That shall be to you better than light and safer than a known way!'
--Minnie Louise Haskins

Few of us are going to witness the parting of the Red Sea. Yet, the little miracles of life can have immense importance. Sometimes our eyes must be opened to recognize the value of those little miracles.

People die. There is nothing unusual about that. But, sometimes families that endure the death of a loved one are wonderfully transformed. The transformation is one of the little miracles of life. Sometimes from horrible things (like the crucifixion) come amazing things (like the resurrection). The life and death of Christ is a great symbol for our own lives and deaths. We need to remember this lesson when tragedy occurs to our lives. (Easier said than done, I know).

My children had a beloved grandfather (Grandpa Nunally), who was the father of my wife. He joined the Church later in life, but when he did there was no doubt about where his faith was embedded. He was brain damaged due to a stroke, but he could still sing up a storm with his guitar. My favorite song of the many that he sung was "How Great Thou Art." Singing that song was his testimony, and he could never get through the song without choking up and with tears welling in his eyes. Sometimes he would just strum his guitar without singing until he could control his emotions.

Just before he died we knew he was in his last years, but little did we know he was in his last days.

One day Grandpa needed to go to the hospital. He was acting very confused (more than usual). For example, he was trying to put his wallet on his foot as a slipper. Grandma Nunally knew then and there that Grandpa had to go to the hospital. She took him to Hines VA Hospital that was on the outskirts of Chicago.

Medical tests showed that he had had a moderate heart attack. The doctors were not quite sure why Grandpa was acting confused, but while at the hospital Grandpa had snapped back to his normal self.

The doctors determined that he needed three stents placed in the arteries of his heart in order to allow the blood to move freely.

The procedure went well, but as he was resting in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU), still unconscious, his heart stopped (flat-lined). The doctors were surprised by this and worked furiously on him for 40 minutes, and then they had to declare him dead.

Now for one of the amazing events of my life: Grandma Nunally had asked me to talk with the cardiologist, a young Doctor in his thirties or so, to discuss how well the stent procedure went. I had previously talked with the Doctor on the phone when Grandpa first entered the hospital. The Doctor and I had discussed the plans to do the stent procedure days before the procedure. I told my wife that I felt real good about this procedure because stents really work well and the procedure is not very dangerous.

On the day of the procedure, I tried to phone the Doctor at Hines VA Hospital, but my phone card had expired. My wife said to me, “You don’t need to call. My Mom will understand that your phone card has expired.” I said, “No, your Mom really wants me to talk to the Doctor.” So, I drove to the store and bought a new phone card. This errand took about fifteen minutes or more.

When I got back I could not get the new phone card to work. The last digit in the PIN number was blurred on the card. So, I dialed and dialed trying different digits in the PIN. I started at “9” and worked my way backwards. Each dialing took a long time because there were so many numbers. Naturally, the correct digit that was missing was “0.”

Of course, as I was attempting to dial during this frustrating process I was complaining to anyone who would listen. As I was griping about phone cards, I was also misdialing the numbers. So, it seemed like a good ten or fifteen minutes passed just in wrestling with the phone, the PIN code, and my own curmudgeon ways.

Finally, I got through to the nurse’s desk on the hospital floor where Grandpa Nunally was stationed. A nurse answered the phone. Here is the dialogue: [I am "Dad" and my wife is "Mom." Dr. Hartshow is a completely fictional name to protect the real doctor.]

Dad: Hello. Can I speak with Dr. Hartshow?

Nurse: Dr. Hartshow cannot come to the phone right now.

Dad: I am the son-in-law of one of his patients, Jerry Nunally. He knows I want to speak with him, and we have talked before.

Nurse: (very, very hesitantly, as if hiding something) Dr. Hartshow is working on an emergency right now and cannot come to the phone.

Dad: (demanding) What’s going on? Tell me.

Nurse: I …. cannot … say.

Dad: (firmly) Tell me what’s happening?

Nurse: (very meekly) Your father-in-law has just coded. [“Coded” is short for “code blue” which means a patient’s heart has stopped].

Dad: (yelling from the kitchen to the bedroom) Mom, get on the phone!!!

Mom: I’ll get on in a minute.

Dad: No. Get on the phone now!!! [I am not sure how long we bickered, but she did get on the phone fairly quickly.]

Nurse: Do you want to talk with your mother-in-law?

Dad: YES! Put her on the phone.

Grandma Nunally: (sobbing) I just went to the car to get something for a minute. I thought I could leave him alone for just a minute. I just got back and the doctors and nurses have surrounded him and are pumping on his chest. I just cannot believe this is happening.

Grandpa’s heart had stopped literally about 30 seconds before we called.

Mom and I stayed on the phone with Grandma during the whole process. I explained to Mom and Grandma that we would know in a few minutes what was going to be the final outcome. Mom and I tried to give the best moral support we could. Mom explained to Grandma that if he died, then he would go to a better place. That seemed to comfort Grandma.

Grandma said, “You don’t have to stay on the phone and run up a big bill.” Mom and I said, “We are not going anywhere.” After about 40 minutes Dr. Hartshow very meekly announced to us on the phone that Grandpa Nunally had passed. The Doctor was truly distraught, surprised, and caught off guard. He was not used to losing patients, I think. I consoled the Doctor and thanked him. “You did everything you could.”

Mom packed that night to leave for Illinois the next morning. I am surprised that she did not leave that night. I am grateful she did not.

It is hard for me to believe that the timing of the phone call was just a coincidence. In any case, our presence on the phone was an immense comfort to Grandma Nunally, who is one of the most spiritual and temple-oriented individuals I know. God was watching over her. "Mom" and I were just little tools in the process.

*****

The funeral was just a few days later, and a second "miracle" occurred. It happened to my Son #1, who was in the Army in Denver. For a number of years he had been inactive in the Church (the term "less active" does not capture of essence of his lack of involvement). He was about to receive a wake up call from Way Upstairs!

(For a little more background information on Son #1, you are invited to read: We are ALL Prodigal Sons).

The following is from a testimonial statement in my son's own words. The context is that he was trying to fly to Chicago from Denver on the day of his Grandfather's funeral.

Testimony of Son #1 (posted by permission):

[S]omething terrible happened in my life, which would eventually show me the path to the truth of this world: my grandfather died. I just moved to [a big city far from Chicago], and still had to rely on MapQuest to find anything. So I was desperately looking for a ride to the airport. But with my flight at 6:15 a.m., and needing to get there by around 4:30am, no one would take me.

So without a ride to the airport, I naturally had to drive myself. Having never driven there before I stopped at a gas station for directions. Thankfully the employee lived near the airport, and gave me a short cut. I thought it would be a really easy drive, because I knew there would be airport signs everywhere.

So taking his advice, I was able to dodge traffic. But, as morning crept, the weather worsened and a thick fog engulfed the city. Visibility was absent completely, and I declared this fog the worse I've ever seen. As road signs past, I was only aware of their presence. The fog was so terrible I couldn't even see a road sign in front of me. Even the road lights were extremely hard to see, and I was running red lights, because I couldn't even tell if there was a street light in front of me.

My plan to follow the signs to the airport was no longer an option. My plan to follow the directions the gas attendant told me was no longer an option. I was getting so completely lost, I couldn't even tell what direction I was headed. My frustration was building, and time was of the essence, to which I had little of. So much time was passing by, I knew there was no way I was going to make my plane, and I knew I was going to miss my grandfather's funeral. I was so angry, I was about to literally start throwing things. I was literally thinking of just going back home, and accepting the fact I was going to miss my grandfather's funeral. I was at the height of anger, a literal beast chained and imprisoned by my hatred. I was willing to destroy anything and everything. I was so desperate; I had no idea what to do. So I did something, in a way like I have never done before, I prayed with seriousness of heart, showing real intent, honestly seeking guidance.

I prayed, asking not to miss my grandpa's funeral. I followed my instincts, and turned on a street that I thought was to the airport. The street turned into a ramp for the freeway, and at this point I had lost all hope. But something told me, "Follow the car in front of you."

I honestly thought I would have to call my Mom and Dad and tell them I missed my flight. I was totally prepared to start throwing things when I got home, to relieve my rage. I was sinking into a large hole of anxiety. But then the thick fog revealed a sign for airport parking! The road I was on the entire time was the correct road. I was amazed -- completely, utterly astonished! This fog was so thick, that I couldn't see one light from the airport and it's runway lights. And at 5:30 a.m. runway lights are as bright as bright gets.

Still following the car lights in front of me, the car just happened to be going to the parking lot I needed. Out of the entire airport parking lot the car led me to a parking spot, right in front of an elevator! I got out of the car and into the elevator, but still had no idea where the ticket check-in was. I still needed to get my e-ticket from the front counter.

I was prepared to sprint through the airport as soon as the elevator doors opened. To my astonishment, I just happened to be on the elevator closest to my ticket counter. The line was very short, maybe two people in front of me. When a ticket counter opened, I approached and said, "My name is ... Faux, and I have a flight to Chicago Midway at 6:15 a.m."

The ticket agent said, "Ooooo……there is a chance I might not be able to pull up your ticket. All of our e-tickets have to be accounted for 45 minutes before the flight. Otherwise the computer automatically reroutes the ticket to another flight, at the 45-minute mark. But I'll give it a shot." But before I could even look at a clock, my ticket was printing and she said, "That's strange, O well you're a lucky man."

She gave me my ticket and pointed me on my way. As I looked for a clock, her words stuck with me. "You're a lucky man." The clock read 5:40 a.m., thirty-five minutes until my flight, ten minutes after the computer was suppose to automatically change my ticket to another flight. I stepped on an escalator, and took my first sigh of relief since I awoke that morning. I looked down at my feet and said, "You're a lucky man".

Never before had I truly believed in God, nor was I sure now. But something told me; luck had nothing to do with it. I was astonished, and no matter how I tried to reason with my "truth" I could not deny this strange set of coincidences. But even with this quite obvious answer to my prayer, I didn't believe in God, nor did I want to go to church to learn more.

So I went about my life, as I had. Doing whatever, then one day came along, and I got bored again. So I started mentally shifting through all the things I could do. I was thinking about buying a bunch of beer, and drinking. But that's when it hit me: "That's what I did yesterday." All I was doing was shifting through things that gave me temporary enjoyment. I would get bored again, depressed again, after doing these same repetitive things I needed something more: something that would give me true enjoyment, down to my core, so I wouldn't get bored anymore.

Again, for readers wanting more of the story, you are invited to read: We are ALL Prodigal Sons. But, to make a long story short, he returned to the Church, became active, received his patriarchal blessing, received the Melchizedek priesthood, received his temple endowments, and got married in the temple. He and his beautiful wife now serve as Ward Missionaries.

His conversion experience, that goes far beyond the fog story given above, occurred at a later date. I am still pondering whether it is appropriate to post those experiences.

*****

Conclusions: Even to this day I have never witnessed the suspension of natural law – such as the parting of the Red Sea. Yet, I have witnessed many little "miracles," over and over again. My life has been an example of the wonderful events that can happen when a tiny (and I mean very tiny) particle of faith has been exercised. Over time, the blessings have added up in my life – many, many blessings. My faith and testimony has grown tremendously as a result -- even if more growth is necessary – and it is.

I am just a regular person. I do not stand out in a crowd. I do not give earth-shattering speeches in Church. In fact, I kind of prefer keeping a low profile. Yet, God watches over my family. God watches over regular people like you and me. How could I ever deny that? Why would I want to?

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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 "True" Way to Mark Scriptures: A Writeous Perspective

Red Pages: A page from my marked up scriptures.

Let me be pointedly controversial. Why? Because I am going to be presumptuous enough to claim I know the "true" way to mark scriptures by pen.

I will try not to get too nasty as I make my pokes, but I may not be entirely successful. Simply, there is a right way to write.

Some people mark scriptures by drawing boxes around verses. Others put a circle around the verse numbers. But, the most irritating is when the verses are underlined by freehand with no straightedge. Looking at all those wavy lines is enough to make a person seasick.

Those of you who use a highlighter or colored pencil to turn important verses into a different shade might as well be playing with a child's coloring book. There is no challenge to that method.

I cringe at the thought of individuals marking scriptures using ink that bleeds through to the other side, and sometimes the bleeding goes right through multiple pages.

I cannot bear to be near individuals as they draw arrows from one verse to another – and perhaps the arrow goes right through the text of neighboring verses. How could I read a verse that has an indiscriminant line running through it like the stray mark drawn by a mischievous three year old who had grabbed his mother's pen?

It is hard to be tolerant of those individuals who mark their scriptures up in multiple colors. Sometimes at church meetings I ask them out of the blue what "green" means. I usually get a blank stare in return. But, if one is going to use green, red, and blue ink, then I think the colors ought to have a categorical meaning or necessity. For example, scriptural mastery verses could be associated with green, and "Preach My Gospel" verses could be in red. Usually, I discover to my dismay that the "variegated ink people" simply have grabbed the most convenient pen without any respect to color. Shouldn't ink colors in scriptures be orderly?

Do NOT get me wrong. I am all for marking up scriptures. Proper marking leads to learning, and learning leads to scriptural literacy. I am going to teach the "Faux way."

*****

But, before I talk about the "Faux way" or Faux method, I need to gripe a little further. My blog name, S.Faux (pronounced Ess Dot Fox), is NOT a pseudonym! OK, true, it is just a part of my full name.

Cynics among the readers of this blog might think I am subtly using the term "Faux" as a parody suggestive of the term "false." Yes, the French word faux (pronounced "fō ") means false. And, yes, members of the Faux family have never been sent to a LDS mission in France, where they would be known as Elder or Sister "False." But, my name is NOT French. I am ENGLISH. I have NO French ancestors.

F-A-U-X is just an alternate spelling for the British name Fawkes, which is CORRECTLY enunciated as "fox." Even so, a fawkes is a falcon, not a fox.

Oh, yes, and if you are going to persist with questions, then there is a possibility that I am related to the British terrorist Guy Fawkes, who tried to blow up Parliament with King James (of the KJV Bible) inside of it. Guy was Catholic and was prohibited from his religious practice by King James, who was a dictatorial Protestant. Now days the British celebrate November 5th as "Guy Fawkes Day," which is their version of Halloween. They also hang Guy in effigy.

While I apologize for a few wayward ancestors, the Fauxes stand for TRUTH, NOT falsehood. Thus, the Faux-method is just another way of saying the true method.

I will now proceed to teach the true method.

*****

Sorry, just one more aside: Every semester I have a college student walk into my office and say they cannot understand the textbook. "Let me look at your textbook," I will ask.

When I open up the student's textbook usually it will be filled with psychedelic colors from highlighting pens. I will tell the student that she or he is good at coloring, but if the material is important enough to color, then she or he needs to slow down, take a straightedge and carefully underline the passages. I tell them to read the passage as they underline, and then to re-read the underlined passages MULTIPLE TIMES. Understanding a college textbook takes more EFFORT than one would devote to a coloring book.

The pen is just an extension of the mind. If you do not believe me, then you need to read the work of Andy Clark, the philosopher. In some real sense, understanding comes from the pen.

The same principle applies to understanding scriptures.

*****



My pen and Triple Combination.

Finally, let's talk about the true method, without making a mountain out of a molehill.

Readers need a steel straightedge – about 6 inches. Why metal? Metal is firm, reminding one of all the sword imagery in the Book of Mormon, and besides, Latter-day Saints like metal writing. Buy the type with cork on the back. Otherwise you will be slipping and sliding, as you try to underline.

Use a pure red Zig "Millennium" pen (width "01" or 0.25 mm). Could there be a more appropriate pen name for a Latter-day Saint? By the way, do NOT bother with smaller or bigger pen tips. The recommended pen width is mandatory. Also, other brands or models of pen will NOT suffice. The ink in the "Millennium" pen is acid free, archival quality, waterproof, fade proof, and non-bleeding. The cost is about two dollars, and it is a bargain.

When marking with your Millennium pen and steel edge, be slow and meticulous. Read while underlining. Strive for perfection, because mistakes are permanent.

OK, this method does require that one be able to forgive the self. I have made mistakes, but I live with them. For example, in the Book of Mormon (p. 311) above Alma chapter 42, I wrote at the top: "Chapters 43 to 62 are known as the 'War Chapters.'" This statement needed to be written on the next page. I cannot believe I made that mistake, but life goes on.

*****

I hope I have converted you to the truth, but if I have not, then I hope you will study and mark your scriptures anyway.

The good news is that all members of my immediate family, except for my independent wife, underline their scriptures the proper way.

My Army son took his Millennium pen and scriptures with him to the Middle East. To celebrate his need for scripture, he took this most wonderful picture, shown below. Can you find the Millennium pen?

[Click on the picture to zoom. Try to find the red Zig Millennium pen. If you give up and cannot find it, then click here to find the answer.]

*****

I pray that we may all remember the straight and narrow way. Thanks for reading this bit of craziness.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

Advancing in Spirit:

Developing the Chess Game of Religious Life

"Schachspieler" (Chessplayer) by Cornelis de Man, 17th Century

Maybe prayers and their answers broadcast on two different frequencies: the scientific channel and the spiritual channel. Just as there are AM radios and FM radios, some people are born tuned to the scientific and others are born tuned to the spiritual. The gifts of God are varied for reasons beyond my understanding. However, just as the human soul consists of a physical body joined with a spiritual one, the scientifically inclined must find the spiritual, and the spiritually inclined must find the scientific. To one extent or another we are all required to find a blend between the two worlds. Learning is clearly involved in both realms. However, this essay will concentrate on the spiritual.

Adult spiritual education, like secular education, can be subdivided into the introductory, intermediate, and intense or advanced. (Please note that this terminology is my own and is not standard LDS vocabulary). When an adult first joins the Church it is often introductory spiritual education that gets emphasized. A Latter-day Saint often begins to operate at the intermediate levels of spiritual development when given responsibilities or authority over others. “Intense” training usually begins in the later years of life.

I am a chess fan, and therefore I am going to further relate these three levels of spiritual development to the chess terminology of "opening game," "middle game," and "endgame." These categories are simply divisions that are used to describe a chess game as it advances in number of moves toward the completion of the game.

I am going to describe a spiritual experience at each of the three levels. (By the way, if some of my chosen examples seem "soldier friendly," then I assure you it was NOT by accident). Also, I should tell you that there is a trend for each these stories to get "better" as the levels get more advanced.

Introductory Level I: Opening game

This is my own experience and concerns the events of my Son #2's birth. (My spiritual experiences are not very miraculous or advanced, but they are important to me).

On December 31st, 1985 my wife (whom I will call "Mom") started having pretty significant contractions. The contractions were a little irregular but were much stronger than previous days. Mom and I were confused because the due date was not for another week. However, we decided it was best to take a trip to the hospital. We lived in the Chestnut Hill / West Roxbury area of Boston and needed to get to Brigham & Women’s Hospital (a world famous institution and part of Harvard Medical School). It was a good 20-25 minute drive depending upon the Boston traffic.

We got to the hospital and parked in one of the large parking buildings. It was a fair walk to the hospital but Mom waddled there OK, as I remember. We didn’t feel too rushed.

Since I was a poor post-doc, we were on the budget plan. This meant that our hospital doctors would be residents (newly graduated MDs and still learning their obstetrics specialty). We finally got situated in the examination room and the resident gave Mom a full examination. He concluded that Mom was in false labor. He said there was no point to staying at the hospital, since the delivery would not be for a few days. He sent us home and said, “Don’t worry about the contractions” or words to that effect.

So, we drove all the way back to our little apartment.

Immediately upon arrival, Mom headed for the bathroom. A lot of groaning began.

“How are you doing in there,” I asked.

“Oh, it’s just gas. I can deal with it,” responded the ever-courageous Mom.

So, I put up with this horrendous groaning for about five minutes. Call it the spirit or call it science, I don’t care which. I just knew we had to go back to the hospital, even though the doctors and nurses had just sent us home.

“Come on; we’re going back to the hospital. This is ridiculous.”

“No, it’s just gas. I’ll be fine.”

“The heck you are fine. Gas does not cause that kind of groaning. Get in the car.”

“No, it’s going to be embarrassing to go back again. It’s just false labor.”

“The doctor is an idiot. We’re going back.”

“OK, OK, but give me a minute.”

“We don’t have a minute.”

Shortly, we got in the car and Mom was groaning with every little bump in the road. I knew this was a lot different than the first trip. I was feeling very anxious. Mom was telling me to go slower and I knew we needed to get there quick. My heart was pounding and I am sure I was a nervous wreck. The drive seemed to take forever.

This time we drove right up to the front of the hospital. I wasn’t going to waste time with some distant parking building. The front entrance was not made for parked cars. I parked anyway and ran to the other side of the car to help Mom out of the car.

The attendant at the front of the building was yelling at me the whole time – “Hey, you can’t park there. You have got to leave.” I ignored him. I pointed Mom to the revolving front doors (I was very familiar with this hospital, since it was one of the places where I worked). I told her, “Tell the woman at the front desk you are having a baby and you need help right now!” The attendant was still screaming at me. Mom waddled through the front doors as I got back in the car and parked at Massachusett’s Mental Health Center, where I had a parking sticker.

I ran back to the hospital – about a three-minute sprint or more. Somehow, I found the Obstetrics’ ward. Mom was already on a table and pushing. Doctors and nurses had surrounded her. As soon as I was within reach, Mom grabbed my sweater and stretched it out about a foot and a half, and she said, “Why did you do this to me?” Husbands often get beat up during transition. At least, that is what I was taught in our pregnancy class. Anyway, her water broke and Son #2 was on his way.

The resident doctor was embarrassed, but he was FURTHER embarrassed when Son #2's head started to poke out. Wrapped around the little neck was the cord. If I had had to deliver the baby, he would have died of suffocation. The cord would have strangled him. The resident handled the situation beautifully. He cut the cord and made sure Mom pushed the baby out quickly so he could breath. The resident doc was really embarrassed, and I hope he learned a lesson.

However, Mom and I also learned important lessons: Trust one’s instincts. Trust the spirit. If we had not returned to the hospital when we did, a baby would have died.

Sometimes subtle spiritual experiences can be VERY important. I thank goodness it all turned out OK.

Oh yes, one more thing – secular in nature. Son #2 was born just a few minutes BEFORE January 1st, meaning that we also received a child-dependent tax deduction for the whole year. For a struggling young couple that was not a small benefit.

Advanced Level II: Middle game

The following story comes from Elder Neal A. Maxwell when he served in WWII.

Elder Maxwell served as an infantryman in the United States Army, and he fought in Okinawa, a major part of the South Pacific theater. At times the battle was fierce and the bombing was heavy. This story begins in the spring of 1945.

Quoting: Neal A. Maxwell in Robert C. Freeman & Dennis A. Wright (2001). Saints at war: Experiences of Latter-day Saints in World War II, Covenant Communications.
My only surviving aunt said that sometime in May of 1945, she doesn't remember the day, Mother had told her the next day that she and Dad had prayed their usual vocal prayer and included me, of course, and my sisters. Then they got into bed and began to go to sleep, and Mother said, "Clarence, we've got to get out and pray again; Neal is in grave danger." And so they got out of bed and prayed again for me. I don't know which day that was, but I rather imagine, given time zones and all of that, it would have probably been when Japanese artillery shelling occurred at its worst stage.

When my Son #1 was deployed to the Middle East, I told my wife that if she ever felt the prompt that we needed to pray for our Army son, then we would get on our knees no matter what time it was, day or night.

There is something spiritually special about mothers, and I wish I had the words to capture it.

Advanced Level III: Endgame

This last level of spiritual advancement is readily available to all members of the Church, but is rarely achieved. I am talking about experiences that, for lack of better words, are just shy of seeing the face of God.

This particular experience comes from Elder M. Russell Ballard in 1990, while acting within his apostolic calling. The moral of this story is priceless – restored blessings and forgiveness.

Excerpt from: M. Russell Ballard, “A Chance to Start Over: Church Disciplinary Councils and the Restoration of Blessings,” Ensign, Sept. 1990, 12
Some time ago I was asked by the First Presidency to stop and visit a man on my way to a stake conference. This man had been excommunicated, had fully repented, and had been found worthy to be baptized. But baptism did not restore his priesthood and temple blessings. That was my assignment, acting on behalf of the Lord at the direction of the President of the Church.

I found the man lying in a hospital suffering from a disease that left him unable to move or speak. On seeing him, I realized that it would be impossible to conduct the customary interview. Instead, I felt impressed that I should interview his wife, who was there with him. We found a vacant room in the hospital, and I had a wonderful visit with this stalwart woman, the mother of eight. She had stood by her husband, remaining true and faithful through all his struggle and difficulty. Now she, like her husband, greatly desired that he have his blessings restored.

As we walked back into the husband’s room, I asked his wife to help me communicate with him. During the two years that his body had deteriorated from disease, he had developed a way to communicate with his eyes. I leaned over his bed and said, “I am Elder Ballard. I have been sent here by the President of the Church. I am authorized to restore your blessings. Would you like that?” I quickly saw I wouldn’t need the help of his wife. Tears filled his eyes and ran down his cheeks in affirmative response.

I placed my hands on his head and, using terminology associated with this ordinance, restored to him the Melchizedek Priesthood.

He sobbed—perhaps the first sounds he had made in some time. I restored his office in the priesthood. Then I restored to him, by the power of the priesthood, the holy endowment that he had received when he went through the temple for the first time. Last, I restored what was perhaps most valuable to him—his sealings to his wife and children.

As the blessing concluded we were all filled with emotion. I looked at his wife and had the impression that I was to bless her also. I said, “Sister, would you like us to give you a blessing?”

She said, “Oh, I would love a blessing, Brother Ballard. I have not had a blessing in a long time.”

I asked her to sit down; then the regional representative, the stake president, and I placed our hands on her head. But when I tried to bless her, the words would not come. We took our hands off her head and I said, “Brethren, let’s move her chair closer to the bed.” We pushed her chair over where I could lift her husband’s hand and place it on her head, since he was unable to lift it himself. As we proceeded again with the blessing, the words flowed. Blessings were given, conviction and comfort came.

I have since thought what a marvelous lesson that experience teaches us. This man had sinned, and a loving Heavenly Father had required that he repent so he could be worthy to be once again numbered among the Saints. He had subsequently done our Heavenly Father’s will; he had turned his life around; he had repented. Now, back in the Church and continuing to progress, he was worthy to have his greatest blessings restored. And he was able to use his restored priesthood immediately, participating in giving his wife a special priesthood blessing.

A few years ago I made the mistake of asking an unsuspecting member of my Priesthood group to read this Elder Ballard quotation for a lesson I was giving. By the middle of the quote, the reader's emotions were flowing, and those emotions only amplified as the reading continued. Are Apostles inspired? I do not know how one could read the story above and conclude otherwise.

Here is another favorite story that illustrates "the endgame:"

Thomas S. Monson, “Labels,” Ensign, Sept. 2000, 2
Years ago, President Spencer W. Kimball shared with President Gordon B. Hinckley, Elder Bruce R. McConkie, and me an experience he had in the appointment of a patriarch for the Shreveport Louisiana Stake of the Church. President Kimball described how he interviewed, how he searched, and how he prayed, that he might learn the Lord’s will concerning the selection. For some reason, none of the suggested candidates was the man for this assignment at this particular time.

The day wore on. The evening meetings began. Suddenly President Kimball turned to the stake president and asked him to identify a particular man seated perhaps two-thirds of the way back from the front of the chapel. The stake president replied that the individual was James Womack, whereupon President Kimball said, “He is the man the Lord has selected to be your stake patriarch. Please have him meet with me in the high council room following the meeting.”

Stake president Charles Cagle was startled, for James Womack did not wear the label of a typical man. He had sustained terrible injuries while in combat during World War II. He lost both hands and one arm, as well as most of his eyesight and part of his hearing. Nobody had wanted to let him in law school when he returned, yet he finished third in his class at Louisiana State University. James Womack simply refused to wear the label “Handicapped.”

That evening as President Kimball met with Brother Womack and informed him that the Lord had designated him to be the patriarch, there was a protracted silence in the room. Then Brother Womack said, “Brother Kimball, it is my understanding that a patriarch is to place his hands on the head of the person he blesses. As you can see, I have no hands to place on the head of anyone.”

Brother Kimball, in his kind and patient manner, invited Brother Womack to make his way to the back of the chair on which Brother Kimball was seated. He then said, “Now, Brother Womack, lean forward and see if the stumps of your arms will reach the top of my head.” To Brother Womack’s joy, they touched Brother Kimball, and the exclamation came forth, “I can reach you! I can reach you!”

“Of course you can reach me,” responded Brother Kimball. “And if you can reach me, you can reach any whom you bless. I will be the shortest person you will ever have seated before you.”

President Kimball reported to us that when the name of James Womack was presented to the stake conference, “the hands of the members shot heavenward in an enthusiastic vote of approval.”

*****

Brief Conclusion: There is NOT a single level of spirituality. Further, spiritual abilities can be learned, developed, and improved. One might even say that one of the purposes of this life is to enhance those skills.

Please note that true spirituality is NOT imaginary magic, a sophisticated delusion, or even something unnatural. The true spirituality of which I have spoken is used and mastered by clear thinking, intelligence, and wisdom.

In Mormonism, how does one win the chess game of life? The answer is to see clearly.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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 Holy Kiss

Apostles Peter and Paul greet each other as captives tied in ropes and about to be martyred in Rome. Tradition states they were killed in the same time proximity. Commiato dei santi Pietro e Paolo,by Alonzo Rodriguez (16th Century) Messina Museo Regionale.

*****

Multiple times in the New Testament (Romans 16:16; 1 Corinthians 16:20; 2 Corinthians 13:12; 1 Thessalonians 5:26; and 1 Peter 5: 14) we are admonished to greet each other with a holy kiss. In those ancient days, members of the Church gave each other Middle Eastern kisses on the cheeks as a salutation. Although the practice can be found in the Old Testament (e.g., 1 Samuel 20:41; 2 Samuel 20:9), the kiss had a defining religious role in early Christian communities (see Penn, 2005, below).

After the deaths of the original Apostles, kissing developed into a complex tradition. An early Apostolic Constitution, a decree from the Pope, states: "[L]et the Deacon say to all, 'Salute ye one another with the holy kiss; and let the clergy salute the bishop, the men of the laity salute the men, the women the women' " (see: Apostolic Constitution, Book VIII, Section 2).

In very early centuries of the Christian church the holy kiss became an essential element of ordinances and sacraments. The holy kiss was given during the Eucharist; after prayers; to newly ordained Bishops; during marriage ceremonies; to the dying; and even to the dead (W. Smith & S. Cheetham, A Dictionary of Christian Antiquities, Vol. 2, 1880, London: John Murray, p. 902-906).

To those non-LDS Christians who insist upon following the Bible literally, I might respectfully ask: “Do you greet members of your Church with a holy kiss?” Actually, some conservative Mennonites and Amish have such a practice. Eastern Orthodox clergy sometimes use the kiss to greet each other. However, most Christian churches do not systematically engage in this method of greeting. Why?

Of course, this example of a holy kiss might be extreme, but it illustrates the necessity for modern-day Apostles & Prophets to give instruction consistent with the context of current times. Nowadays, a handshake will do. (And, I suppose one could argue that handshakes are Biblical too; see Galatians 2:9). If one attends an LDS meeting on Sundays, one must be prepared to shake a dozen or more hands. I appreciate that we LDS do NOT kiss one another in meetings. (However, I must admit that there might be some exceptions in LDS meetings outside of America).

Interestingly, Romans 16:16, which reads, "Salute one another with an holy kiss," is changed in the Joseph Smith Translation (JST), which replaces "kiss" with "salutation." Similar changes are found in the JST versions of 1 Corinthians 16:20, 2 Corinthians 13:12, and 1 Thessalonians 5:26. The reference to a "kiss of charity" is unchanged in the JST 1 Peter 5:14. In any case, the JST appears to reject kissing as a standard greeting for the ages. I interpret this as a modern stance for Latter-day Saints, and NOT as a rejection of historical fact.

Salutations of any sort (kisses, handshakes, hellos) are important because it may be the only time during a day where one individual can acknowledge another as an individual. Salutations and greetings communicate, “I recognize you and I think you are important!” Such simple behaviors give a grand reality to the command: "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

*****

For a thorough academic evaluation of the practice in ancient times, see: Michael Penn, Kissing Christians: Ritual and Community in the Late Ancient Church (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005).

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.

The Battle of Brazito During Family Home Evening

A Piece of Historical Fiction

Colonel Alexander W. Doniphan shortly after
the Mexican-American war.

Fowler had just been called to be 2nd Counselor in his Ward Bishopric. It was Monday evening, and he decided that the family better start doing regular Family Home Evenings each week, as prescribed by the LDS Church.

He had become a little complacent about organizing them. His wife, Elizabeth, often had City Council Meetings on that night, and when she got home it was often too late to organize the teenagers and teach something coherent. At least that was his standard verbal excuse. In any case, organizing family schedules was a nightmare anytime of the week.

But, tonight had to be different. He was going to organize a family lesson, gather up the teenagers, and then just hope Elizabeth would walk through the door in time for part of the lesson. She had encouraged Fowler to do this all along, but the encouragement put the full burden on him.

Last year the family had had about 12 Family Home Evenings, and about 6 were disasters. During the last attempt, Tammy, the 13 year old, stormed off in a huff because "Liza," the 16 year old poked fun at the "bo" that Tammy had a crush on. Fowler chastised Liza, and then Liza marched off to her room and slammed the door. That mishap left Fowler with just the boys, Nate (18) and Dennis (15). The planned lesson, "Love at Home," no longer felt right, and Fowler sent the boys back to the televised football game. The boys were all for it.

Maybe it was the last lesson-attempt that provoked Fowler's latest plan. His intention was to talk a little bit about warfare in America during the 19th century. With such a topic, a couple of teenagers could march off in a huff and the lesson could still proceed. Family warfare would fit in well with the horrors of military war. Fowler knew his logic was off, but he needed any kind of rationalization to get the job done.

Fowler was a history buff, especially with LDS Church history. He had been reading about Colonel Alexander Doniphan, the Missouri soldier and lawyer who had literally saved the life of Joseph Smith, the founder of the Mormons. Doniphan had been heavily involved in the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848. Although he led his own troops, he was nested under General Stephen Kearny's famous "Army of the West."

Fowler's excuse for talking about Doniphan's Battle of Brazito was the important contributions of Doniphan to early Church history, even if he was an outsider to Mormonism. Fowler wanted to teach his family that Doniphan was a true American hero. Many have forgotten him, but NOT Fowler's family.

Fowler started making his room inspections for the children. "OK, kids, it is Family Home Evening time. Stop what you are doing and make your way to the family room."

Dennis yelled, "Dad, come on. The Vikings are on the fifth yard line and it’s second down."

"Too bad, young man," retorted Fowler. "Family time is a priority."

Across the hall in her room, Tammy snipped, "Where's Mom then??!!"

"Come on. Come on," Fowler pleaded. "Get your you-know-whats" onto the couches downstairs."

The rounding up of the kids took five minutes, and just as all the kids were in the family room, Fowler found himself needing a quick bathroom break. "Any of you kids leave this room and you ARE GROUNDED," he announced as firmly as he could while marching upstairs.

When he got back, he asked Liza to give an opening prayer, which she did. Then, Fowler asked the kids to sing "Onward Christian Soldiers."

Before the song could begin, Tammy wondered out loud, "Aren't we supposed to sing BEFORE we have the prayer?"

Fowler did wonder a second, but then responded, "No, Tammy, it just does not matter. OK, let's sing it with enthusiasm." He gave a pitch, too high, and the strained song was underway.

The family muddled through, even as Dennis made up a few of his own lines that included something about Batman. Fowler was tempted to get after him, but decided it was NOT worth it.

Fowler thanked the family for the song attempt, and then he unrolled an American map on the floor. "I am going to teach you about an interesting battle known as the Battle of Brazito," he said while pointing to a location near El Paso, Texas.

"Kids, I have taught you about Alexander Doniphan before. You know he was a hero. Well, I am going to tell you another amazing story about him."

The kids were a little restless, but were willing to give their Dad the benefit of the doubt. The story about how Doniphan saved Joseph Smith's life really was amazing.

Fowler moved from the couch to the middle of the floor near his map. He was surrounded by kids on all sides – boy, girl, boy, girl. Such a mix was about the most peaceful possible, and so Fowler tried to keep his mind on the story:

I am going to tell you a short story about the Battle of Brazito fought by Colonel Alexander Doniphan and his soldiers during the Mexican-American war from 1846 to 1848.

Doniphan's men were known as the First Missouri Mounted Volunteers.

Dennis asked, half seriously, "Did they drive tanks?"

"No, they were mounted on horses," Fowler said gently.

"Stupid," snapped Dennis.

"You're stupid," retorted Tammy.

Fowler continued unabated:

Doniphan’s 800+ men marched until afternoon despite the fact it was Christmas day of 1846. The great Colonel wanted to give his men a break in order to celebrate the holiday. Finally they encamped near the Rio Grande river at a place called El Brazito. Throughout the day Mexican army spies had observed the U.S. regiment and were surprised at how lax the soldiers appeared to be.

Dennis started humming the theme song for James Bond, 007. Fowler thanked him for the background music.

Unfortunately for the U.S. soldiers there was not much to do in the camp.

Some of the men captured a beautiful white stallion. Doniphan and his officers engaged in a big game of poker to decide who should get the horse.

Tammy blurted, "I thought we weren't supposed to play poker."

Nate was getting a little irritated and chastised her: "Let Dad finish his story. Besides, Doniphan was not a Mormon, and somebody can play cards if they want to."

Tammy stuck her tongue out at Nate and then smiled at him as if the fight were over in a nanosecond.

Fowler just did his best to keep his train of thought, although he could feel it wavering.

As Doniphan played cards, he really whooped it up. But many of his men were really on alert and noticed a cloud of dust to the southeast. At first they thought it might be the wind, but they kept their eyes on the cloud.

Advance scouts brought word to Doniphan that an enemy regiment, 1200 in number, was now on its way toward camp. Doniphan threw down his cards and exclaimed, “Darn it, I finally got an invincible hand, but I’ll have to play it in steel now!”

Nate interjected, "I'll bet he really did not say 'Darn.' I'll bet it was the real "D" word."

Tammy could not help herself: "Oh, you mean 'Damn.'"

"Tammy!!!," the whole room erupted at once.

"Whoops, sorry," said Tammy in a bit of a blush.

Fowler did not know whether to laugh uncontrollably or cry, but he was determined to finish:

Colonel Doniphan told his officers, “You all remember that I am ahead in this poker game.” Then he ordered the bugler to sound assembly. The men came running from all quarters and fell into formation.

Doniphan established two main lines of men so that they could alternate firing and reloading. The muskets could only fire once and then it took 15 second to reload.

The Mexicans in bright shiny coats marched with a great deal of pomp toward the camp. The Americans looked far more homely. Except for the officers, the American soldiers were a pretty scraggly looking bunch.

As the Mexican army established its position, it sent one of its officers up to the American line to demand surrender. The Mexican officer carried a flag with two skulls on it, and then saluted Doniphan and dipped the flag. The man then demanded that Doniphan return with him to the Mexican force. Doniphan replied, “If your commander wants to see me, he can come here.” “He will not,” the Mexican officer answered. Doniphan snorted back “Then he can go to hell.”

"Dad!!!, all the kids yelled.

Fowler chuckled, "Those were Doniphan's words, not mine. Besides, I think Tammy has decided that if I won't use blunt language, then she will."

Nate responded, "Dad, we know we're not supposed to swear. We are just giving you a hard time."

"Thanks, I think," choked Fowler. "Let me continue."

"Yeah, this is getting interesting … for once," said Liza, with a smile diverted toward her Dad.

The officer returned to the enemy line, and then a Mexican army band began to play. The bugles sounded the charge.

The Mexican force outnumbering the Americans began to march forward. Doniphan ordered his men to hold fire.

When the enemy was within 60 yards the Americans began to receive fire. Doniphan was on his horse and charged from the rear to the very front of the action. Enemy shots were landing all around. As the enemy began to reload, Doniphan ordered his front line to shoot. Lots of enemy dropped and those still standing had trouble loading their guns. Then Doniphan ordered the rear to shoot. There was more confusion, and more dead. After the rear line had fired, the front line was ready to shoot again and so they did. The two lines shot in alternation and produced a continuous barrage against the enemy.

The Mexican army retreated but only after there were 43 killed and 150 wounded. The Americans had only 7 wounded. The battle took only one-half an hour.

Fowler did not know how it got organized, but suddenly he recognized that his kids were acting out the battle from the American side. Tammy and Nate were in the rear and Liza and Dennis were in the front. They shot imaginary muskets in alternation with sound effects. Of course, the reloading times were a little off, since the shots sounded more like machine guns.

"OK, kids," Fowler pleaded. "At least I stirred your imaginations. Now let me finish. There is just a bit more."

"Yeah, Dad, who won the horse?" Nate queried.

"Well, I will tell you."

When the battle was won Doniphan went back to his poker game. He expected to win it too, but he really complained when no one could find the white stallion that was supposed to be the jackpot. Apparently it escaped during the confusion of battle.

Doniphan’s men grew to respect him so much that several of them wrote their memoirs of marching with Doniphan. Some of the memoirs were even published because the American public was just dying to know what Doniphan was doing. He was kind of the Patton of his time.

Just at that moment Elizabeth walked through the front door into the family room. The kids yelled, "Mom!!!!"

Elizabeth acted surprised: "Don't tell me you are having Family Home Evening?" Then as an afterthought she said, "Why didn't you wait for me? Hmm, actually Tuesday would have been better."

Fowler just smiled. "I do the best I can on this family's shoestring schedule."

"Honey, you are right," Elizabeth answered more thoughtfully. "What was the lesson on?"

Dennis answered instantaneously, "Dad was teaching us how to swear."

***References***

For a wonderful biography of Doniphan, see: Rodger D. Launius (1997). Alexander William Doniphan: Portrait of a Missouri Moderate, University of Missouri Press.

For an excellent description of Doniphan's military adventures, see: Joseph C. Dawson III (1999). Doniphan's Epic March, University Press of Kansas.

***Epilogue***

I do NOT mean to characterize LDS Family Home Evenings as generally being this difficult. Most go very smoothly and happily. However, they can be challenging at times, especially when teenagers are involved. Let's just say I can identify with Fowler.

For a better representation of what Family Home Evening entails, see this link entitled: 100+ Family Home Evening Ideas.

Last, someone really should make a movie about Alexander Doniphan. Too bad John Wayne is not around to play the part.

*****

Copyright 2008 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] com; 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.