Alma, chapter 42

 This is Alma trying to explain, to his son, Corianton, the justice of God, a justice that sounds so fierce and miserable in Old Testament writings, starting with the casting out of the Garden of Eden (which increased sadness and difficulty for Adam and Eve) and continuing on throughout history, and which seems, to Corianton, to be out of character of a loving God.

Alma starts from the beginning.  His explanation goes something like this:

1st: Adam and Eve.  If they had remained in their original state in the Garden of Eden, where everything was provided, and where there was no death due to the tree of life, there would have been sobering natural consequences?  What would have been some of those?

They would have lived forever, their children and grandchildren and every succeeding generation would have lived forever.  That is unsustainable on earth...beyond its natural resources...shortages of food, overwhelming environmental pollution, etc. etc.    Think about what happens in a society in that situation.

2nd: Powerful, wicked, men and women would never die.  Their destructive, dishonest egregious efforts to maintain power would never end.  They (and we) would never have the sense of mortality that offers us reminders and crucial opportunities to review our lives.  Alma refers to this in verse 5: "having no space for repentance" means having no sense of parameters of lifespan or sense of an end, which parameters serve all of us well in moving us to review our lives and consider how we are using our time and to what ends, and therefore offering opportunities to recognized opportunities to engage in the blessed experience of repentance.  

3rd: Furthermore, not only would powerful, wicked people never die, there would be never ending battles between them and those who wanted to dethrone them or to take their place.  We have enough of those in a mortal life, they would be endless in an immortal wicked world.

Alma refers to such a situation being one in which the word of God becomes void.  Void means "having no legal or binding force; nul; not effectual to bind parties, or to convey or support a right, not sufficient to produce its effect.   Alma is saying that in  such a situation, people who choose wickedness, would not be motivated to repent, but feel free to continually pursue wicked goals without fear of death or any sense of mortal danger. The prophet Isaiah wrote: "My word shall not return to me void, but shall accomplish that which I please". (Isaiah 55:11). A world that includes death, either your own, or of those who are important to you, includes a powerful, and fairly frequent nudge to consider your life, the word of God, and what is most important to you.  A world without death does so far less.

4th: Alma also says that the "great plan of salvation would have been frustrated".  God's whole plan is set up to give us experience that teaches us powerful, personal lessons, helps us see and choose what is most important to us, teaches us how to make changes in order to become all we desire to be, and then to be transformed by glorious resurrection.  

Alma is trying to show Corianton that it is easy to see harshness in God's actions where there is actually a tremendous amount of mercy.

Note: Resurrection doesn't just mean "getting a body back".  It means being "raised with glory", transformed in heavenly ways, empowered to do the good you seek to do in powerful ways.  What kind of glory?  One that reflects, specifically, who you, individually have become and the desires of your heart. (Doctrine and Covenants 88).  (Those who do not wish to do anything good....no glory with your resurrection).

5th: Alma also speaks about what the inevitability of physical death does in a person's life:  It prevents you from living here forever (which most would not prefer once they not only experience the tragedies and violence involved in mortal life) and helps you understand that this life is far from ideal and that post death existence offers far more to us than mortal life does. 

Understanding that, we begin to see that being forever here on earth would cause us to become "lost" (Alma 42:6).  Have you ever become physically lost?  Unable to find your way home, or to the destination at which you set out to arrive?  Becoming lost, in this verse is like that...unable to find your way home to life in the presence of God, which home is joyful to every person who loves goodness.

Corianton, with his father and brothers, has been through a lot (Alma chapter 38), both physically and emotionally, because of his work with his father, trying to teach the word God.  He wonders whether it makes sense to teach about a coming of a Savior far into the future that he is not sure will happen.  And he has made some bad decisions trying to find relief from that insecurity about what he has been asked to do and to teach. 

Alma's words in chapter 42 are his attempt to help his son see that God's response to sin, whether it is Corianton's sin or the sin of Adam and Eve, or anyone else, is not a vindictive assignment to a state of punishment and misery, but rather a reflection of God offering a mortal life that is set up to help us understand and experience the natural, logical, actual consequences of sin (which consequence, is always, ultimately, and naturally, misery) and the consequences of discipleship.

Most of us, consciously, or unconsciously, experience that learning and experience during our lives.  Death, and our awareness of our mortality, is part of the plan to move us out of living amidst what would otherwise be a never ending earthly cycle of power seeking and conflict and violence and struggle, and the misery that such creates if allowed to continue without end.  

The post mortal life, Alma explains, is set up to free us from that awful possibility...putting us in a new, post-moral state; a state where redemption continues to be possible due our desire to repent and change without the encumbrance of a failing, mortal body, which redemption continues to be available to us due to the amazing justice of God and due to the amazing mercy and deliverance from the bondage of our sins, which deliverance the Father and the Son made possible through the latter's atonement for each of us.  

Corianton has been struggling with a misapprehension of the nature of God...seeing Him as a decreer of laws, a promiser of far off personal interaction, and a vindictive dealer out of justice.  When we see God that way we seek consolation elsewhere, which is exactly what Corianton did.  That put Corianton in a reasonable state of mind: feeling antipathy towards God because he thinks that God's motives must be control and punishment for sin (which he, Corianton has engaged in) while, at the same time He claims to be full of love.  Corianton's antipathy, coming from those assumptions, makes total sense.

Corianton has been laboring under the belief that God, by nature is vindictive and harsh, focused on obedience and penalty (justice), in spite of claiming to be a God of love.  His father is trying to help disabuse him from that erroneous assumption by explaining the total incorporation of loving mercy and forgiveness in God's plan from the beginning, made possible by a huge and voluntarily and lovingly given price on the part of both the Father and the Son.  

Verse 1 of Chapter 43 indicates that Coriantion may have found it helpful.

 

Spiritual fasting as a turning towards partnership

Thinking about the practice of spiritual fasting this morning.

"Fasting requires self-control and discipline, as one denies the natural desires of the flesh. During spiritual fasting, the believer's focus is removed from the physical things of this world and intensely concentrated on God." ~ Mary Fairchild

I generally have tended to think about fasting from food as an expression of turning to God and away from food for a time, good in and of itself, and considered even better when it is "done with a purpose", a petition for help for self or others, in mind.  But Fairchild's statement has me thinking about the principle of fasting as it relates to a broader definition of that turning.

Fasting from food reminds me of my own physical weakness and dependency upon God's creation of this world and its resources for my very life; my own weakness in comparison to the power of a wondrous, life-giving, loving, and amazing God.  It can direct my feelings of hunger into awareness of my own dependence upon Him and the world He created for us, and, hopefully,  therefore,  encourages me towards grateful and more earnest communication with Him.  And, seeking that communication, I may gain spiritual clarity of thought. 

That leads me to believe that, though we often talk about "fasting with a purpose",  and tend to think of it as a method to employ while petitioning God for a particular and important need or hope to be fulfilled, spiritual fasting is not simply a way to express gratitude, or to earn God's favor, or to increase the likelihood that He will do something, for us or someone else. Rather, the purpose of fasting is to produce a transformation in us—a clearer, more focused attention and dependence upon God.  Thus, my more focused attention to, and grateful communication with God while fasting can help me to hear God's voice more clearly on those very subjects that are on my mind and in my heart.  And as I do so, that attention moves our communication away from "petitioner to grantor" (I need this, please make it happen) and into "partners" (here is what is possible, and what we each can do) in the work of the Lord near me.

Clearly, food is not the only thing which, if I fast from it, can help me in my efforts to turn my heart and mind to God.  At this point in my life, after decades of regular spiritual fasts from food, fasting from food is fairly easy and familiar.  What's harder for me at this stage of my life?  Fasting from time spent online.  Sobering.

Furthermore, fasting, it seems, is more than abstinence from something, which abstinence is hopefully practiced with God in mind. 

Isaiah wrote "Is this not the fast that I have chosen? to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke?  Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house? That thou sees the naked, that thou cover him: and that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh?"  (Isaiah 58:6-7)

We have a tradition, when we engage in a spiritual fast, of donating "fast offerings"; funds to be used by churches or other institutions to aid others who struggle with one or more of the burdens and needs that Isaiah wrote about.

It occurs to me that it would be wise for me to not only make such donations with those Isaiah verses in mind, but, as I communicate with God during a spiritual fast (be it a fast from food or from anything else), to also seek from Him the courage, heart, will, and information He may give me in order to not only donate funds, but also to be able to recognize, by His spirit, the moments or times in the coming days when I am personally in a position to act in a way that furthers what Isaiah wrote about and to do so.

For a hesitant, homebody person like me who finds solitude peaceful, asking to be able to see those moments or times and to act accordingly feels daunting.  But if I remember that our Father and I are partners in whatever He indicates in the days that follow such a seeking and seeing, rather than us being just petitioner and grantor, that helps. A lot.

Ezekiel 36:16-20. When we wrap ourselves and our sins in the flag of religious devotion...

"Moreover the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

"Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their own way and by their doings:...

"Wherefore I poured out my fury upon them for the blood that they had shed upon the land, and for their idol wherewith they had polluted it: 

"And I scattered them among the heathen, and they were dispersed through the countries: according to their way and according to their doings I judged them.

"And when they entered unto the heathen, whither they went, they profaned my holy name, when they said to them, "These are the people of the Lord".  (King James Version)

The word of the Lord came unto me saying

"My son, when the people who knew me, and called themselves my people, lived in the land that I had given them, they made it a country full of sin by their choices and their actions:...

"I responded with energy and swiftness because they embraced the sins of anger, violence, and killing, and because they embraced ideologies, and powerful entities. and leaders which encouraged those sins and extolled such responses and actions.

"And so I allowed them to be attacked and defeated by other nations that do not know me.  My decision to do so was a just and appropriate response to their decisions and actions.

"And when they were among people who do not know me, they treated my name with irreverence and abuse whenever they declared, "We are the people of the Lord".  

Sobering to consider today.

The Lord's considered offer, which some accepted, and others did not: Ezekiel 36:21-32

Corrected post: What Latter-day Saints Get Wrong About Prophets

What Latter-day Saints get wrong about living prophets, according to Keith A. Erekson 

By Valerie Walton, Church News,  3 Feb 2022, 4:00 PM EST 

 During his time working with Church history, Keith A. Erekson, the director of historical outreach and partnerships for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has listened to thousands of questions from people who struggle with concerns and doubts about the Church. They range from the multiple accounts of the First Vision, to polygamy, to the prohibition on the participation of Black Latter-day Saints in priesthood and temple ordinances, to witnessing friends being excluded or insulted for identifying as LGBT. 

“Maybe it’s a little of all of these and then some,” he said. 

Many of these questions “invoke the existence and role of living prophets,” Erekson said in an Ensign College devotional held in the Assembly Hall on Tuesday, Feb. 1. 

Erekson cited the Old Testament story about Naaman in 2 Kings 5 seeking healing from the prophet Elisha as an example of a relationship Latter-day Saints might have today with living prophets. 

Naaman, a successful military commander and warrior, was suffering from a skin disease. He approached Elisha, who had a reputation as a healer, according to the customs of his time: with a letter of recommendation from his king, a flourish of horses and chariots, and gifts of gold, silver and clothing. 

“He also expected Elisha to behave the same way as other healers in their culture,” Erekson explained, “by calling aloud, waving his hand, or enacting some other ritual performance. But Elisha defied Naaman’s expectations by refusing the gifts and sending a simple message to wash seven times in a nearby river.”

Naaman instantly became angry and went away in a rage. Later, his servants talked him into trying the treatment, which worked. 

“So here is the insight: Naaman’s instant rage surfaced when his expectations were challenged,” Erekson said. “He protested by saying, ‘I thought that for me he would surely come out.’ Yes, Naaman needed to humble himself, but the root problem was neither the prophet nor his prescription; it was the expectations Naaman brought to the encounter.” 

Erekson asked his listeners what expectations they might have about prophets, how those expectations might be influenced by their upbringing and culture, and if they are assuming things that are incorrect. “Admitting the errors in our own thinking is sometimes the most difficult part of understanding Church history because it takes humility to change our expectations and assumptions after we learn they are incorrect.” 

Many oversimplify living prophets to a simple binary of being inspired or uninspired. However, instruction given by the Lord on the day the Church was organized, which is found in Doctrine and Covenants 21:1-2, gives three things that should be expected of prophets: “Behold, there shall be a record kept among you; and in it thou shalt be called a seer, a translator, a prophet, an apostle of Jesus Christ, an elder of the church through the will of God the Father, and the grace of your Lord Jesus Christ, Being inspired of the Holy Ghost … .” 

“Prophets cultivate relationships with each of the three members of the Godhead and understanding these relationships helps dispel common misunderstandings of their work,” Erekson said. 

Many cultures have models of prophets. For some, a prophet is a sphinx, riddler or soothsayer who speaks in anonymous riddles. For others, a prophet is a “lone voice who speaks out against all evil and oppression” and denounces every wrong. Another model is that of a cable news pundit who pins the blame for tragedies on the sins of an enemy group, offering harsh condemnations. 

 Some Latter-day Saints come to expect prophets to act like these models. “Then, if prophets speak too clearly in favor of vaccination, or if they fail to stand with or against the internet’s outrage of the day, or if they offer kindness instead of criticism of refugees, some turn away in rage like Naaman,” Erekson said. 

Another unhelpful expectation is a distrust in a person who is influenced by culture. Every human is shaped by the language, customs, knowledge and experiences of individuals, families and societies, making it impossible for anyone — including prophets — to not be influenced by culture. 

“In fact, Nephi explained that God speaks to prophets — and all of us — ‘according to their language, unto their understanding’ — in other words, our cultures” (2 Nephi 31:3).  

Erekson said that prophets interact with their cultures, such as Joseph Smith using seer stones, Joseph F. Smith pondering the afterlife during the ravages of World War I, or President Russell M. Nelson counseling Latter-day Saints to abandon attitudes and actions of prejudice in a society built on discrimination. 

 “Prophets participate in their cultures as do you and I, and the way we all progress is by following God in our cultures.” 

Another expectation is that to follow the prophet, one must imitate their every deed, such as raising pigeons because President Thomas S. Monson did. “Prophets do not urge us to follow or imitate them, but to follow and imitate the Savior,” Erekson said. 

“Stated another way, the prophets do not teach us to follow them, but to ‘hear Him’!” 

Some expect prophets to receive revelation “only by kneeling alone and asking for it,” Erekson said. While many revelatory experiences happen that way, prophets also receive revelation with other people through councils. Today, the Church is administered through councils comprised of members of the First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Seventy, Presiding Bishopric and general organizations. 

“If we expect revelation to come only to individuals, then we will miss many of God’s modern dealings with living prophets.” 

Why do prophets need the grace of Christ? “For the same reasons that you and I depend on His grace — to forgive our sins, succor our infirmities, mitigate our shortcomings, expand our capabilities, turn weaknesses into strengths,” Erekson said. 

Prophets make mistakes and they disagree. In extreme cases, their differing perspectives can lead to disputes. “Most of the time,” Erekson said, “the differences of opinion serve to bring all perspectives on issues into the discussion.” 

The only person to ever live a mistake-free life was Jesus Christ. Prophets are aware of their own shortcomings, Erekson said, citing Moses who worried over his speaking inadequacies, Moroni who felt the same about his writing, and Joseph Smith who published his errors and divine rebukes. 

“We should also not expect that prophets do not get tricked,” Erekson said. He gave a few scriptural and modern examples of prophets being fooled. For instance, when Joseph Smith lost the 116 pages of the Book of Mormon manuscript, he “was told simply, ‘You cannot always tell the wicked from the righteous’ (Doctrine and Covenants 10:37). The message was not ‘One day you will learn how to identify the wicked.’ Just, ‘you cannot.’” 

Simply citing the many instances of when prophets disagreed, made mistakes or were tricked is incomplete, Erekson said, “without understanding that prophets serve ‘through the … grace of [our] Lord Jesus Christ.’ His grace is sufficient to bring them to unanimity, refine their souls and succor them.” 

Prophets don’t know everything about the future. “While it is true that God reveals some of His secrets to prophets, and that some prophets including Moses, Enoch and Nephi received sweeping visions, that does not mean that every prophet knows everything about everything,” Erekson said. The things they do know are not always spelled out for them.

 “As the ‘mouthpiece’ of the Lord, they do not simply open their mouths and the word of God flows out,” he said. “Sometimes revelation has come as dictated wording, but prophets also receive inspiration, feelings and impressions that they must put into words and actions. Sometimes they explore paths that don’t work out.” 

Erekson then addressed the idea that the prophet will never lead the Church astray — wording that comes from a statement made by Wilford Woodruff announcing the end of plural marriage. Over time, “additional assumptions have been attached — that the practices of the Church should never change, and that following prophetic counsel should cause no suffering,” he said. 

“In its complete original context, Wilford Woodruff’s teaching emphasized that the prophet would not … lead people ‘astray from the oracles [or revelations] of God and from their duty.’ 

Prophets will not lead us away from their true witness of Jesus Christ, from His revelations or from the path, however hard it may be, to follow Him. 

“Because prophets act and preach by the Spirit, we have a duty to seek the Spirit to understand and receive their message.” Prophets work to be inspired of the Holy Ghost because they don’t know everything, and they gain light and truth from the Lord line upon line. 

Doctrine and Covenants 107:22 instructs that prophets are to be “upheld by the confidence, faith, and prayer of the church.” 

Today, members of the Church uphold the prophets “with confidence gained through the companionship of the Holy Ghost, with faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and through prayer to God our Father,” Erekson said. 

“We should rightly expect prophets to be called through the will of God and the grace of Jesus Christ and receive ongoing guidance through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost,” Erekson said. “As we do so, we can, like Naaman, shed incorrect expectations and assumptions about prophets that both impede our ability to be blessed and prompt divisive anger.” 

You can watch or read the full Ensign College devotional here.  

https://www.ensign.edu/keith-a-erekson-february-2022

Creating a moral, compassionate, brave and principled life

If we are adults with moral awareness, we are responsible for our decisions. 

And when we see our lives more like an organic act which we are called to create, rooted in increasing moral and compassionate understanding, and less like a script we need to follow, we are more fully free to grow in wisdom and comprehension (though following a  script initially may appeal to us more because it requires far less of us).

It is certainly easier to learn a role or a part that someone has handed to us than it is to create a life based upon an evolving foundation of truth seeking. 

But it is the latter that is ultimately more likely to foster greater moral courage, comprehension, and a thoughtfully principled life.

And so questions are good, changing moral understanding and evolving enlightenment is hopefully life-long, agency is important, and kindness towards others who are on their own version of such learning processes is essential.

The phrase “cut off from” in the Old Testament

 There it was again, in Proverbs 2:22: “But the wicked shall be cut off”, in this case, cut off from the earth.  Other verses in the Bible say things like “from among this people” , or just “cut off”.  So what does it mean?

From https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1946/what-does-the-old-testament-phrase-cut-off-from-their-people-mean

we find this answer, which is rather interesting.

“according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kareth:

The Hebrew term kareth ("cutting off" Hebrew: כָּרֵת‎, [kaˈret]) is a form of punishment for sin ... In the Talmud, kareth means not necessarily physical "cutting off" of life, but extinction of the soul and denial of a share in the world to come. ... 

In the Hebrew Bible, kareth is a form of punishment which may mean premature death, or else exclusion from the people.[3][4] According to Richard C. Steiner, the phrase "to be cut off from one's people" is an antonym for "to be gathered to one's people" (e.g. Genesis 25:8), and thus kareth in the Bible means to be deprived of the afterlife.[5]
Examples of sins making a person liable to kareth include eating chametz on Passover,[6] sexual violations,[7] ritual impurities, and a man's refusal to be circumcised.[8] The Book of Numbers states that anyone who sins deliberately or high-handedly receives kareth.

Rabbinic interpretation:

Kareth is the punishment for certain crimes and offences defined under Jewish law (e.g. eating the life blood of a living animal, eating suet, refusing to be circumcised, etc.), a punishment that can only be given at the hand of heaven unto persons of the Jewish faith who are bound to keep the Jewish law, rather than made punishable by any earthly court. In some cases of sexual misconduct and in breaking the laws of the Sabbath, such as where there are witnesses of the act, the court is able to inflict punishment. By definition, kareth does not apply to non-Jews. Kareth can either mean dying young (before the age of 50 or 60[10]), dying without children, or the soul being spiritually "cut off" from your people after death.[11] According to Nachmanides, both definitions are accurate.

You can look up the footnotes on that website.

One thing that intrigues me in that definition is the possible definition of  “being spiritually cut off from your people after death”.  In an LDS perspective that might be seen as a reference to the division between prison and paradise in the post mortal/pre-resurrection life, or to the (grossly oversimplified) understanding of post-resurrection life.  I tend to think it fits better with what the scriptures say about the former than what they say about the latter.  

This phrase, “cut off” comes up in Leviticus a number of times when a particular sin is mentioned, with the immediately following verse stating that sin is punishable by death. Some tend to think that this means that being “cut off” means being killed.  I tend, rather, to think that they are two separate consequences, not the same consequence being stated twice.  The Rabbinic interpretation seems to support that; referring to being “cut off”  as a consequence that comes from heavenly action or the eternal power of God, not a physical consequence carried out by humans on earth who are trying to carry out His will in regards to consequences on earth.

C.S. Lewis, in one of his books, portrayed the misery of hell not as a fire and brimstone suffering, but instead as an existence typified by one’s antipathy, anger, bitterness, resentment, and one’s self-justfication for sin, which caused one to isolate oneself further and further (both physically and relationship-wise) from others and from God.  It strikes me as something to consider as a possible example of the essence of what the biblical references to “being cut off” might be referring to in the eternal scheme of things.

Psalm 61 So will I sing praise unto thy name for ever, that I may daily perform my vows.

 A relationship between my praising God and my ability to daily remember and keep the covenants I have made with God?

In my religious culture we speak of and practice thanking God, and petitioning God, and confiding in God, and confessing to God in our prayers.  But we tend to relegate our praising Him to our hymn singing:

“Oh God our Help in Ages Past…”  “I Stand All Amazed…”  “Praise God from Whom All Blessings Flow”

And realize, thinking about it, that when I think about praise in prayer I tend to remember expansive public prayers by evangelical friends, or quiet recitation by Catholic friends, or the strong words of the Imam I listened to in the local Mosque, but I cannot remember the last time I heard a member of my faith praise God in prayer;  humble, faithful, loving, trusting, petitioning, thankful prayers? yes.  prayers of praise?  not so much.

Why?  Perhaps it is because the perceived boisterousness or high energy of evangelical praise does not fit the tenor of the prayer we are trying to pray, or the solemnity and tradition of the quiet more formal Catholic prayer seems too different, or the declarations of the Imam seem too unfamiliar for us to incorporate into our own prayers. Or perhaps it is because we cannot find in our vocabulary words that express our  awe and understanding of the nature of our God. But that should not preclude us from praising in prayer.  Particularly since there are so many admonitions in the scriptures to “praise the Lord”.

What I am finding is that yes, when I praise God in prayer, I am fully and uncomfortably aware that the words I use, no matter how carefully and respectfully chosen are woefully inadequate.  And I don’t like that feeling.  

On the other hand, when I do try to praise him in prayer, verbally or just with my heart because words are so inadequate, and do so before I speak to him of the help I seek for others or myself, or of the good I want to do that day, (acknowledging consciously or subconsciously, in that process, the covenants that I want to keep that cause me to seek to do effectuate and do good), my power to keep those covenants and do that good is increased.  My confidence to be able to do and work for good actually increases as I articulate the power and majesty and amazing grace of my God to whom I am both expressing thanks and petitioning for assistance.

It seems that there is something about praising God in prayer that reminds me of the nature of God and of His ready, willing (full of grace) inclination to help.  And that increases my hope and faith as I move forward, which in turn opens my mind to more communication from Him; extra bits of holy determination and vision that empower me to live, more consistently, the covenants (vows) I have made.

Halting between two opinions

 When I have received direction from the Lord and find myself indecisive simply because the alternatives seem reasonable and compelling:

“How long halt ye between two opinions?  If the Lord be God, follow him”.   (1 Kings 18:21)

“Behold, the Lord requireth the heart and a willing mind:”  (Doc & Cov 64:33)

Artists’ renderings of David and Goliath

Unknown Artist

 Peter Paul Reubens

"The New and Everlasting Covenant" and "The New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage"

"The new and everlasting covenant" is composed of "all covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows performances, connections association or expectations" [1] that God invites his children to enter into by the Holy Spirit (ie: ratified as in effect by the Holy Ghost)[3].  These covenants referred to are entered into in conjunction with God's authority and power.  

The new and everlasting covenant is also called "the fullness of the gospel"[4] in part, I believe, because it reminds us that we are ultimately called to enter into a complete (full) commitment/covenant to incorporate every part of Jesus's gospel into our lives, covenanting ourselves to being fully united with God; to take upon ourselves the name of Christ.

 

The new and everlasting covenant includes, therefore, all covenants that we make to more fully live the gospel of Jesus Christ.  Those covenants include covenants we make at baptism, during the sacrament, when we marry, when we receive priesthood ordination or priesthood power, etc.

 

"The new and everlasting covenant of marriage" is the gospel marriage covenant, made in conjunction with God's authority and power, and made between God and two of his children who are in, or who are entering into, a marriage.[5]  It involves a man and a woman giving themselves to each other to be husband and wife in a holy marriage[6] and, like every covenant, each of them, individually, solemnly makes a covenant to the Lord that they will be faithful to the principles of the gospel of Jesus Christ in their marriage; loving and caring for each other. [7] 

This covenant also involves a covenant and a promise, on God's part, to seal upon those individuals, certain, specific, heavenly blessings and power to act in godly ways, pronounced by someone who has been given God's power to do so,[8]which, covenant "in the process of time"[9]  may "sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise".[10]  They are reminded that the efficacy of the sealing of those blessings and power to act is dependent upon their faithfulness to the Lord.  And none of those blessings say anything about people being "sealed to each other".  Specific blessings are sealed upon them dependent upon their faithfulness. Being "sealed to each other" is not one of those blessings. 

 

In the temple marriage ceremony what is sealed is the promise of blessings upon each of the two individuals involved, both the husband and the wife, with counsel that their receiving those blessings, individually, depends upon their respective faithfulness to the Lord, and their living the principles of His gospel throughout their lives.   This is not an ordinance that is focused on who lives with whom.  It is an ordinance that invites us, as individuals, to live holy lives in our relationships, and to be prepared, therefore, to receive the grace and glory that God hopes we will embrace with joy.  This is a classic gospel covenant pattern.

 

Contrary to Latter-day Saint vernacular and happy but theologically sloppy Primary songs, and even the occasional misuse of the phrase in church manuals, a husband and wife are not "sealed to each other" in the temple.   Rather, each individual enters into a "new and everlasting covenant of marriage" before God, promising to God that each will, individually, seek to create a holy marriage; a marriage upon a full commitment to the principles of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  They are also pronounced married and in a marriage relationship that may (if they individually keep the covenants into which they have entered)[11] last beyond this life.[12] and divine blessings are conditionally "sealed" upon them[13] dependent upon their individual faithfulness to the commitment they have made.  Again this is a classic gospel covenant pattern.

 

Temple marriage "sealings', in other words the things that are actually sealed in a marriage in a temple, are not sealings (bindings, tying, gluing eternally into the same celestial relationship) of two people to each other.  Temple marriage sealings are actually provisional sealings of specific future blessings upon individuals who have made specific promises to God to live a holy life in their marriage.[14]

 

The blessings that are sealed upon them are dependent upon their individual faithful keeping of their promise to live by the word of God in their marriage thoughout their lives and beyond.[15]  Those blessings are blessings that, like the blessings of other holy covenants, are ones connected to and are a result of one's efforts to live a holy, or celestial, life.[16]

  

We are not "family groups" to God (though He does delight in a good and loving family).  We are, first and foremost, His individual, beloved children.

---

[1]Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Fielding Smith p.165.

[2] Doctrine and Covenants 1:15-16, 22-23

[3] Smith Joseph F, Doctrines of Salvation, 2:46

[4] Doctrine and Covenants 66:2

[5] Doctrine and Covenants 132:9

[6] Preparing to Enter the Holy Temple, https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/preparing-to-enter-the-holy-temple/preparing-to-enter-the-holy-temple?lang=eng

[7] True to the Faith p. 171, The Family a Proclamation to the World

[8] Doctrine and Covenants 132:19

[9] Moses 7:21, Bednar, David A.,  Ensign, May 2007, p. 22

[10] Doctrine and Covenants 76:51-53, Smith, ibid. 2:94-95, Bednar, David A, Ensign, May 2007 p.22

[11] Doctrine and Covenants 121:41-42, 

[12] Lee, Harold B. Stand Ye in Holy Places, p.53

[13] Doctrine and Covenants 132:19-20

[14] Cofford, Kree-L, "Marriage in the Lord's Way, Part 1", Ensign June 1998

[15] Smith, ibid. 2:46,  Doctrine and Covenants 132:21

[16] Doctrine and Covenants sections 121, 76, and 132

Fear, Impatience, and Thinking That Simply Performing Ordinances Is What You Need to Get God to Assist You 1st Samuel 13:8

 Before battle, ancient Israelites were counseled to offer sacrifices to God, seeking His help and blessing in the coming fight.  Those sacrifices were under the direction of men set apart by God to oversee them, as  directed by the Lord.

Saul found himself preparing for battle against the Philistines in Gilgal following Jonathan’s attack on their garrison at Geba.  The huge army gathered by the Philistines was (vs. 5) was frightening to behold, and Saul’s soldiers began to hunker down in defensive positions or desert all-together (vs. 5-6).

Samuel, the prophet called to express God's will to Saul and all his people, had told Saul to wait 7 full days, and that he (Samuel) would be there to for that rite of sacrifice at the end of that period.

It must have been excruciating for Saul to watch his outnumbered army increase in fear and decrease in numbers as they awaited the arrival of Samuel.  Every day he waited made their situation look worse.

So he gave up waiting and went ahead and offered the sacrifices himself.  It seems to indicate that for him, paying attention to God and making acting under His direction for timing and place…working with Him and drawing nearer to Him that process, was not what was important.  Instead it was simply the ritual of sacrifice, by itself,  that He believed would bring God’s blessing upon his effort and solve his mounting challenges.

He was reducing what should have created an experience of divine connection and guidance into an experience that simply went through a ritual in order to get something he felt he desperately needed.

Samuel’s famous sentence, “Obedience is greater than sacrifice” is not so much a lauding of the principle of obedience, as it is a reminder, when we engage in religious rites, to truly engage with God, receiving  direction from Him about how, when, where , who etc. and recommitting ourselves to Him and opening our hearts to further connection and instruction as we do so  (a foundational principle of holy obedience).  The rite (in this case sacrifice, but it could be applied to any other religious rite) itself is not what is most important.  It is humility before God and desire to seek Him and learn from Him and follow His counsel that is the vital part of any such outward form of worship or covenant making.

When we reduce God to a hander out of favors that we merit through rites (or ceremonies or rituals or performances) rather than discovering the communing with Him that comes as we seek His will and understanding about those rites and during  those rites,  and seeking to trust and obey His will  in that, and  in all other things on an ongoing  basis.

“Obedience is  greater than sacrifice”  is, in essence,  “Seeking to do God’s will and working with God as you engage in ordinances and rites and rituals (animal sacrifice in this case) is of far  greater importance and value to you, and connects you with God in far more blessedly, than simply participating in or carrying out those ordinances, rites  and rituals”.

Overlooking Weaknesses

“I have long felt that happiness in marriage is not so much a matter of romance as it is an anxious concern for the comfort and well-being of one’s companion.  That involves a willingness to overlook weaknesses and mistakes.” 

Gordon B. Hinckley, Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley (1997), 325.

My faith is placed upon Jesus Christ

      “Brigham Young...said 'My faith is not placed upon the Lord’s working upon the islands of the sea, upon his bringing the people here, … nor upon the favors he bestows upon this people or upon that people, neither upon whether we are blessed or not blessed, but my faith is placed upon the Lord Jesus Christ, and my knowledge I have received from him.' (Brigham Young, "Instructions", Deseret News, Nov. 21, 1855)

     "Our repentance and obedience, our service and sacrifices do matter. We want to be among those described by Ether as “always abounding in good works." (Ether 12:4) But it is not...because of some tally kept in celestial account books. These things matter because they engage us in God’s work and are the means by which we collaborate with Him in our own transformation from natural man to saint. (Mosiah 3:19) What our Heavenly Father offers us is Himself and His Son, a close and enduring relationship with Them through the grace and mediation of Jesus Christ, our Redeemer.

From "Our Relationship with God", D. Todd Christofferson, April 2022

It is not true that when the prophet speaks the thinking has been done.

Some critics of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day saints express belief that that church expects unquestioning responses to statements by church leaders. A quote which they choose to offer in support of this misconception is that ‘when the prophet speaks, the thinking is done.’ This statement originally appeared in the Improvement Era, in June 1945, as the Ward Teaching message for the month. The entire paragraph of that article that contains that phrase was

"When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan–it is God’s plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy. God works in no other way. To think otherwise, without immediate repentance, may cost one his faith, may destroy his testimony, and leave him a stranger to the kingdom of God"

Dr. J. Raymond Cope, the leader of the First Unitarian Society in Salt Lake City, was one individual who read that article in 1945 and was concerned. He decided to express his concerns about the impact of this message in a letter to President George Albert Smith in November of the same year. The letter was cordial, and expressed the feeling that such a message was “doing inestimable harm to many who have no other reason to question the integrity of the Church leaders… this cannot be the position of the true leaders.”

President Smith responded to Dr. Cope with a letter of his own, designed to clarify the point, at the first of December. The letter, reproduced in full below, should lay to rest any misconception about whether the Church or its leaders expect blind obedience in any degree. (Items that are underlined were underlined in the original.)

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

Office of the First Presidency

Salt Lake City, Utah

December 7, 1945

Dr. J. Raymond Cope

First Unitarian Society

13th East at 6th South Street

Salt Lake City, Utah

 

My dear Dr. Cope:

I have read with interest and deep concern your letter of November 16, 1945, in which you make special comment on “a short religious editorial prepared by one of your (our) leaders entitled “Sustaining the General Authorities of the Church'”. You say that you read the message with amazement, and that you have since been disturbed because of its effect upon members of the Church.

I am gratified with the spirit of friendliness that pervades your letter, and thank you for having taken the time to write to me.

The leaflet to which you refer, and from which you quote in your letter, was not “prepared” by “one of our leaders.” However, one or more of them inadvertently permitted the paragraph to pass uncensored. By their so doing, not a few members of the Church have been upset in their feelings, and General Authorities have been embarrassed.

I am pleased to assure you that you are right in your attitude that the passage quoted does not express the true position of the Church. Even to imply that members of the Church are not to do their own thinking is grossly to misrepresent the true ideal of the Church, which is that every individual must obtain for himself a testimony of the truth of the Gospel, must, through the redemption of Jesus Christ, work out his own salvation, and is personally responsible to His Maker for his individual acts. The Lord Himself does not attempt coercion in His desire and effort to give peace and salvation to His children. He gives the principles of life and true progress, but leaves every person free to choose or to reject His teachings. This plan the Authorities of the Church try to follow.

The Prophet Joseph Smith once said: “I want liberty of thinking and believing as I please.” This liberty he and his successors in the leadership of the Church have granted to every other member thereof.

On one occasion in answer to the question by a prominent visitor how he governed his people, the Prophet answered: “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.”

Again, as recorded in the History of the Church (Volume 5, page 498 [499] Joseph Smith said further: “If I esteem mankind to be in error, shall I bear them down? No. I will lift them up, and in their own way too, if I cannot persuade them my way is better; and I will not seek to compel any man to believe as I do, only by the force of reasoning, for truth will cut its own way.”

I cite these few quotations, from many that might be given, merely to confirm your good and true opinion that the Church gives to every man his free agency, and admonishes him always to use the reason and good judgment with which God has blessed him.

In the advocacy of this principle leaders of the Church not only join congregations in singing but quote frequently the following:

“Know this, that every soul is free

To choose his life and what he’ll be,

For this eternal truth is given

That God will force no man to heaven.”

Again I thank you for your manifest friendliness and for your expressed willingness to cooperate in every way to establish good will and harmony among the people with whom we are jointly laboring to bring brotherhood and tolerance.

Faithfully yours,

Geo. Albert Smith [signed]

In a nutshell, that sentiment of 

"When our leaders speak, the thinking has been done. When they propose a plan–it is God’s plan. When they point the way, there is no other which is safe. When they give direction, it should mark the end of controversy. God works in no other way. To think otherwise, without immediate repentance, may cost one his faith, may destroy his testimony, and leave him a stranger to the kingdom of God"

Is definitely not a gospel truth nor is it supported as such by the church.

This letter from George Albert Smith can be found in the George A. Smith Papers (Manuscript no. 36, Box 63-8A), Special Collections, Marriott Library, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. More detailed information on this topic can be found in Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 19:1 (Spring 1986), 35-39.

You can find a transcription of that 1945 misguided Improvement Era magazine article here: https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/archive/publications/when-the-prophet-speaks-is-the-thinking-done

Why meditation?

 In our current society it seems that the Adversary majors in five things: noise, hurry, crowds, distractions and indignation.  And he seeks to keep us engaged in those.

One thing the Adversary really doesn’t like is the practice of meditation or contemplation.

In the Bible two different Hebrew words are used to convey the idea of meditation and have various meanings: listening to God’s word, reflecting on God’s works, remembering God’s deeds, contemplating on God’s laws, etc.  And in each case there is emphasis on how one’s behavior changes as a result of the increased or renewed comprehension of God and His work in our lives.  

That kind of meditation almost always leads to the incorporation of repentance, increased comprehension, and/or renewed commitment into our lives.

My meditation, as a disciple of Christ is, very simply, designed to increase my ability to hear God’s voice in my life, to experience fellowship with God, to learn God’s perspective of love and light and truth, and to incorporate what I learn from that meditation into my life and into my interaction with others.

Consciously taking the time for it is something I need to do more.

Gods (plural) in Abraham, chapter 4

 When I much was younger, I remember hearing all kinds of conjectures, all rather highly speculative and creative, about why that noun was plural in chapter 4.

The most reasonable explanation to me is this:  

Chapter 3 uses “the Lord” to refer to God.  Singular.  And describes His outlining of his plans to “the intelligences that were organized before the world was”.

At the end of chapter 3, the Lord asks who he should “send”, two volunteer, and the Lord chooses the first one, the one who, on earth, will be known as Jesus.

And then, as the creation starts, the use of plural, begins.  Why? Because now there are two involved in the creation of the world: The Father and that first one: the Son.

Why do I think that is the answer to the question about why plural appears here?  

Consider the opening verses of the Book of John, which speak of Jesus Christ’s intimate involvement in the creation of the world.  

Consider Jesus’ words later, in chapter 5 of the Book of John: “ Verily, truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does, the Son also does.”

And consider of the meaning of “Immanuel” by which name Jesus was called by both Isaiah and Matthew; “God with us.”

The God the Father and God the Son were working together in the creation outlined in Abraham chapter 4.  Plural.

I think that the reason for that plural is just that simple.