A dear sister once expressed her belief that the ordinance of confirmation, receiving the Gift of the Holy Ghost through the laying on of hands, is the same thing as being baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost (as in 3Ne. 9:20). I believe this is inaccurate. They are two distinct events, though one may accompany the other.
In the Doctrine and Covenants, and in the Book of Abraham, we are taught that the eternal trajectory of this earth on which we live mirrors the trajectory or path of a mortal individual. The earth existed in a spirit form; we were spirits before we were born physically. The earth had a physical creation; we have a physical birth. The earth was baptized at the time of Noah and the flood; we are baptized at age 8. I think the appearance of the rainbow after the flood is to the earth what confirmation is to a mortal individual. The earth's equivalent of baptism with fire will occur at the Savior's return, when every evil person and every corruptible thing will be destroyed by fire. Our spiritual rebirth is not what happens when hands are laid upon our heads after baptism. Rather, it is what happens as we obey the instruction we receive when we are confirmed: "Receive the Holy Ghost."
This is not a passive description of what has just happened; it is a command to live in such a way that we are worthy of the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost, and to heed its promptings.
Think about the director, the liahona that Lehi found outside the door of his tent one morning.
It appeared when it was needed—at the very moment when they began their journey into unfamiliar territory toward the as yet unseen promised land. Imagine what would have happened if Lehi had left it on the ground where he found it. Unthinkable. But imagine if Lehi had picked it up, admired it for a while, and put it into his luggage, rarely or never to be seen by him or his family. Would that constitute receiving this miraculous gift? Hardly. The Lord's gifts are given to be used, not to be ignored or treated lightly.
The comparison between the liahona and the "word of Chirst" is clarified by Alma when he gives this national treasure to his son (see Alma 37:43-44). Where do we get the word of Christ from? Certainly from the scriptures. But many have had the scriptures, yet been in a state of apostasy because they lacked something more fundamental: direct revelation, the Holy Ghost. "No man can receive the Holy Ghost without receiving revelations. The Holy Ghost is a revelator" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 328). To receive the Holy Ghost means to follow its guidance and directions.
President Taylor recalled something Joseph Smith told him: "Elder Taylor, you have been baptized, you have had hands laid upon your head for the reception of the Holy Ghost, and you have been ordained to the holy priesthood. Now, if you will continue to follow the leadings of that spirit, it will always lead you right. Sometimes it might be contrary to your judgment; never mind that, follow its dictates; and if you be true to its whisperings it will in time become in you a principle of revelation so that you will know all things" (Deseret News: Semi-Weekly, 15 Jan. 1878, 1).
Joseph Smith also taught: "A person may profit by noticing the first intimation of the spirit of revelation; for instance, when you feel pure intelligence flowing into you, it may give you sudden strokes of ideas, so that by noticing it, you may find it fulfilled the same day or soon; (i.e.) those things that were presented unto your minds by the Spirit of God, will come to pass; and thus by learning the Spirit of God and understanding it, you may grow into the principle of revelation, until you become perfect in Christ Jesus" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 151).
It is tempting to say that the Spirit is everything. One would have to be omniscient to make such a statement with certainty, but it seems to be close enough to the truth to me. Our ordinances must be sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise before they are valid in the next world; seeing angels only adds condemnation, and lacks converting power without the Spirit; without it, we are in pain (see D&C 19:20); without it, life cannot even exist. When it is withdrawn, ordained men lose the authority of the priesthood.
The Spirit is given to us in degrees, or portions, like a dimmer knob that makes a light grow brighter gradually as it turns. How can we receive more? D&C 88 says that when we live according to celestial law, we receive a portion of celestial glory. When we live a terrestrial or telestial law, we receive a portion of those. But a portion is only a part. It says we will receive a fullness when we are resurrected and reach our assigned glory, whether of celestial, terrestrial, or telestial. So obedience to God's law to us is a way to ensure the quality of the Spirit we are receiving. What about quantity?
As a missionary, I received a printed sticker with seven suggestions—ways to invite the Spirit. These included singing, prayer, and performing ordinances. While the notion is correct, that we can only invite, never force, the Spirit to be with us, these suggestions tend toward the drinking fountain, while only obliquely approaching the source, the river. "And ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit. And whoso cometh unto me with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, him will I baptize
with fire and with the Holy Ghost, even as the Lamanites, because of
their faith in me at the time of their conversion, were baptized with
fire and with the Holy Ghost, and they knew it not" (3Ne.9:20).
This is a more extreme description of receiving the Spirit than simply "having" it, or "feeling" it. "...baptize with fire and with the Holy Ghost..." is intense language. What is the prerequisite to receiving this greater portion of the Spirit? "...offer for a sacrifice unto me a broken heart and a contrite spirit..." Jesus also mentions faith. It appears from this that a little humility will cause us to receive a little portion of the Spirit, while complete humility (the Hebrew is literally "broken heart" and "crushed spirit") will receive a massive outpouring.
It is possible to be confirmed a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints without having a broken heart or a contrite spirit. That complete humility is the bar we have to clear before spiritual rebirth happens; confirmation is necessary to make rebirth formalized, complete, but it is not the only prerequisite.
Years ago, a wonderful young woman I knew announced to a Sunday school class that, after thinking about the enormity of being required to sacrifice willingly, anything and everything for the Lord, she honestly did not want to do it. She figuratively stepped back a pace from the edge of such a cliff in fear. Strangely, her guile-free admission that she found complete submission to the Lord difficult, something she would be unwilling to do, was a flat contradiction of the promises and covenants she had already made in the Temple. She hesitated to make the very sacrifice she had covenanted to make.
While this young woman was not guilty of any grievous sin, experiencing a mighty change of heart is necessary for us to get into heaven, whether we are the vilest of sinners or not (see Mosiah 27:25), and that means some kind of complete submission. When we drag our feet about making this offering the Lord might give us problems to humble us.
When I first started learning about these principles, the necessity of sacrificing our all to the Lord, and the attendant blessings the Lord pours out on those who are willing to make such a sacrifice, I mistakenly believed that I could "get it over with" in one shot. My college institute was holding a drive to buy new toys for needy children, and I thought that I could demonstrate my total commitment to the Lord by emptying everything from my bank account and donating it to this charitable endeavor. As I drove from the bank to the institute building, a sickening feeling started to come over me, what I would later come to recognize as a prohibiting prompting of the Holy Spirit. Without words, the message was, "No, Stop, Don't do this..." The feeling worsened as I came to the building. It was intolerable by the time I was ready to stuff several thousand dollars into an unsigned envelope. I caved, and only put in a fraction of what I had intended to.
I learn several important lessons from that experience. One of them is that we are to approach the Lord as a waiter approaches a restaurant patron. We are to offer Him the whole menu—a list of everything we own or love. He is the one who decides what is an acceptable offering from us to Him. "Will I accept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name? Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed?" (D&C 132:9-10).
My hypocrisy in this attempt to pay the Lord became clear to me later. God does not want a part of us, or a fraction of what we have. He wants everything—our whole selves, our time, our abilities, our every possession, our relationships, our dreams, everything we treasure, our hearts, now and forever. The Lord has already offered Himself to us in a similar way; it is fitting that we must respond in kind. If I am trying to get it over with so I can do other things I find more convenient or appealing, is my offering really a sign of love toward God?
"Holy, Holy, Holy, is the Lord of Hosts," says Isaiah 6:3. What does "holy" mean? "Clean" in a spiritual as well as physical way is one correct meaning. But another profoundly instructive definition of "holy" for us is "consecrated" or "dedicated." Temples are open to all tourists for inspection before they are dedicated. But afterward, they are used for specific purposes by people with certain qualifications only. To commit one's self half way to the Lord is like dedicating a Temple for ordinances in some of the rooms, but renting it as an apartment or a restaurant in other rooms.
When a Temple is dedicated, and no unclean thing is allowed inside, then the Spirit of the Lord dwells there, and is experienced there, manifested there, in ways that do not typically happen before it is dedicated. Similarly, when we devote our whole self to Christ and His service, we are filled with fire and with the Holy Ghost to a degree that can happen in no other way. We give our whole heart to Christ, and He gives us His heart, His nature, to replace it. The baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost and the mighty change of heart are the same thing.
In the Temple we make covenants to commit everything we have to God. The words HOLINESS TO THE LORD written on the outside of modern Temples, do not mean "praise God." "Holiness to the Lord" means "consecrated to the Lord," in other words, "we gave this to God; it is His." HOLINESS TO THE LORD was engraved on the golden crown worn by the High Priest in the ancient Temple. He belonged to God; he could only see certain things, hear certain things, do certain things, and go certain places, because he was not his own anymore, but God's. God does not overstep agency. If we want to be holy, we have to give everything we are, everything we have, to the Lord. When we are His, then He can cause that mighty change of heart, a transplant that replaces our flawed nature and installs His nature where ours was. D&C 109, the dedicatory prayer for the Kirtland Temple, lists as one of the purposes of the Temple that those who come there "may receive a fulness of the Holy Ghost" (v. 15). When we make the covenants of the Temple with all sincerity, and strive to keep them with all our hearts, we will realize that great blessing—to receive the Holy Ghost.
I hope that we will see the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel as the real meat, the real mysteries, and the real center of our mortal probation. Receiving the Holy Ghost is the work of a lifetime, not something we can get over and done with.
Saturday, May 18, 2013
Friday, May 3, 2013
Heavenly Mother
Here is an excerpt from a conversation I had, to the best of my memory:
Friend: "Why don't we read or hear more about Heavenly Mother?"
Me: "I think the reason is because...why are you doing that?" (The friend I was talking to had raised her hands to her ears as if to improve her hearing, in a histrionic, playful fashion.)
Friend: "Because I want to hear you say what EVERYONE else says—God doesn't reveal anything about Her because He doesn't want Her to be disrespected."
Me: "Actually, I was going to say that we don't hear much about Her because our mortal experience, our salvation here, is not Her job."
My friend did not like that answer very much. Aside from Eliza R. Snow's hymn, "O My Father," and the words "Heavenly Parents" in The Family: A Proclamation to the World, we have no direct canonical references to Heavenly Mother. If we learn about Her, it must be through the same means that Eliza R. Snow mentions in her hymn—reason. We must read between the lines, infer, see implications, follow the dominoes of syllogistic lines of reasoning. If God is veiled from us in a cloud of mystery, His Partner is doubly veiled. Why the cover-up? And why do we not worship or pray to Her?
Concerned women were asking such questions online recently, and I take this moment to chime in and give my response here.
President Uchtdorf said, "God the Eternal Father did not give that first great commandment because He needs us to love Him. His power and glory are not diminished should we disregard, deny, or even defile His name. His influence and dominion extend through time and space independent of our acceptance, approval, or admiration.
"No, God does not need us to love Him. But oh, how we need to love God!
"For what we love determines what we seek.
"What we seek determines what we think and do.
"What we think and do determines who we are—and who we will become.
"We are created in the image of our heavenly parents; we are God’s spirit children. Therefore, we have a vast capacity for love—it is part of our spiritual heritage. What and how we love not only defines us as individuals; it also defines us as a church. Love is the defining characteristic of a disciple of Christ" (The God of Love, October 2009 General Conference). Notice the mention of "parents."
Worship is for our benefit, not God's; it is not to make us feel good about being male or female. We pray to God and worship Him because He is the One, along with Christ and the Holy Ghost, charged with getting us out of the telestial pigsty we live in. When someone is baptized, the person performing the ordinance says, "Brother/Sister ________, having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." He then lays the person down in the water, and brings them back up again. As Jack Christensen quipped in one of my institute classes, "There was no second-string Savior," no substitute to perform the Atonement if Jesus decided to back out or quit. Jesus Christ is the only Savior. "And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent" (Mosiah 3:17).
Regardless of what beloved friends or family we left behind premortally, we can only look one place for salvation while we are here. I believe that if we could establish direct communication with Heavenly Mother, she would immediately redirect us to Father. Why? Because there is no one else for us to hold onto in order to be pulled to safety. This life is spiritually perilous; it is like walking a tightrope with Satan hurling rocks and rotten tomatoes at us the whole time. A firm grip on our covenants made with God, His Son, and the power of the Holy Ghost, is all we have to stabilize us and bring us safely back. There will be a whole eternity to spend with Mother; for now, focusing on anyone but Christ (we covenant weekly in the sacrament to "always remember him") would be a potentially dangerous preoccupation.
We worship and pray to God because of the urgency of holding to the Father and Christ and none else. We follow the promptings of the Holy Ghost back to them, and they escort us back to heaven. Till then, as Paul says, we are in peril every hour. Just as Peter's focus on the Savior allowed him to walk on the water, our focus on the Savior will bring us across the gulf of misery. THEN the reunion Sister Snow envisions can occur:
"When I leave this frail existence...Father, Mother, may I meet you In your royal courts on high?...Let me come and dwell with you."
Friend: "Why don't we read or hear more about Heavenly Mother?"
Me: "I think the reason is because...why are you doing that?" (The friend I was talking to had raised her hands to her ears as if to improve her hearing, in a histrionic, playful fashion.)
Friend: "Because I want to hear you say what EVERYONE else says—God doesn't reveal anything about Her because He doesn't want Her to be disrespected."
Me: "Actually, I was going to say that we don't hear much about Her because our mortal experience, our salvation here, is not Her job."
My friend did not like that answer very much. Aside from Eliza R. Snow's hymn, "O My Father," and the words "Heavenly Parents" in The Family: A Proclamation to the World, we have no direct canonical references to Heavenly Mother. If we learn about Her, it must be through the same means that Eliza R. Snow mentions in her hymn—reason. We must read between the lines, infer, see implications, follow the dominoes of syllogistic lines of reasoning. If God is veiled from us in a cloud of mystery, His Partner is doubly veiled. Why the cover-up? And why do we not worship or pray to Her?
Concerned women were asking such questions online recently, and I take this moment to chime in and give my response here.
President Uchtdorf said, "God the Eternal Father did not give that first great commandment because He needs us to love Him. His power and glory are not diminished should we disregard, deny, or even defile His name. His influence and dominion extend through time and space independent of our acceptance, approval, or admiration.
"No, God does not need us to love Him. But oh, how we need to love God!
"For what we love determines what we seek.
"What we seek determines what we think and do.
"What we think and do determines who we are—and who we will become.
"We are created in the image of our heavenly parents; we are God’s spirit children. Therefore, we have a vast capacity for love—it is part of our spiritual heritage. What and how we love not only defines us as individuals; it also defines us as a church. Love is the defining characteristic of a disciple of Christ" (The God of Love, October 2009 General Conference). Notice the mention of "parents."
Worship is for our benefit, not God's; it is not to make us feel good about being male or female. We pray to God and worship Him because He is the One, along with Christ and the Holy Ghost, charged with getting us out of the telestial pigsty we live in. When someone is baptized, the person performing the ordinance says, "Brother/Sister ________, having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." He then lays the person down in the water, and brings them back up again. As Jack Christensen quipped in one of my institute classes, "There was no second-string Savior," no substitute to perform the Atonement if Jesus decided to back out or quit. Jesus Christ is the only Savior. "And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent" (Mosiah 3:17).
Regardless of what beloved friends or family we left behind premortally, we can only look one place for salvation while we are here. I believe that if we could establish direct communication with Heavenly Mother, she would immediately redirect us to Father. Why? Because there is no one else for us to hold onto in order to be pulled to safety. This life is spiritually perilous; it is like walking a tightrope with Satan hurling rocks and rotten tomatoes at us the whole time. A firm grip on our covenants made with God, His Son, and the power of the Holy Ghost, is all we have to stabilize us and bring us safely back. There will be a whole eternity to spend with Mother; for now, focusing on anyone but Christ (we covenant weekly in the sacrament to "always remember him") would be a potentially dangerous preoccupation.
We worship and pray to God because of the urgency of holding to the Father and Christ and none else. We follow the promptings of the Holy Ghost back to them, and they escort us back to heaven. Till then, as Paul says, we are in peril every hour. Just as Peter's focus on the Savior allowed him to walk on the water, our focus on the Savior will bring us across the gulf of misery. THEN the reunion Sister Snow envisions can occur:
"When I leave this frail existence...Father, Mother, may I meet you In your royal courts on high?...Let me come and dwell with you."
Monday, April 15, 2013
The Importance of the Commandments
We Latter-day Saints receive much criticism from various denominations for teaching that our behavior has an impact on our salvation. Is there any scriptural support for the importance of behavior to salvation?
Yes, there is, and we need look no further than the teachings of Jesus Christ Himself to find it in the New Testament. Perhaps our friends of other faiths misunderstand the point of the commandments. A recent attempt by such friends to teach us wayward Mormons the truth was an ad campaign whose sole purpose was to demonstrate the futility of good works. The distilled essence of their message was: “We all sin and fall short—therefore, the commandments must not figure into salvation, but are probably the Lord’s way of setting the bar so high that we give up and rely on grace.” The commandments are not a heavy backpack; they are a jetpack, because “the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them” (1Ne. 3:7). The purpose of grace is not to sit down and stop trying; it is to enable us to do works we cannot do otherwise.
Peter seems to understand this principle. When the disciples in the boat see Jesus walking on the water, they are afraid, and uncertain that it really is Him. Peter determines a test: “...Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water.” (Matt. 14:28). When the Lord bids or commands us to do something, He provides the ability, the means to perform the task at the same time. “And he said, Come.” Peter hops out of the boat, and begins to walk on the water also. His faith waivers, and he begins to sink, but his belief that the Lord would prepare a way to accomplish the feat was justified; Jesus grabbed his hand and brought him up again out of the water, and together they walked back to the ship.
Each commandment we receive has a built-in portion of grace that enables us to obey it.
A good Pentecostal friend in Georgia quoted Isaiah to me: “...all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags...” (64:6). Our attempts to obey frequently come up short (like Peter sinking). If we perform so poorly, why does the Lord give us an avalanche of commandments? Though we cannot prove by our actions that we deserve heaven, we can still prove that we love God by our attempts to do what He asks us to do. “If ye love me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love. These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you” (John 15:10-14). Fumble or stumble we may, but as long as we are trying to keep God’s commandments with love for Him, He is pleased. It is a matter of proving our love for God.
Jesus quotes from Isaiah more than any other prophet. “...well did Esais prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 14:7-9). Included on that list of vain teachings is the idea, “take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry,” because God does not care what you do so long as you believe. “...Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:18-20). Jesus is adamant about us striving to produce those “rags.”
Many people teach that all we must to do be saved is confess Christ, and believe. “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock...” (Matt. 7:21-24). There is no conversation between the Lord and those being judged about whether they confessed and believed. Jesus does not ask anyone, “Have you been saved?” “Saved” does not happen till Jesus welcomes us through the gate. All promises are contingent on good behavior till then.
As if that were not enough, Matthew gives us an even more vivid view of the final judgment: “When the Son of Man shall come in his glory...before him shall be gathered all nations...Then shall the King say to those on his right hand, Come, ye blessed...inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer, when [did we do this stuff to you]? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” The scripture goes on to exactly reverse the judgment on those who are sent “into everlasting fire:” “...ye gave me no meat...ye gave me no drink...ye took me not in...ye clothed me not...ye visited me not...Inasmuch as ye did it not unto one of the least of these, ye did it not unto me...these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” (Matt. 25:31-46). Again, there is no discussion about faith, confession, or whether a person has been “saved.” Undoubtedly those things figure into the final judgment, because they are mentioned by Jesus. But what we do, our behavior, is also included. Neither is irrelevant.
“They that are whole need no physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Mark 2:17). Repentance denotes a turning of hand and foot, as well as heart and mind, from bad to good. Again, this is not a general demanding robotic obedience from mindless drones: “For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother” (Mark 3:35). It is about love. We are to try, and when we fail, we are to rely on His forgiveness, repent, and try again. Even if we cannot push the boulder up the hill, or even budge it, the amount of pressure we put against the implacable object is known to God, and He sees our love in our efforts to obey Him.
A military leader made a famous statement about obedience, oft quoted: “...choose you this day whom ye will serve...but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” Joshua’s statement resonates with firm, resolute determination and dedication. It is easy to catch his enthusiasm, and his audience reciprocates: “...therefore will we also serve the Lord; for he is our God.” But Joshua doubts their sincerity: “Ye cannot serve the Lord: for he is an holy God; he is a jealous God...If ye forsake the Lord, and serve strange gods, then he will turn and do you hurt, and consume you, after that he hath done you good...the people said...Nay; but we will serve the Lord. And Joshua said...therefore put away...the strange gods which are among you, and incline your heart unto the Lord God of Israel” (Joshua 24:15-23). In spite of Old Testament style rigor and regimented strictness, even then these things were still a matter of the heart.
Jesus is approached by a lawyer: “...what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord they God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.”
The first four of the Ten Commandments explain our relationship to God—He is our only God, have no idols, do not take His name in vain, and keep the Sabbath holy. The next six commandments explain our relationship with other mortals—honor parents, do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not lie, do not covet. These are outward and behavioral; the lawyer expressed the internal essence of the commandments, and Jesus agreed that he had got it right. The lawyer quibbles, and Jesus gives the parable of the Good Samaritan. “Go, and do thou likewise” (Luke 10:25-37).
There are numerous examples of Jesus emphasizing the importance of behavior in the New Testament. Does this mean grace is inadequate, or that we are to earn our salvation? We cannot earn salvation in the strictest sense; we cannot merit anything of ourselves. But because Jesus paid the price for sin, we have the chance to repent and try again, which Jesus demands that everyone do. Our behavior, then, becomes the means by which we show our love for God and our fellow men.
“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (John 17:3). “And hereby do we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments” (1 John 2:3). “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him” (1Cor. 2:9). Both to love God, and know Him, are equated with obedience.
Many who preach the idea of salvation independent of action cite Paul: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8-9). But is Paul saying works are irrelevant? In the very next verse: “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Are we “saved?” The place we look is to our works—those who are created anew by Christ will reflect that new creation in their works. Jesus tells Nicodemus that those who do truth make public that their good deeds required God’s assistance, “that they are wrought in God” (John 3:21). Paul is echoing the idea in Ephesians. Are we “born again?” “If ye know that [the Son] is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him” (1 John 2:29).
Indeed, few writers in the scriptures are more fervent about the importance of behavior than Paul. “Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness” (Rom. 6:16-18). Perhaps the pendulum of works vs. grace had swung too far in the direction of salvation by works among his audience, and he wrote about grace to remind us that we really are helpless after all we can do. But he does not dismiss the need for good works. Grace and works are both important in his writing. The works just show Whom we love. This is not sentimental love; it is critical. Whom do we worship? When our hearts are examined, who or what is enthroned there? Jesus is the one who saves us, who pulls us up out of the pit we have fallen in. But we must exert some kind of effort to hold onto Him; that effort is our attempt to obey “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” Faith in Christ is necessary, but repentance, baptism in water, and then by fire and by the Holy Ghost, are all plainly taught in the scriptures.
Teaching us about salvation by grace does not obviate or negate the numerous commandments to change and improve our behavior. Any system of faith that cannot reconcile the two, when they are both part of Jesus’ teachings, is false. If works are unimportant, then huge swaths of scripture, of Jesus’ own words, are also unimportant. This is not what the restored gospel teaches. In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we believe the Bible to be the word of God, and restoration scriptures, The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price, all support a combination of grace, faith, and works, just like the New Testament.
Yes, there is, and we need look no further than the teachings of Jesus Christ Himself to find it in the New Testament. Perhaps our friends of other faiths misunderstand the point of the commandments. A recent attempt by such friends to teach us wayward Mormons the truth was an ad campaign whose sole purpose was to demonstrate the futility of good works. The distilled essence of their message was: “We all sin and fall short—therefore, the commandments must not figure into salvation, but are probably the Lord’s way of setting the bar so high that we give up and rely on grace.” The commandments are not a heavy backpack; they are a jetpack, because “the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may accomplish the thing which he commandeth them” (1Ne. 3:7). The purpose of grace is not to sit down and stop trying; it is to enable us to do works we cannot do otherwise.
Peter seems to understand this principle. When the disciples in the boat see Jesus walking on the water, they are afraid, and uncertain that it really is Him. Peter determines a test: “...Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water.” (Matt. 14:28). When the Lord bids or commands us to do something, He provides the ability, the means to perform the task at the same time. “And he said, Come.” Peter hops out of the boat, and begins to walk on the water also. His faith waivers, and he begins to sink, but his belief that the Lord would prepare a way to accomplish the feat was justified; Jesus grabbed his hand and brought him up again out of the water, and together they walked back to the ship.
Each commandment we receive has a built-in portion of grace that enables us to obey it.
A good Pentecostal friend in Georgia quoted Isaiah to me: “...all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags...” (64:6). Our attempts to obey frequently come up short (like Peter sinking). If we perform so poorly, why does the Lord give us an avalanche of commandments? Though we cannot prove by our actions that we deserve heaven, we can still prove that we love God by our attempts to do what He asks us to do. “If ye love me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love. These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you” (John 15:10-14). Fumble or stumble we may, but as long as we are trying to keep God’s commandments with love for Him, He is pleased. It is a matter of proving our love for God.
Jesus quotes from Isaiah more than any other prophet. “...well did Esais prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. 14:7-9). Included on that list of vain teachings is the idea, “take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry,” because God does not care what you do so long as you believe. “...Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:18-20). Jesus is adamant about us striving to produce those “rags.”
Many people teach that all we must to do be saved is confess Christ, and believe. “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock...” (Matt. 7:21-24). There is no conversation between the Lord and those being judged about whether they confessed and believed. Jesus does not ask anyone, “Have you been saved?” “Saved” does not happen till Jesus welcomes us through the gate. All promises are contingent on good behavior till then.
As if that were not enough, Matthew gives us an even more vivid view of the final judgment: “When the Son of Man shall come in his glory...before him shall be gathered all nations...Then shall the King say to those on his right hand, Come, ye blessed...inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer, when [did we do this stuff to you]? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” The scripture goes on to exactly reverse the judgment on those who are sent “into everlasting fire:” “...ye gave me no meat...ye gave me no drink...ye took me not in...ye clothed me not...ye visited me not...Inasmuch as ye did it not unto one of the least of these, ye did it not unto me...these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal” (Matt. 25:31-46). Again, there is no discussion about faith, confession, or whether a person has been “saved.” Undoubtedly those things figure into the final judgment, because they are mentioned by Jesus. But what we do, our behavior, is also included. Neither is irrelevant.
“They that are whole need no physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Mark 2:17). Repentance denotes a turning of hand and foot, as well as heart and mind, from bad to good. Again, this is not a general demanding robotic obedience from mindless drones: “For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother” (Mark 3:35). It is about love. We are to try, and when we fail, we are to rely on His forgiveness, repent, and try again. Even if we cannot push the boulder up the hill, or even budge it, the amount of pressure we put against the implacable object is known to God, and He sees our love in our efforts to obey Him.
A military leader made a famous statement about obedience, oft quoted: “...choose you this day whom ye will serve...but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” Joshua’s statement resonates with firm, resolute determination and dedication. It is easy to catch his enthusiasm, and his audience reciprocates: “...therefore will we also serve the Lord; for he is our God.” But Joshua doubts their sincerity: “Ye cannot serve the Lord: for he is an holy God; he is a jealous God...If ye forsake the Lord, and serve strange gods, then he will turn and do you hurt, and consume you, after that he hath done you good...the people said...Nay; but we will serve the Lord. And Joshua said...therefore put away...the strange gods which are among you, and incline your heart unto the Lord God of Israel” (Joshua 24:15-23). In spite of Old Testament style rigor and regimented strictness, even then these things were still a matter of the heart.
Jesus is approached by a lawyer: “...what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord they God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.”
The first four of the Ten Commandments explain our relationship to God—He is our only God, have no idols, do not take His name in vain, and keep the Sabbath holy. The next six commandments explain our relationship with other mortals—honor parents, do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not lie, do not covet. These are outward and behavioral; the lawyer expressed the internal essence of the commandments, and Jesus agreed that he had got it right. The lawyer quibbles, and Jesus gives the parable of the Good Samaritan. “Go, and do thou likewise” (Luke 10:25-37).
There are numerous examples of Jesus emphasizing the importance of behavior in the New Testament. Does this mean grace is inadequate, or that we are to earn our salvation? We cannot earn salvation in the strictest sense; we cannot merit anything of ourselves. But because Jesus paid the price for sin, we have the chance to repent and try again, which Jesus demands that everyone do. Our behavior, then, becomes the means by which we show our love for God and our fellow men.
“And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (John 17:3). “And hereby do we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments” (1 John 2:3). “If ye love me, keep my commandments.” “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him” (1Cor. 2:9). Both to love God, and know Him, are equated with obedience.
Many who preach the idea of salvation independent of action cite Paul: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8-9). But is Paul saying works are irrelevant? In the very next verse: “For we are his workmanship, created in Christ unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” Are we “saved?” The place we look is to our works—those who are created anew by Christ will reflect that new creation in their works. Jesus tells Nicodemus that those who do truth make public that their good deeds required God’s assistance, “that they are wrought in God” (John 3:21). Paul is echoing the idea in Ephesians. Are we “born again?” “If ye know that [the Son] is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him” (1 John 2:29).
Indeed, few writers in the scriptures are more fervent about the importance of behavior than Paul. “Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness” (Rom. 6:16-18). Perhaps the pendulum of works vs. grace had swung too far in the direction of salvation by works among his audience, and he wrote about grace to remind us that we really are helpless after all we can do. But he does not dismiss the need for good works. Grace and works are both important in his writing. The works just show Whom we love. This is not sentimental love; it is critical. Whom do we worship? When our hearts are examined, who or what is enthroned there? Jesus is the one who saves us, who pulls us up out of the pit we have fallen in. But we must exert some kind of effort to hold onto Him; that effort is our attempt to obey “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” Faith in Christ is necessary, but repentance, baptism in water, and then by fire and by the Holy Ghost, are all plainly taught in the scriptures.
Teaching us about salvation by grace does not obviate or negate the numerous commandments to change and improve our behavior. Any system of faith that cannot reconcile the two, when they are both part of Jesus’ teachings, is false. If works are unimportant, then huge swaths of scripture, of Jesus’ own words, are also unimportant. This is not what the restored gospel teaches. In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we believe the Bible to be the word of God, and restoration scriptures, The Book of Mormon, The Doctrine and Covenants, and The Pearl of Great Price, all support a combination of grace, faith, and works, just like the New Testament.
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Marriage and Resurrection
I recently learned that D&C 132 was the last revelation Joseph
Smith received—about eleven months
before he was killed—that was included in the Doctrine and Covenants.
“Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection” (D&C 132:19) is a promise received by sealed spouses, and fulfilled for married couples when they are exalted. Along with immortality, sacrifice and death are also mentioned in section 132. Why the intersection of marriage with sacrifice and death? What is the connection between marriage and resurrection?
Speaking of those who are exalted, D&C 76:59 says, “...all things are theirs, whether life or death...” D&C 88 indicates that those who fulfill the measure of their creation will receive exaltation and celestial glory: “For notwithstanding they die, they also shall rise again, a spiritual body. They who are of a celestial spirit shall receive the same body which was a natural body; even ye shall receive your bodies, and your glory shall be that glory by which your bodies are quickened” (vs. 27-29). I take “natural body” here to mean that those who are exalted will retain the mortal power to beget life. Exaltation, and the reception of power over life and death, only comes to those who are married, sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise in this life and the next. Resurrection and marriage are related because both are associated power to create life. One begets new life; the other makes it renewed.
Creating worlds and filling them with animal life (Gen. 1-2), begetting children (Rom. 8:16), resurrecting the dead (John 11:25), bringing spiritual rebirth (D&C 76:24, Moses 1:39), are powers of resurrected beings. Jesus fittingly calls Himself The Life of the World. We can receive versions of some of these abilities in this life, but only a fullness of them in the next as married couples.
“Then shall they be gods, because they have no end,” “...a fulness and continuation of the seeds forever and ever...” D&C 132 also mentions sacrifice and death in relation to resurrection and eternal life. Abraham offered Isaac, and was blessed; David killed Uriah, and was damned. Marriages are performed at altars, the traditional place of sacrifice, a crux of life and death in the scriptures. The the House of Israel are symbolically bought through an atoning sacrifice of a lamb at the Old Temple. This helped the people look forward to Jesus Christ, who actually atoned for all sin. The Temple, then, is the crossroads of marriage and sacrifice, too.
Jesus descended into death, and was resurrected to perfection. We can inherit that same blessing, for He beckons, “come, follow me.” Little children who die are guaranteed exaltation in the celestial kingdom. He also taught, "...it will be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 348). I assume there are many things we experience throughout the trajectory of mortal life, from birth to marriage to old age, that prepare us for that long learning experience. Joseph Smith said, “I do not like to see a little child pass away, for it has not filled the measure of its creation and gained the victory over death” (Early History of Provo, 1849–1872; Utah Stake Bishop Meetings, July 17, 1868). In other words, the child is going to be exalted, but there will be added homework to do in order to compensate, to catch up to those who died in their old age. So there are advantages to staying behind in this mortal quagmire, if we prove faithful. "In retrospect, we will even see that our most trying years here [in mortality] will often have been our best years, producing large tree rings on our soul, Gethsemanes of growth!" (Taking up the Cross, Neal A. Maxwell, given at Brigham Young University on 4 January 1976).
I have wondered at the curious phrase, "gained the victory over death." I knew well a woman who was widowed, and lived alone. She missed her husband terribly, and was very eager to be done with life. Unlike most people, who are willing to do anything to stay alive, this woman actually wanted to be taken home to heaven. (She mentioned she was eager to chasten her husband for leaving her alone for all those years.) She eventually got her wish, and passed away after being alone for several years first. It seems to me that she had gained the victory over death—she felt no apprehension. Like the bold child at the pool brave enough to ascend the high dive for the first time while her friends halt and quiver at the bottom. While most of us fret and wring our hands in trepidation, paying doctors and absorbing vitamins and pills, she was unafraid to die, to plunge into eternity. Love and fear are incompatible; this woman loved her husband, and wanted to be wherever he went. Death involves total commitment because we cannot rescind it.
“Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection” (D&C 132:19) is a promise received by sealed spouses, and fulfilled for married couples when they are exalted. Along with immortality, sacrifice and death are also mentioned in section 132. Why the intersection of marriage with sacrifice and death? What is the connection between marriage and resurrection?
Speaking of those who are exalted, D&C 76:59 says, “...all things are theirs, whether life or death...” D&C 88 indicates that those who fulfill the measure of their creation will receive exaltation and celestial glory: “For notwithstanding they die, they also shall rise again, a spiritual body. They who are of a celestial spirit shall receive the same body which was a natural body; even ye shall receive your bodies, and your glory shall be that glory by which your bodies are quickened” (vs. 27-29). I take “natural body” here to mean that those who are exalted will retain the mortal power to beget life. Exaltation, and the reception of power over life and death, only comes to those who are married, sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise in this life and the next. Resurrection and marriage are related because both are associated power to create life. One begets new life; the other makes it renewed.
Creating worlds and filling them with animal life (Gen. 1-2), begetting children (Rom. 8:16), resurrecting the dead (John 11:25), bringing spiritual rebirth (D&C 76:24, Moses 1:39), are powers of resurrected beings. Jesus fittingly calls Himself The Life of the World. We can receive versions of some of these abilities in this life, but only a fullness of them in the next as married couples.
“Then shall they be gods, because they have no end,” “...a fulness and continuation of the seeds forever and ever...” D&C 132 also mentions sacrifice and death in relation to resurrection and eternal life. Abraham offered Isaac, and was blessed; David killed Uriah, and was damned. Marriages are performed at altars, the traditional place of sacrifice, a crux of life and death in the scriptures. The the House of Israel are symbolically bought through an atoning sacrifice of a lamb at the Old Temple. This helped the people look forward to Jesus Christ, who actually atoned for all sin. The Temple, then, is the crossroads of marriage and sacrifice, too.
Jesus descended into death, and was resurrected to perfection. We can inherit that same blessing, for He beckons, “come, follow me.” Little children who die are guaranteed exaltation in the celestial kingdom. He also taught, "...it will be a great work to learn our salvation and exaltation even beyond the grave" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 348). I assume there are many things we experience throughout the trajectory of mortal life, from birth to marriage to old age, that prepare us for that long learning experience. Joseph Smith said, “I do not like to see a little child pass away, for it has not filled the measure of its creation and gained the victory over death” (Early History of Provo, 1849–1872; Utah Stake Bishop Meetings, July 17, 1868). In other words, the child is going to be exalted, but there will be added homework to do in order to compensate, to catch up to those who died in their old age. So there are advantages to staying behind in this mortal quagmire, if we prove faithful. "In retrospect, we will even see that our most trying years here [in mortality] will often have been our best years, producing large tree rings on our soul, Gethsemanes of growth!" (Taking up the Cross, Neal A. Maxwell, given at Brigham Young University on 4 January 1976).
I have wondered at the curious phrase, "gained the victory over death." I knew well a woman who was widowed, and lived alone. She missed her husband terribly, and was very eager to be done with life. Unlike most people, who are willing to do anything to stay alive, this woman actually wanted to be taken home to heaven. (She mentioned she was eager to chasten her husband for leaving her alone for all those years.) She eventually got her wish, and passed away after being alone for several years first. It seems to me that she had gained the victory over death—she felt no apprehension. Like the bold child at the pool brave enough to ascend the high dive for the first time while her friends halt and quiver at the bottom. While most of us fret and wring our hands in trepidation, paying doctors and absorbing vitamins and pills, she was unafraid to die, to plunge into eternity. Love and fear are incompatible; this woman loved her husband, and wanted to be wherever he went. Death involves total commitment because we cannot rescind it.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
The Wrong Cause
Jesus warned Peter that “Satan desireth to have you, that he may sift you as wheat.” What does it mean to be “sifted as wheat?” Elder Oaks stated that it means to be rendered mundane, like the Nephites who lost the Spirit and became “weak like unto [their] brethren” (Morm. 2:26), left to rely on their own strength and wisdom, without the gifts of the Spirit. We need that flame burning brightly to avoid deception.
Those convinced they are sinners are a step closer to God than those who are doing the wrong thing, yet are also convinced that they are doing God’s work. What a coup—for Satan to convince us we are righteous when we are sinning. “The devil has great power to deceive; he will so transform things as to make one gape at those who are doing the will of God” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph smith, p. 227).
Peter was asked by the Savior to accompany Him into the Garden of Gethsemane. He asked Peter to stay awake, but Peter fell asleep. Perhaps he was bewildered by Jesus’ many painful predictions of His own death, as well as Peter’s imminent betrayal. A stomach full of Passover dinner, the largest and most lavish meal of the year, probably contributed to his exhaustion. Whatever the case, Peter slept through part of the greatest event in history, the hours Christ suffered in the Garden for our sins. When the agony of Gethsemane was complete, and the next phase of the Atonement was about to begin, Jesus told Peter, “Sleep on now, and take your rest: it is enough, the hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners” (Mark 14:41). Peter had slept when Jesus needed him; now Peter springs into action when the Lord has told him to go back to sleep.
Judas identifies Jesus for the mob with a kiss; Peter pulls out a sword and strikes off the ear of Malchus, the servant of the High Priest. Jesus tells Peter, “Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” First Jesus asks Peter to stay awake, and he sleeps. Then Jesus says it is time for His betrayal, and Peter tries to prevent it. Peter follows the mob and Jesus back to the city when Jesus had specifically told Peter to go back to sleep. If Peter had laid down in the Garden and slept instead of following the mob, he would not have denied knowing Jesus, or wept bitterly. If he had done as Jesus told him, none of those painful outcomes would have followed.
How easy it is to fight for the wrong cause, to have our ladders propped against the wrong wall. An old military adage asks, “Is this the hill you want to die on?” Gamaleel warned the zealous Pharisees to wait and see what came of Jesus’ disciples, not to persecute them prematurely. If they were not of God, the sect would die off without their help; if not, their persecutors would “be found to fight against God.” Saul of Tarsus, later the Apostle Paul, was one of those persecutors. He fulfilled the prophecy of the Savior that “...the time cometh that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me” (John 16:2-3). Paul and Peter both made grievous errors while believing that they were doing good.
Joseph Smith warned against “zeal not according to knowledge”—undereducated enthusiasm. Peter acted with great enthusiasm, but was unwittingly interfering with the Atonement. Paul fought with great zeal against Christians, until the Lord told him to stop. King Saul thought he could placate the mob and God at the same time by saving the cattle he was commanded to destroy, and use them for burnt offerings instead. His attempt to serve two masters lost him his crown and his soul.
I recently read a sign held by a young woman in a photo that said MORMONS FOR NON-TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE. The article next to the photo explained that there had been a rally in support of gay marriage, and that the crowd had included several BYU students. I understand that there are many members of the Church who support the idea of marriage consisting of something other than one man and one woman. These desires spring from the virtues of kindness, generosity, tolerance, open-mindedness, and egalitarianism. But, as we have established above, it is possible to have pure motives while doing the wrong thing. Is there a higher law than kindness? Yes, it is obedience to "every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." That includes following His ordained servants. Members of the Church may or may not have read The Family: A Proclamation to the World. The first paragraph states, "We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children." The Proclamation on the Family was signed by all members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.
This position was reaffirmed recently: "We firmly support the divinely appointed definition of marriage as the union between a man and a woman because it is the single most important institution for strengthening children, families, and society." Members of the Church who support the current popular trends of alternatives to traditional marriage are in open opposition to the governing body of the Church. If the Church were a democracy, and questions of right and wrong could be solved through democratic processes or debate, it would not be governed by revelation. (That was the sure sign that Christianity had been corrupted in the 4th century—questions of doctrine were hammered out by committees instead of direct revelation.) If the Church is governed by revelation to the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, debate and speculation have no place directing the Church. "Kingdom" is not "democracy."
Contained within the above statement by the leaders of the Church is a nugget of understanding that has eluded many people, including myself until recently: while spouses can and should derive benefit from marriage, the main purpose of marriage is to beget children in an environment best suited to their development. Statistically speaking, children fare better when they are raised by their biological parents. Adoption and divorce tend to produce poorer quality environments than traditional marriage for children. Governments depend on successful marriages to provide something no other institution can adequately generate: the next generation of healthy, moral, law abiding citizens. Adoption, and a multitude of other arrangements, can produce notable exceptions to this rule, but they are exceptions, and laws are drafted to govern millions of people, not thousands of exceptions. Why should a government or church support a version of marriage that, by definition, automatically excludes one or both of the biological parents from raising their children? Dead-beat parents are already a social problem that creates a host of ills; why sponsor a system that encourages one or both biological parents to surrender their duties of caring for their kids?
Reference is often made to an imaginary "right" to have one's sexual preference endorsed as a matter of public record. If marriage were primarily about the needs of adults, this would make sense. But there is no compelling reason to do this for homosexual relationships, because such activity has no lasting consequences outside their relationship. On the other hand, it makes sense for governments and churches to support lasting, committed relationships between men and women, because whether they stay together or not, their relationship will create the next generation of citizens. Whether that next generation is emotionally, socially, spiritually, physically, and financially ready to stand up and replace the old generation depends largely on the durability of the relationship of its biological parents. Any measure government can take, any privilege it can extend, to encourage couples to promise life-long fidelity to each other will benefit the next generation, and by extension, the everyone else. One person can live a hundred years. Whether that person spends those hundred years as a burden or a blessing to society depends greatly on the quality of the relationship between parents during formative years.
"Equality" is the rallying cry for most gay-marriage proponents. As harsh as it may seem, equality in law is already established. Anyone of any sexual orientation may marry anyone of the opposite sex, and the two of them automatically become the guardians of all the children they have together. Fulfillment of their needs should not be the basis for printing marriage licenses; what is best for the next generation should be.
As I have written elsewhere, marriage is performed at altars, not at ATMs, slot machines, or refrigerators. It is not about convenience; it is about sacrifice. Why are brides and grooms held on such high pedestals? Current tides of narcissistic self-absorption emphasize the ego affirmation aspect, and endless funds can be vaporized on trinkets and frills and clothing and tinsel. Modern wedding celebrations are a dizzy blend of family reunion, fashion show, and birthday party in one slick package. If this were the main reason behind marriage celebrations, then gay-marriage and traditional marriage would indeed be equal. Yes, we feel empathy for the excitement of the newlyweds, and rejoice in their love and joy. But the deeper reason for celebrating has less to do with deserving a pat on the back or needing ego boost; the bride's and groom's vow at the altar will perpetuate the community.
What sacrifices do traditional marriages include? First, couples sacrifice by forming a relationship with someone who has a different physical, mental, and emotional makeup than they, someone of the opposite sex. This is a tricky union to sustain for decades on end, and requires work and often counseling. Any support society can offer is a welcome boon. Second, traditional couples sacrifice the opportunity to seek other potential mates. The inclination does not necessarily go away, and options welcome or unwelcome continue to present themselves. The bride and groom promise to ignore any such temptation. A union whose main purpose is gratification will eventually dissolve as boredom at home and temptation abroad drive partners apart. It is not a fair-weather commitment; "...for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health..." Third, traditional couples sacrifice the rest of their lives to take care of any children produced by their union. Human nature may waiver between fidelity and adultery, but the needs of children from cradle to adulthood will require decades of commitment on the part of both parents in any case. It is best to start the relationship on a note of complete devotion. This is a strict and potentially rough course the couple is signing up for. It is extremely fitting that they receive the admiration and generosity of their community and government.
For these and many other sacrifices, it makes sense to make the commitment between a man and a woman a matter of public record, and to extend privileges (different from rights) to them for their public service. True, few are inclined to see marriage this way today, but when have intentions and ultimate uses, means and ends, ever lined up, especially where government is involved? Without this broader, long-term view, weddings become another example of emotional exhibitionism with no inherent benefit beyond the couple's feelings.
Though intent is honorable and feelings warmly enthusiastic, members of the Church who throw their support behind a system that is fundamentally opposed to establishing what is best for children, in favor of what is comfortable in the short-term for adults, are misled in their zeal. We came to this earth to pull uphill against the burden of matter, not to succumb or lie down every time a breeze of temptation blows on us. Nowhere in all the fussing and fretting on this subject by members of the Church have I heard any mention of receiving the grace of God to bear burdens. The assumption seems to be that heterosexuals have been given outlets for their sexual appetites because the strict law of chastity is suspended via marriage. That, or at least chaste single heterosexual members of of the Church derive the hope necessary for self restraint from the far off promise of marriage one day. Also, the assumption is that homosexuals have no righteous avenue for sexual expression, and are therefore left without relief or hope. The solution to the perceived problem is worldly, not divine. Heterosexuals are able to keep the commandment because God makes an exception to the rules about chastity; why not make more exceptions for others?
This view is wrong. The Lord prepares a way to keep all His commandments. Grace, not distant hope of fulfilled appetite, is the proper solution. Whether delivering us from temptation, or giving us strength to bear it, God does not abandon us to struggle alone. This grace is sufficient for all who come to Christ in faith and humility. Paul had a thorn in the flesh, and the Lord refused to remove it, but He still gave Paul grace to carry this burden. Members of the Church who support alternative forms of marriage never mention this power, (except rarely to label it as a spurious avenue of rescue from something as dire as sexual temptation). Perhaps this is because they have yet to experience such sustaining grace themselves.They seem to view the alternatives as suffer, or compromise the commandment; no third alternative is perceived. But there are other weapons than temporal worldly ones available in the fight against sin; there is a spiritual solution, namely, grace.
The message to all, regardless of sexuality, is the same: repent, take up your cross, and follow Christ. Becoming acquainted with His grace will enable anyone to bear any burden for Him. The Atonement is called "infinite;" it is available to all. Sometimes we are completely delivered; other times we receive grace to carry burdens until the Lord sees fit to deliver us. Either way, it is possible to do so with joy on a long-term basis: "And now it came to pass that the burdens which were laid upon Alma and his brethren were made light; yea, the Lord did strengthen them that they could bear up their burdens with ease, and they did submit cheerfully and with patience to all the will of the Lord" (Mosiah 24:15). I have experienced such sustaining and empowering grace, as well as deliverance by a change of heart. I hope that everyone else will gain a testimony of such help as well, and acknowledge the Lord's power to rescue us.
[Update, 11 April 2013: I realized that Satan was the first person on the list of people with good intentions who want to give God advice, to "steady the Ark." Satan's proposed version of the plan of salvation eliminated the possibility of sin, or the necessity of the suffering attending the Atonement, by eliminating agency. If everyone has their choices made for them, voila, no sin. A great plan, yes? No. It was turned down by our all-knowing Father in Heaven because He knew it would not work. Everyone who rebelled was sent here to earth to get us to surrender our agency through other means. Satan went from "I'll save everyone" to "I'll damn everyone" very quickly. Selfish motives are characterized by short-sightedness in planning and action, as well as shortcuts for convenience. Such motives seek to circumvent the law of the harvest. But the quickest way is through it, not around it.
Jesus, on the other hand, was willing to bear the entire burden of punishment for our sin, as well as all our pain. And God planned to let all these things happen, our sin and suffering, and the Atonement for it. They seem horrific on the surface, but God can see down the road to the end, and knows what will cause the maximum benefit to us. We get to learn from difficulty instead of ease. It is easy to mistake "nice" with love—but love is more intense than like, and God loves us. He will not settle for our mediocrity. Hence the brutal school, stringent test, and beautiful gift of mortality.]
Those convinced they are sinners are a step closer to God than those who are doing the wrong thing, yet are also convinced that they are doing God’s work. What a coup—for Satan to convince us we are righteous when we are sinning. “The devil has great power to deceive; he will so transform things as to make one gape at those who are doing the will of God” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph smith, p. 227).
Peter was asked by the Savior to accompany Him into the Garden of Gethsemane. He asked Peter to stay awake, but Peter fell asleep. Perhaps he was bewildered by Jesus’ many painful predictions of His own death, as well as Peter’s imminent betrayal. A stomach full of Passover dinner, the largest and most lavish meal of the year, probably contributed to his exhaustion. Whatever the case, Peter slept through part of the greatest event in history, the hours Christ suffered in the Garden for our sins. When the agony of Gethsemane was complete, and the next phase of the Atonement was about to begin, Jesus told Peter, “Sleep on now, and take your rest: it is enough, the hour is come; behold, the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners” (Mark 14:41). Peter had slept when Jesus needed him; now Peter springs into action when the Lord has told him to go back to sleep.
Judas identifies Jesus for the mob with a kiss; Peter pulls out a sword and strikes off the ear of Malchus, the servant of the High Priest. Jesus tells Peter, “Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” First Jesus asks Peter to stay awake, and he sleeps. Then Jesus says it is time for His betrayal, and Peter tries to prevent it. Peter follows the mob and Jesus back to the city when Jesus had specifically told Peter to go back to sleep. If Peter had laid down in the Garden and slept instead of following the mob, he would not have denied knowing Jesus, or wept bitterly. If he had done as Jesus told him, none of those painful outcomes would have followed.
How easy it is to fight for the wrong cause, to have our ladders propped against the wrong wall. An old military adage asks, “Is this the hill you want to die on?” Gamaleel warned the zealous Pharisees to wait and see what came of Jesus’ disciples, not to persecute them prematurely. If they were not of God, the sect would die off without their help; if not, their persecutors would “be found to fight against God.” Saul of Tarsus, later the Apostle Paul, was one of those persecutors. He fulfilled the prophecy of the Savior that “...the time cometh that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me” (John 16:2-3). Paul and Peter both made grievous errors while believing that they were doing good.
Joseph Smith warned against “zeal not according to knowledge”—undereducated enthusiasm. Peter acted with great enthusiasm, but was unwittingly interfering with the Atonement. Paul fought with great zeal against Christians, until the Lord told him to stop. King Saul thought he could placate the mob and God at the same time by saving the cattle he was commanded to destroy, and use them for burnt offerings instead. His attempt to serve two masters lost him his crown and his soul.
I recently read a sign held by a young woman in a photo that said MORMONS FOR NON-TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE. The article next to the photo explained that there had been a rally in support of gay marriage, and that the crowd had included several BYU students. I understand that there are many members of the Church who support the idea of marriage consisting of something other than one man and one woman. These desires spring from the virtues of kindness, generosity, tolerance, open-mindedness, and egalitarianism. But, as we have established above, it is possible to have pure motives while doing the wrong thing. Is there a higher law than kindness? Yes, it is obedience to "every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." That includes following His ordained servants. Members of the Church may or may not have read The Family: A Proclamation to the World. The first paragraph states, "We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children." The Proclamation on the Family was signed by all members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.
This position was reaffirmed recently: "We firmly support the divinely appointed definition of marriage as the union between a man and a woman because it is the single most important institution for strengthening children, families, and society." Members of the Church who support the current popular trends of alternatives to traditional marriage are in open opposition to the governing body of the Church. If the Church were a democracy, and questions of right and wrong could be solved through democratic processes or debate, it would not be governed by revelation. (That was the sure sign that Christianity had been corrupted in the 4th century—questions of doctrine were hammered out by committees instead of direct revelation.) If the Church is governed by revelation to the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, debate and speculation have no place directing the Church. "Kingdom" is not "democracy."
Contained within the above statement by the leaders of the Church is a nugget of understanding that has eluded many people, including myself until recently: while spouses can and should derive benefit from marriage, the main purpose of marriage is to beget children in an environment best suited to their development. Statistically speaking, children fare better when they are raised by their biological parents. Adoption and divorce tend to produce poorer quality environments than traditional marriage for children. Governments depend on successful marriages to provide something no other institution can adequately generate: the next generation of healthy, moral, law abiding citizens. Adoption, and a multitude of other arrangements, can produce notable exceptions to this rule, but they are exceptions, and laws are drafted to govern millions of people, not thousands of exceptions. Why should a government or church support a version of marriage that, by definition, automatically excludes one or both of the biological parents from raising their children? Dead-beat parents are already a social problem that creates a host of ills; why sponsor a system that encourages one or both biological parents to surrender their duties of caring for their kids?
Reference is often made to an imaginary "right" to have one's sexual preference endorsed as a matter of public record. If marriage were primarily about the needs of adults, this would make sense. But there is no compelling reason to do this for homosexual relationships, because such activity has no lasting consequences outside their relationship. On the other hand, it makes sense for governments and churches to support lasting, committed relationships between men and women, because whether they stay together or not, their relationship will create the next generation of citizens. Whether that next generation is emotionally, socially, spiritually, physically, and financially ready to stand up and replace the old generation depends largely on the durability of the relationship of its biological parents. Any measure government can take, any privilege it can extend, to encourage couples to promise life-long fidelity to each other will benefit the next generation, and by extension, the everyone else. One person can live a hundred years. Whether that person spends those hundred years as a burden or a blessing to society depends greatly on the quality of the relationship between parents during formative years.
"Equality" is the rallying cry for most gay-marriage proponents. As harsh as it may seem, equality in law is already established. Anyone of any sexual orientation may marry anyone of the opposite sex, and the two of them automatically become the guardians of all the children they have together. Fulfillment of their needs should not be the basis for printing marriage licenses; what is best for the next generation should be.
As I have written elsewhere, marriage is performed at altars, not at ATMs, slot machines, or refrigerators. It is not about convenience; it is about sacrifice. Why are brides and grooms held on such high pedestals? Current tides of narcissistic self-absorption emphasize the ego affirmation aspect, and endless funds can be vaporized on trinkets and frills and clothing and tinsel. Modern wedding celebrations are a dizzy blend of family reunion, fashion show, and birthday party in one slick package. If this were the main reason behind marriage celebrations, then gay-marriage and traditional marriage would indeed be equal. Yes, we feel empathy for the excitement of the newlyweds, and rejoice in their love and joy. But the deeper reason for celebrating has less to do with deserving a pat on the back or needing ego boost; the bride's and groom's vow at the altar will perpetuate the community.
What sacrifices do traditional marriages include? First, couples sacrifice by forming a relationship with someone who has a different physical, mental, and emotional makeup than they, someone of the opposite sex. This is a tricky union to sustain for decades on end, and requires work and often counseling. Any support society can offer is a welcome boon. Second, traditional couples sacrifice the opportunity to seek other potential mates. The inclination does not necessarily go away, and options welcome or unwelcome continue to present themselves. The bride and groom promise to ignore any such temptation. A union whose main purpose is gratification will eventually dissolve as boredom at home and temptation abroad drive partners apart. It is not a fair-weather commitment; "...for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health..." Third, traditional couples sacrifice the rest of their lives to take care of any children produced by their union. Human nature may waiver between fidelity and adultery, but the needs of children from cradle to adulthood will require decades of commitment on the part of both parents in any case. It is best to start the relationship on a note of complete devotion. This is a strict and potentially rough course the couple is signing up for. It is extremely fitting that they receive the admiration and generosity of their community and government.
For these and many other sacrifices, it makes sense to make the commitment between a man and a woman a matter of public record, and to extend privileges (different from rights) to them for their public service. True, few are inclined to see marriage this way today, but when have intentions and ultimate uses, means and ends, ever lined up, especially where government is involved? Without this broader, long-term view, weddings become another example of emotional exhibitionism with no inherent benefit beyond the couple's feelings.
Though intent is honorable and feelings warmly enthusiastic, members of the Church who throw their support behind a system that is fundamentally opposed to establishing what is best for children, in favor of what is comfortable in the short-term for adults, are misled in their zeal. We came to this earth to pull uphill against the burden of matter, not to succumb or lie down every time a breeze of temptation blows on us. Nowhere in all the fussing and fretting on this subject by members of the Church have I heard any mention of receiving the grace of God to bear burdens. The assumption seems to be that heterosexuals have been given outlets for their sexual appetites because the strict law of chastity is suspended via marriage. That, or at least chaste single heterosexual members of of the Church derive the hope necessary for self restraint from the far off promise of marriage one day. Also, the assumption is that homosexuals have no righteous avenue for sexual expression, and are therefore left without relief or hope. The solution to the perceived problem is worldly, not divine. Heterosexuals are able to keep the commandment because God makes an exception to the rules about chastity; why not make more exceptions for others?
This view is wrong. The Lord prepares a way to keep all His commandments. Grace, not distant hope of fulfilled appetite, is the proper solution. Whether delivering us from temptation, or giving us strength to bear it, God does not abandon us to struggle alone. This grace is sufficient for all who come to Christ in faith and humility. Paul had a thorn in the flesh, and the Lord refused to remove it, but He still gave Paul grace to carry this burden. Members of the Church who support alternative forms of marriage never mention this power, (except rarely to label it as a spurious avenue of rescue from something as dire as sexual temptation). Perhaps this is because they have yet to experience such sustaining grace themselves.They seem to view the alternatives as suffer, or compromise the commandment; no third alternative is perceived. But there are other weapons than temporal worldly ones available in the fight against sin; there is a spiritual solution, namely, grace.
The message to all, regardless of sexuality, is the same: repent, take up your cross, and follow Christ. Becoming acquainted with His grace will enable anyone to bear any burden for Him. The Atonement is called "infinite;" it is available to all. Sometimes we are completely delivered; other times we receive grace to carry burdens until the Lord sees fit to deliver us. Either way, it is possible to do so with joy on a long-term basis: "And now it came to pass that the burdens which were laid upon Alma and his brethren were made light; yea, the Lord did strengthen them that they could bear up their burdens with ease, and they did submit cheerfully and with patience to all the will of the Lord" (Mosiah 24:15). I have experienced such sustaining and empowering grace, as well as deliverance by a change of heart. I hope that everyone else will gain a testimony of such help as well, and acknowledge the Lord's power to rescue us.
[Update, 11 April 2013: I realized that Satan was the first person on the list of people with good intentions who want to give God advice, to "steady the Ark." Satan's proposed version of the plan of salvation eliminated the possibility of sin, or the necessity of the suffering attending the Atonement, by eliminating agency. If everyone has their choices made for them, voila, no sin. A great plan, yes? No. It was turned down by our all-knowing Father in Heaven because He knew it would not work. Everyone who rebelled was sent here to earth to get us to surrender our agency through other means. Satan went from "I'll save everyone" to "I'll damn everyone" very quickly. Selfish motives are characterized by short-sightedness in planning and action, as well as shortcuts for convenience. Such motives seek to circumvent the law of the harvest. But the quickest way is through it, not around it.
Jesus, on the other hand, was willing to bear the entire burden of punishment for our sin, as well as all our pain. And God planned to let all these things happen, our sin and suffering, and the Atonement for it. They seem horrific on the surface, but God can see down the road to the end, and knows what will cause the maximum benefit to us. We get to learn from difficulty instead of ease. It is easy to mistake "nice" with love—but love is more intense than like, and God loves us. He will not settle for our mediocrity. Hence the brutal school, stringent test, and beautiful gift of mortality.]
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Killer Cures
Truth is indivisible—it is all connect some way or other. The gospel encompasses all truth, but not all truth is saving truth. Not everything we learn in this life is pertinent to salvation. “No one was ever damned for believing too much,” taught the Prophet Joseph Smith, and it is a good thing, too. As Hugh Nibley observed, each of us “constantly shifts ground on his beliefs.” (Would we be progressing or learning if we were not?)
Joseph Smith encountered an emerging science, called phrenology. The basic idea was that the shape of one’s head, prominences and dips in particular areas, could tell you about the personality of an individual. At first he was enthusiastic about this new development, and even went to have his cranium measured. (These specific measurements have been used in attempts to authenticate a purported photograph of Joseph Smith.) But after a while, Joseph felt that the science was bogus, and he abandoned the idea altogether.
While I am the first person to complain about the mainstream medical establishment in America, not only for its practices, but for its undergirding philosophy, I still feel it is closer to the mark than many alternative medical theories. Joseph Smith abandoned phrenology, but many of the saints still clung to it. I see similar trends today.
Why the powerful draw of alternative medicine? Sometimes it works. Often, though, its appeal derives from pride instead of evidence. When something is based on rules that reside beyond the limits of truth, anyone can be an expert. Some members of the Church today (in my community, at least) would rather be experts in dubious and unproven fields than in difficult, unforgiving reality. They sidestep admitting we “do not know the meaning of all things” (1Ne. 11:17). This is sad, because a frank admission of ignorance is the first step toward learning something new. I remember desperately thrusting a Book of Mormon toward a college co-ed on my mission, but her arms remained unmoved. She calmly decline my attempts to lead her anywhere, stating that she thought she should be able to figure faith out on her own. She was attending college with a frank admission of her amateur status, learning temporal, physical, and scientific truths from experts. Yet the concepts that most college professors admit are beyond their reach—eternal truth, the meaning of life, the purpose of existence, the nature of God—this undergrad thought she could tackle those verities alone. Again, a lack of any experimental foundation for a concept camouflages our ignorance, and everyone is suddenly an expert in their own eyes.
Joseph Smith taught many keys for discerning where information comes from—God, man, and the devil were the three potential sources he enumerated. Just because something seems miraculous (literally, “a little mystery that makes you puzzle at it”) does not necessarily mean it is from God. There are two supernatural forces at work, one good, the other evil, and discernment is needed to judge between them. One key Joseph gave for discerning between good and manifestations is truth—was any truth communicated by the manifestation? “The Holy Ghost is a revelator,” he taught. If something comes from God, new information will usually be imparted along with whatever is manifested.
“Energy healing” (and other alternative medicine theories) seems to be a popular dalliance among some members of the Church in my area. Even the intangible things of the gospel, such as faith and the Spirit, are commended to us on an experimental, experiential basis by the Book of Mormon. “Experiment upon the word,” Alma teaches. There will be results you can feel, even if the experience transcends language a bit. Energy healing and its LDS proponents, on the other hand, have failed to present me with compelling evidence for the practice. I believe that “many great and important things” are yet to be revealed, and that my lack of understanding does not invalidate a principle. (No one has the foggiest notion of how gravity, for instance, works, but that does not keep it from being real.) However, “by their fruits ye shall know them” still rings in our ears down the corridors of time—we are to test spirits, doctrines, philosophies, and medical procedures, as well as their practitioners, against the yardstick of revealed truth, and by their long-term outcomes.
My first run-in with energy healing had to do with crystals. It was set up very much like a Tupperware party—a the promotion was made inside a home. I do not know whether the pretty and polished stones presented actually conferred the benefits the woman claimed. One crystal suspended by a chain was supposed to spin one way if you held it over your hand and your “energy” was “negative,” the other way if it were “positive.” I saw the crystal spin, but it would have been more impressive if the crystal were suspended from something more fixed and stationary than a human hand. I told the woman pitching these ideas and materials that one of my legs is slightly shorter than the other. She claimed it due to an imbalance that could be cured through some kind of energy work as I lay on a massage table. (Another alternate physician whose discipline is closer to reality, a chiropractor, also claimed that my spine was merely misaligned, and attempted to realign it through popping and stretching me on a table. It did not work. One leg is still slightly different in length than another.) As I drove with the daughter of the enthusiastic sales woman to fetch the table from her home, I asked about the crystal dangling from her neck. “Oh, this is just a bit of jewelry.” The mother was a believer; the daughter was apparently ashamed, but perhaps dutifully wore the crystal anyway to please her. I ultimately declined to have my back fixed through energy healing.
While I did not see anyone manifest great fruits of superhealth, or even any significant change in the health of the woman whose home hosted the energy crystal presentation, I did however watch her divorce her husband for no apparent reason years later, and rend the hearts and confidence of her children, and nearly destroy her family.
“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: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him” (James 5:14-15). Notice that the Lord’s prescribed method for administering to the sick is an ordinance, which can affect the soul, not just the body. What keeps this procedure from being hocus-pocus? The blind man Jesus healed with clay and water might have splashed mud and any other liquid on his face a thousand times; the main thing that made it a cure was the commandment of the Lord to do it.
There is no rational reason on earth to believe that cancer or any other internal malady should yield to the application of oil, the laying on of hands, or prayer. But I have seen it work with my own eyes. Understanding how it works is not the main key; rather, the key is to rely on priesthood power, and have faith in the Lord. In the experience I witnessed, both the one giving the blessing, and the one receiving the blessing, felt the power of God; both received direction from the Spirit, one to know what to say in the blessing, the other to know through what was said to do with the health conferred by the Lord via the blessing. So the gift of renewed health was not merely for the consolation of vanity or building abs of steel—it was to make a servant of the Lord useful to those around her. Peter jumped out of the boat to walk on water after he saw the Savior do it; we Latter-day saints prefer to strap on our metaphorical water skis (in many ways, not just looking to cure disease). We rely on the arm of the flesh, the power of day planner; we want to use some device we can control, something that seems more cunning or flashy, or at least something we can comprehend.
I like vitamin supplements. Who knows if they have helped much, but I like them. A girl facing a particular cosmetic health challenge took some supplements from me, held them in her hand, and silently asked her body if they were OK to eat, and waited for it to answer before she washed them down with a swig of water. Later she ate a bunch of junk food. Was the voice that vetted the vitamins the same one that demanded she eat the unhealthy food? I knew that she knew from personal experience that her cosmetic problem would go away when she stopped eating sweets, but she wanted a way to keep eating junk food and be healthy. Eventually she asked for a priesthood blessing. I never felt worse about giving a blessing in my life—the Spirit was not with me in it—and I have regretted doing it since. We both should be tuning in to the Spirit more, instead of listening to peer pressure, or other voices.
A more recent example of far-fetched medicine has been proffered to me by a dear friend, also a member. He has been telling me that negative energy, emotions, whatever you want to call it, can imprint on substances, that the substances will actually “remember” or retain the negative nature of what they passed through. For instance, water may become defiled with toxins, and then be strictly, completely purified from those toxins, and yet not do its job of quenching thirst in the body effectively because of residual negative influence from the toxic substances. Common sense seems to indicate that to remove all impurities from water is to remove all harmful side effects of those impurities, but the idea is that the water must also be healed of its memory of contact with bad things by coming in contact with good things, flushed through some system of glass beads or whatnot. I do not have the heart to challenge this friend’s belief in energy memory of food and water, partly because he has offered so much help to me in recent months with some severe bone injuries. He has recommended minerals necessary for bone repair, and even brought by ingredients for making yogurt to improve my calcium intake while lowering milk’s sugar content. Know them by their fruits; visiting and caring for the sick is a definite fruit of a real servant of God. I just wish I could get some discernible evidence on the water treatment idea. If it works, I am OK with it, even if I cannot understand why it works. If it does not work, what harm could it do? A waste of time and money, unless it provides psychosomatic benefits.
However, despite all his attempts to be a proponent for spiritual and physical health, this good friend still eats junk food, and shares recipes for such foods with all his friends. Of course, the recipes are made from much better ingredients than most brownies and cakes. But the most salubrious dessert is not as good for one’s health as fasting, or skipping dessert. The reason God puts so much good stuff in fruit is to keep the sugar from killing us, and if you avoid sweet stuff, you will not need so many vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and the like. (Eskimos eat no vitamin C, but they never get scurvy, because their diets are completely free of carbohydrate. Do we need more vitamin C, or less sweet stuff? Are we being healthy, or just applying poison and antidote simultaneously?) My dear friend takes many steps to improve his health, while still clinging to the stuff that keeps him a little bit overweight. He is a very healthy guy, but a shrink in his waistline from the absence of sweets would extend his life far more than the perfect combination of nutrients.
Whether blessing the prescribed way or some alternative, these examples of members listed above all have something in common: we are all wealthy people with free time. “...they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.” Paul gives the cure for this condition in the verse before it: “And having food and clothing, let us be therewith content” (1Tim. 6:8-9). “Fix it till it’s broke” is the sardonic axiom that seems to apply to America, and we North American members of the Church, discussed above. Poor people never seem to get snared in this kind of folly—they are too busy being health, farming, walking, looking at nature, spending time with family, to worry about their health. Commercials on TV (I actually watched a little in a hospital a while ago) seem to be of two kinds: 1. Foods that damage health, and 2. pills that treat the symptoms of eating all that rubbish. Brigham Young said, “You get up in the morning and have...everything you can possibly cram into the stomach, until you surfeit the system and lay the foundation for disease and early death....Work less, wear less, and eat less, and we shall be a great deal wiser, healthier, and wealthier people than by taking the course we now do.” (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 187).
The only proven way to extend lifespan in lab rats is caloric restriction—feeding them two thirds of the calories they would like to eat. There is every indication human bodies work the same way. This is the easiest, cheapest cure of all—nothing. Of fasting, Isaiah says, “...thine health shall spring forth speedily...the Lord shall...make fat thy bones: and thou shalt be like a watered garden, and like a spring of water, whose waters fail not” (Isa. 58:8, 11). This treatment and prevention for disease may work, but it is not nearly as glamorous as magical crystals that ostensibly let you eat junk food and be healthy anyway.
“...cease to find fault one with another...” (D&C 88:124). I do not delight in criticizing people, and I have deliberately tried to obscure the identities of those involved in the follies I personally witnessed and recited above. This is no proclamation of my emancipation from similar follies and vices; I merely wish to extend a general warning about what I see as a symptom of low faith, high wealth, free time, and the desire to transcend other mere mortals by possessing secret powers and knowledge. This kind of thing can gull anyone who is in the wrong place, spiritually. It seems fitting here to enumerate some of my own foibles, and exhibit some humility to cover the halitosis of my accusations.
As I have looked squarely into the mirror of introspection, I have realized that I do not eat solely for fuel or building materials to support my body. If those were the only reasons I ate, I would be the healthiest person I know. Instead, my eating patterns revolve around shutting off my brain. Fructose impairs cortex function, just like alcohol. It is designed to do this because in nature, fruit sugar signals our bodies that winter is coming. Cortex is where our willpower is located in the brain, and dampening willpower makes us likely to stuff ourselves and fatten up before winter. So the long-standing addiction I have to carbohydrates has less to do with a sweet tooth, and more to do with dodging the uncomfortable realities of life. Even without sweets, a full stomach draws blood away from the rest of the body (i.e. the brain) for digestion. Essentially, excess food helps to sweep away my hard thoughts (and hence, feelings) about life, rather than deal with them. Food can be an agent of procrastination. If I would take the time to amend my life and fill it with emotionally satisfying things and relationships, food would lose most of its appeal.
My friend (who wants to purify water energies) defined addictions as a dependence on something besides the Lord. I like this definition, more good fruits on his part. If we want improved health, do we lean on the Lord, or a burgeoning medicine cabinet, a pharmacy, and an army of witchdoctors? If life is empty, do we fill it with carnal stimuli, like food and alcohol, or do we rely on the Comforter for comfort? It is easy to make the mistake of believing the Lord’s admonition to Adam to live by the sweat of his brow was an invitation to focus solely on our survival or make it our main goal. Even President Packer, who often counsels youth to keep harmful substances out of their bodies, admits that maintaining health is ultimately “a losing battle.” My experience has been that the Lord heals, but the doctor collects the fee. The Lord will keep us alive, or make us sick, or take us home to heaven, all according to His plan and timing for us. The point of life is not to spend it trying to live forever, but to prepare to meet God when it is over, however long or brief our lives may be. Those who seek to save their lives lose them, but those who serve God will be preserved. (An extreme example is John and the three Nephites.)
Joseph Smith encountered an emerging science, called phrenology. The basic idea was that the shape of one’s head, prominences and dips in particular areas, could tell you about the personality of an individual. At first he was enthusiastic about this new development, and even went to have his cranium measured. (These specific measurements have been used in attempts to authenticate a purported photograph of Joseph Smith.) But after a while, Joseph felt that the science was bogus, and he abandoned the idea altogether.
While I am the first person to complain about the mainstream medical establishment in America, not only for its practices, but for its undergirding philosophy, I still feel it is closer to the mark than many alternative medical theories. Joseph Smith abandoned phrenology, but many of the saints still clung to it. I see similar trends today.
Why the powerful draw of alternative medicine? Sometimes it works. Often, though, its appeal derives from pride instead of evidence. When something is based on rules that reside beyond the limits of truth, anyone can be an expert. Some members of the Church today (in my community, at least) would rather be experts in dubious and unproven fields than in difficult, unforgiving reality. They sidestep admitting we “do not know the meaning of all things” (1Ne. 11:17). This is sad, because a frank admission of ignorance is the first step toward learning something new. I remember desperately thrusting a Book of Mormon toward a college co-ed on my mission, but her arms remained unmoved. She calmly decline my attempts to lead her anywhere, stating that she thought she should be able to figure faith out on her own. She was attending college with a frank admission of her amateur status, learning temporal, physical, and scientific truths from experts. Yet the concepts that most college professors admit are beyond their reach—eternal truth, the meaning of life, the purpose of existence, the nature of God—this undergrad thought she could tackle those verities alone. Again, a lack of any experimental foundation for a concept camouflages our ignorance, and everyone is suddenly an expert in their own eyes.
Joseph Smith taught many keys for discerning where information comes from—God, man, and the devil were the three potential sources he enumerated. Just because something seems miraculous (literally, “a little mystery that makes you puzzle at it”) does not necessarily mean it is from God. There are two supernatural forces at work, one good, the other evil, and discernment is needed to judge between them. One key Joseph gave for discerning between good and manifestations is truth—was any truth communicated by the manifestation? “The Holy Ghost is a revelator,” he taught. If something comes from God, new information will usually be imparted along with whatever is manifested.
“Energy healing” (and other alternative medicine theories) seems to be a popular dalliance among some members of the Church in my area. Even the intangible things of the gospel, such as faith and the Spirit, are commended to us on an experimental, experiential basis by the Book of Mormon. “Experiment upon the word,” Alma teaches. There will be results you can feel, even if the experience transcends language a bit. Energy healing and its LDS proponents, on the other hand, have failed to present me with compelling evidence for the practice. I believe that “many great and important things” are yet to be revealed, and that my lack of understanding does not invalidate a principle. (No one has the foggiest notion of how gravity, for instance, works, but that does not keep it from being real.) However, “by their fruits ye shall know them” still rings in our ears down the corridors of time—we are to test spirits, doctrines, philosophies, and medical procedures, as well as their practitioners, against the yardstick of revealed truth, and by their long-term outcomes.
My first run-in with energy healing had to do with crystals. It was set up very much like a Tupperware party—a the promotion was made inside a home. I do not know whether the pretty and polished stones presented actually conferred the benefits the woman claimed. One crystal suspended by a chain was supposed to spin one way if you held it over your hand and your “energy” was “negative,” the other way if it were “positive.” I saw the crystal spin, but it would have been more impressive if the crystal were suspended from something more fixed and stationary than a human hand. I told the woman pitching these ideas and materials that one of my legs is slightly shorter than the other. She claimed it due to an imbalance that could be cured through some kind of energy work as I lay on a massage table. (Another alternate physician whose discipline is closer to reality, a chiropractor, also claimed that my spine was merely misaligned, and attempted to realign it through popping and stretching me on a table. It did not work. One leg is still slightly different in length than another.) As I drove with the daughter of the enthusiastic sales woman to fetch the table from her home, I asked about the crystal dangling from her neck. “Oh, this is just a bit of jewelry.” The mother was a believer; the daughter was apparently ashamed, but perhaps dutifully wore the crystal anyway to please her. I ultimately declined to have my back fixed through energy healing.
While I did not see anyone manifest great fruits of superhealth, or even any significant change in the health of the woman whose home hosted the energy crystal presentation, I did however watch her divorce her husband for no apparent reason years later, and rend the hearts and confidence of her children, and nearly destroy her family.
“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: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him” (James 5:14-15). Notice that the Lord’s prescribed method for administering to the sick is an ordinance, which can affect the soul, not just the body. What keeps this procedure from being hocus-pocus? The blind man Jesus healed with clay and water might have splashed mud and any other liquid on his face a thousand times; the main thing that made it a cure was the commandment of the Lord to do it.
There is no rational reason on earth to believe that cancer or any other internal malady should yield to the application of oil, the laying on of hands, or prayer. But I have seen it work with my own eyes. Understanding how it works is not the main key; rather, the key is to rely on priesthood power, and have faith in the Lord. In the experience I witnessed, both the one giving the blessing, and the one receiving the blessing, felt the power of God; both received direction from the Spirit, one to know what to say in the blessing, the other to know through what was said to do with the health conferred by the Lord via the blessing. So the gift of renewed health was not merely for the consolation of vanity or building abs of steel—it was to make a servant of the Lord useful to those around her. Peter jumped out of the boat to walk on water after he saw the Savior do it; we Latter-day saints prefer to strap on our metaphorical water skis (in many ways, not just looking to cure disease). We rely on the arm of the flesh, the power of day planner; we want to use some device we can control, something that seems more cunning or flashy, or at least something we can comprehend.
I like vitamin supplements. Who knows if they have helped much, but I like them. A girl facing a particular cosmetic health challenge took some supplements from me, held them in her hand, and silently asked her body if they were OK to eat, and waited for it to answer before she washed them down with a swig of water. Later she ate a bunch of junk food. Was the voice that vetted the vitamins the same one that demanded she eat the unhealthy food? I knew that she knew from personal experience that her cosmetic problem would go away when she stopped eating sweets, but she wanted a way to keep eating junk food and be healthy. Eventually she asked for a priesthood blessing. I never felt worse about giving a blessing in my life—the Spirit was not with me in it—and I have regretted doing it since. We both should be tuning in to the Spirit more, instead of listening to peer pressure, or other voices.
A more recent example of far-fetched medicine has been proffered to me by a dear friend, also a member. He has been telling me that negative energy, emotions, whatever you want to call it, can imprint on substances, that the substances will actually “remember” or retain the negative nature of what they passed through. For instance, water may become defiled with toxins, and then be strictly, completely purified from those toxins, and yet not do its job of quenching thirst in the body effectively because of residual negative influence from the toxic substances. Common sense seems to indicate that to remove all impurities from water is to remove all harmful side effects of those impurities, but the idea is that the water must also be healed of its memory of contact with bad things by coming in contact with good things, flushed through some system of glass beads or whatnot. I do not have the heart to challenge this friend’s belief in energy memory of food and water, partly because he has offered so much help to me in recent months with some severe bone injuries. He has recommended minerals necessary for bone repair, and even brought by ingredients for making yogurt to improve my calcium intake while lowering milk’s sugar content. Know them by their fruits; visiting and caring for the sick is a definite fruit of a real servant of God. I just wish I could get some discernible evidence on the water treatment idea. If it works, I am OK with it, even if I cannot understand why it works. If it does not work, what harm could it do? A waste of time and money, unless it provides psychosomatic benefits.
However, despite all his attempts to be a proponent for spiritual and physical health, this good friend still eats junk food, and shares recipes for such foods with all his friends. Of course, the recipes are made from much better ingredients than most brownies and cakes. But the most salubrious dessert is not as good for one’s health as fasting, or skipping dessert. The reason God puts so much good stuff in fruit is to keep the sugar from killing us, and if you avoid sweet stuff, you will not need so many vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and the like. (Eskimos eat no vitamin C, but they never get scurvy, because their diets are completely free of carbohydrate. Do we need more vitamin C, or less sweet stuff? Are we being healthy, or just applying poison and antidote simultaneously?) My dear friend takes many steps to improve his health, while still clinging to the stuff that keeps him a little bit overweight. He is a very healthy guy, but a shrink in his waistline from the absence of sweets would extend his life far more than the perfect combination of nutrients.
Whether blessing the prescribed way or some alternative, these examples of members listed above all have something in common: we are all wealthy people with free time. “...they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition.” Paul gives the cure for this condition in the verse before it: “And having food and clothing, let us be therewith content” (1Tim. 6:8-9). “Fix it till it’s broke” is the sardonic axiom that seems to apply to America, and we North American members of the Church, discussed above. Poor people never seem to get snared in this kind of folly—they are too busy being health, farming, walking, looking at nature, spending time with family, to worry about their health. Commercials on TV (I actually watched a little in a hospital a while ago) seem to be of two kinds: 1. Foods that damage health, and 2. pills that treat the symptoms of eating all that rubbish. Brigham Young said, “You get up in the morning and have...everything you can possibly cram into the stomach, until you surfeit the system and lay the foundation for disease and early death....Work less, wear less, and eat less, and we shall be a great deal wiser, healthier, and wealthier people than by taking the course we now do.” (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 187).
The only proven way to extend lifespan in lab rats is caloric restriction—feeding them two thirds of the calories they would like to eat. There is every indication human bodies work the same way. This is the easiest, cheapest cure of all—nothing. Of fasting, Isaiah says, “...thine health shall spring forth speedily...the Lord shall...make fat thy bones: and thou shalt be like a watered garden, and like a spring of water, whose waters fail not” (Isa. 58:8, 11). This treatment and prevention for disease may work, but it is not nearly as glamorous as magical crystals that ostensibly let you eat junk food and be healthy anyway.
“...cease to find fault one with another...” (D&C 88:124). I do not delight in criticizing people, and I have deliberately tried to obscure the identities of those involved in the follies I personally witnessed and recited above. This is no proclamation of my emancipation from similar follies and vices; I merely wish to extend a general warning about what I see as a symptom of low faith, high wealth, free time, and the desire to transcend other mere mortals by possessing secret powers and knowledge. This kind of thing can gull anyone who is in the wrong place, spiritually. It seems fitting here to enumerate some of my own foibles, and exhibit some humility to cover the halitosis of my accusations.
As I have looked squarely into the mirror of introspection, I have realized that I do not eat solely for fuel or building materials to support my body. If those were the only reasons I ate, I would be the healthiest person I know. Instead, my eating patterns revolve around shutting off my brain. Fructose impairs cortex function, just like alcohol. It is designed to do this because in nature, fruit sugar signals our bodies that winter is coming. Cortex is where our willpower is located in the brain, and dampening willpower makes us likely to stuff ourselves and fatten up before winter. So the long-standing addiction I have to carbohydrates has less to do with a sweet tooth, and more to do with dodging the uncomfortable realities of life. Even without sweets, a full stomach draws blood away from the rest of the body (i.e. the brain) for digestion. Essentially, excess food helps to sweep away my hard thoughts (and hence, feelings) about life, rather than deal with them. Food can be an agent of procrastination. If I would take the time to amend my life and fill it with emotionally satisfying things and relationships, food would lose most of its appeal.
My friend (who wants to purify water energies) defined addictions as a dependence on something besides the Lord. I like this definition, more good fruits on his part. If we want improved health, do we lean on the Lord, or a burgeoning medicine cabinet, a pharmacy, and an army of witchdoctors? If life is empty, do we fill it with carnal stimuli, like food and alcohol, or do we rely on the Comforter for comfort? It is easy to make the mistake of believing the Lord’s admonition to Adam to live by the sweat of his brow was an invitation to focus solely on our survival or make it our main goal. Even President Packer, who often counsels youth to keep harmful substances out of their bodies, admits that maintaining health is ultimately “a losing battle.” My experience has been that the Lord heals, but the doctor collects the fee. The Lord will keep us alive, or make us sick, or take us home to heaven, all according to His plan and timing for us. The point of life is not to spend it trying to live forever, but to prepare to meet God when it is over, however long or brief our lives may be. Those who seek to save their lives lose them, but those who serve God will be preserved. (An extreme example is John and the three Nephites.)
God may not care that much about keeping us alive, or whether our understanding of medicine is all that accurate. Our bodies do not just have the capacity to die; they are designed unavoidably to die. The ultimate cure for all diseases is the resurrection, and everyone will get that permanent fix in any case. Not everyone will be spiritually healed, however, and that makes it a more pressing issue. "...fear not even unto death; for in this world your joy is not full, but in me your joy is full. Therefore, care not for the body, neither the life of the body; but care for the soul, and for the life of the soul" (D&C 101:36-37). There are armies of people on the other side of the veil who need to hear the gospel, and our death here may send us to them there. Our knowledge of medicine or experience with healing miracles may be limited. But our simple understanding of the gospel, saving truth, can be perfect, provided the Spirit is our teacher.
Part of preparing to meet God is learning to discern where influences and ideas are coming from, and choosing the good from the bad. Another part of that preparation is learning to rely on the Lord, to trust Him even when we might be tempted to sell our souls for a little physical healing.
Part of preparing to meet God is learning to discern where influences and ideas are coming from, and choosing the good from the bad. Another part of that preparation is learning to rely on the Lord, to trust Him even when we might be tempted to sell our souls for a little physical healing.
Monday, March 25, 2013
Intelligence
I recently heard a scientist (an agnostic or an atheist, reading between the lines) speaking about his family in a radio interview. He said he let his kids make messes because he was more concerned with preserving and fostering their innate tendency to be curious and perform experiments than he was with having a clean house. This man, though an agnostic at best, knew more about what it means to be “like God” from personal experience as a father than he could have learned from twenty years of attendance and study at a divinity school. Scripture indicates that God cared more about preserving our agency than He did about preventing the inevitable mess and pain that come from sin. This is likely because we learn best through personal experience, even painful experience. The tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil were both made by God, and He gave Adam and Eve freedom to choose both, knowing beforehand the consequences. Instead of adopting Satan’s plan of depriving us of agency to prevent the resulting mess, He sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to clean it up through His suffering. The agnostic scientist on the radio had experienced a microcosm of the plan of salvation in his own living room.
This vignette demonstrates the difference between intellectual or theoretical learning, and experiential learning. Take D&C 121 as another example. “Behold, many are called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen? Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world that they do not learn this one lesson…” Hold it right there. If the revelation gives us a description of the unlearned lesson, is that the equivalent of God giving the unchosen a cheat-sheet? If He tells us that our obsession with owning a fleet of sports cars and a swimming pool full of cocaine keeps us from learning a certain lesson, and then tells us what that lesson is, will that allow us to keep our unhealthy obsession and still be “called” as well as “chosen?” No, because the obsession does not simply blind us to facts; it robs us of the capacity live the information, regardless of whether we can quote the lesson in D&C 121 by heart.
Facts we learn are not the same thing as traits we earn.
“Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection.” That seems to indicate that book learning is critical to our salvation. It is. “Faith cometh by hearing the word.” But are facts all we need? “And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.” Why the redundancy—“...knowledge and intelligence...?” Are they the same thing in this context? Rather than emphasis by redundancy, I believe these two words indicate distinct and separate things. Knowledge refers to facts we know; intelligence here refers to what we are, our character, the degree to which we adhere to light and knowledge we possess. Two beings might know the same facts, but one may choose to inconvenience himself by acting on that information, while the other may choose to shirk the responsibility the information places on his shoulders. They both have the same knowledge, but one is more intelligent, more obedient to truth, than the other. Hence we gain intelligence by “diligence and obedience,” not necessarily by theoretical exercises (though our minds must stretch also before we can receive the things of God).
Abraham gets a lesson in astronomy from the Lord, in which the magnitude of various heavenly bodies is compared to spiritual magnitude of intelligences, conscious heavenly beings. If you find two beings, and one is more intelligent than the other, you may find one more intelligent than either. But God is “more intelligent than they all” (Abr. 3:19). James chides us in his epistle: “...faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” (James 2:17-20). Our acts must reflect our level of knowledge, or we lose light and come under condemnation. Intelligence is our fidelity to whatever knowledge we have. Jesus’ ability to do the right thing no matter what exceeded everyone else’s; this was one reason He was the only one who could successfully complete the Atonement.
Till one is equally intelligent with God, we are beings with varying levels of intelligence, above or below each other. How do we become more intelligent in this sense? Obedience and diligence, adherence to the laws we have already received. As our obedience increases (even as our determination to be obedient increases) we receive further grace to be able to climb the next mountain. If it were possible to gain this kind of intelligence from a book the way we gain other knowledge, life and the creation would have been unnecessary. We could have remained in our premortal home, and studied some heavenly book until we knew all there is to know. But learning the dictionary definition of patience will not make it easier to endure gracefully. The woman in line at the grocery store in front of us may take five minutes to find a working pen in her purse, and reciting a definition of patience will not be very helpful in keeping our temper from flaring. The crucible of experience is where such intelligence is earned.
When we show we are a good enough pilot of our flawed, simple, limited physical bodies here, we can then receive a powerful resurrected body, because we were faithful stewards who magnified the first one. “Well done, thou good and faithful servant—thou has been faithful over a few things. I will make thee a ruler over many things.” You were a good owner and driver of a compact car; I will make you the captain of an aircraft carrier.
I was in a tempting circumstance once, and I walked away. But I was deeply troubled by how easily my keel had almost been overwhelmed, how magnetic it still was, even after a few minutes of walking in the opposite direction. I implored in a silent prayer of how to surmount such things. The answer I got back was from Abr. 3:17. “...there is nothing that the Lord thy God shall take in his heart to do but what he will do it.” When I first encountered this statement in the scriptures, it seemed to me to be a non-sequitur, an interruption of the narrative. I wondered what Abraham was looking at in the vision that prompted the Lord to say such a thing. But if intelligence indicates fidelity to truth, what could be more appropriate here? Moons and stars may be above one another in magnitude; spirits may be above each other in their respective level of intelligence; God is above them all. One ranking system used as a metaphor for another.
And what could be more appropriate for me to know as I walked away from temptation, yet still felt it heavy on my heart? If God does not waste His heart on impossibilities, neither should we. We should reserve our hearts for what we WILL do. Part of the ache of mortality is constantly having our hearts entangled in that which is not, nor ever will be. “Wickedness never was happiness,” but how many times have we tried to brew happiness with just the right amount of wickedness included in the recipe? The leaven falls flat, and the aftertaste is always bitter. But as we follow the Spirit a little bit better each day, we get closer to happiness that does not include what Elder Maxwell called that unpleasant “morning-after” feeling.
This vignette demonstrates the difference between intellectual or theoretical learning, and experiential learning. Take D&C 121 as another example. “Behold, many are called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen? Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world that they do not learn this one lesson…” Hold it right there. If the revelation gives us a description of the unlearned lesson, is that the equivalent of God giving the unchosen a cheat-sheet? If He tells us that our obsession with owning a fleet of sports cars and a swimming pool full of cocaine keeps us from learning a certain lesson, and then tells us what that lesson is, will that allow us to keep our unhealthy obsession and still be “called” as well as “chosen?” No, because the obsession does not simply blind us to facts; it robs us of the capacity live the information, regardless of whether we can quote the lesson in D&C 121 by heart.
Facts we learn are not the same thing as traits we earn.
“Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection.” That seems to indicate that book learning is critical to our salvation. It is. “Faith cometh by hearing the word.” But are facts all we need? “And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.” Why the redundancy—“...knowledge and intelligence...?” Are they the same thing in this context? Rather than emphasis by redundancy, I believe these two words indicate distinct and separate things. Knowledge refers to facts we know; intelligence here refers to what we are, our character, the degree to which we adhere to light and knowledge we possess. Two beings might know the same facts, but one may choose to inconvenience himself by acting on that information, while the other may choose to shirk the responsibility the information places on his shoulders. They both have the same knowledge, but one is more intelligent, more obedient to truth, than the other. Hence we gain intelligence by “diligence and obedience,” not necessarily by theoretical exercises (though our minds must stretch also before we can receive the things of God).
Abraham gets a lesson in astronomy from the Lord, in which the magnitude of various heavenly bodies is compared to spiritual magnitude of intelligences, conscious heavenly beings. If you find two beings, and one is more intelligent than the other, you may find one more intelligent than either. But God is “more intelligent than they all” (Abr. 3:19). James chides us in his epistle: “...faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” (James 2:17-20). Our acts must reflect our level of knowledge, or we lose light and come under condemnation. Intelligence is our fidelity to whatever knowledge we have. Jesus’ ability to do the right thing no matter what exceeded everyone else’s; this was one reason He was the only one who could successfully complete the Atonement.
Till one is equally intelligent with God, we are beings with varying levels of intelligence, above or below each other. How do we become more intelligent in this sense? Obedience and diligence, adherence to the laws we have already received. As our obedience increases (even as our determination to be obedient increases) we receive further grace to be able to climb the next mountain. If it were possible to gain this kind of intelligence from a book the way we gain other knowledge, life and the creation would have been unnecessary. We could have remained in our premortal home, and studied some heavenly book until we knew all there is to know. But learning the dictionary definition of patience will not make it easier to endure gracefully. The woman in line at the grocery store in front of us may take five minutes to find a working pen in her purse, and reciting a definition of patience will not be very helpful in keeping our temper from flaring. The crucible of experience is where such intelligence is earned.
When we show we are a good enough pilot of our flawed, simple, limited physical bodies here, we can then receive a powerful resurrected body, because we were faithful stewards who magnified the first one. “Well done, thou good and faithful servant—thou has been faithful over a few things. I will make thee a ruler over many things.” You were a good owner and driver of a compact car; I will make you the captain of an aircraft carrier.
I was in a tempting circumstance once, and I walked away. But I was deeply troubled by how easily my keel had almost been overwhelmed, how magnetic it still was, even after a few minutes of walking in the opposite direction. I implored in a silent prayer of how to surmount such things. The answer I got back was from Abr. 3:17. “...there is nothing that the Lord thy God shall take in his heart to do but what he will do it.” When I first encountered this statement in the scriptures, it seemed to me to be a non-sequitur, an interruption of the narrative. I wondered what Abraham was looking at in the vision that prompted the Lord to say such a thing. But if intelligence indicates fidelity to truth, what could be more appropriate here? Moons and stars may be above one another in magnitude; spirits may be above each other in their respective level of intelligence; God is above them all. One ranking system used as a metaphor for another.
And what could be more appropriate for me to know as I walked away from temptation, yet still felt it heavy on my heart? If God does not waste His heart on impossibilities, neither should we. We should reserve our hearts for what we WILL do. Part of the ache of mortality is constantly having our hearts entangled in that which is not, nor ever will be. “Wickedness never was happiness,” but how many times have we tried to brew happiness with just the right amount of wickedness included in the recipe? The leaven falls flat, and the aftertaste is always bitter. But as we follow the Spirit a little bit better each day, we get closer to happiness that does not include what Elder Maxwell called that unpleasant “morning-after” feeling.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)