The Concept of Race, in the Gospel

I expect to hear much more about the priesthood ban the LDS church imposed on black Africans as the US presidential election gets closer.  And I’d expect LDS blogs to begin either defending the ban, attempting to explain it away, or talking about how the church needs to formally apologize for being racist and move on — [This recent one from Wheat & Tares comes to mind]

Brand-nu’s comments on the It maketh no matter to me, God accepteth no [one]‘s person post got me to write out my view of human race — especially as it pertains to the racist doctrines of Cain’s mark and Canaan’s curse being the black skin of Africans and their enslavement by Europeans.

The origins of associating Cain’s mark with having black skin – and then tying that together with Canaan’s curse of slavery – and then rolling it all in with the priesthood restriction pertaining to Pharaoh [through Ham] in the book of Abraham — all originate with Victorian-era, Western European/American attempts to justify the enslavement of Africans.

No group ever persecutes, enslaves, tortures, or murders another group without first justifying their actions by placing the subjugated group outside the moral community of all human-beings [by one means or another].

Cain’s mark:

The entire point of the YHVH-author’s writings in Genesis was to explain how the world at the present [the time at which he was writing] came to be that way.  Why does man labor to till the earth, why does woman labor to birth children, why do some people organize as separate family-units and wear clothing – while others organize as sexually-open tribes and wear little clothing, why do some people raise crops and flocks – while others roam the earth and hunt nomadically, why do humans speak different languages? – etc.

The story of Cain’s mark is that author’s attempt to explain the existence of the nomadic Sleb tribes of Arabia, which were contemporaries with the people who wrote the biblical text.  These people were qayin [the word translated as "Cain"], which means “workers in metal”.

Their own cultural traditions explain that they were nomadic because, “the ground does not yield fruit to them.”  Also, as a tribal group, they are known to take seven-fold revenge on a person who kills one of their own fellow-tribesmen.  In other words, they start to sound a lot like:

and Cain went into the field
and Cain talked with Abel
his brother
and it came to pass
that while they were in the field
Cain rose up against Abel
his brother
and slew him
and Cain gloried in that which he had done
saying

I am free
surely the flocks of my brother
falleth into my hands

and YHVH said unto Cain

where is Abel
thy brother?

And he said

I know not
am I my brother’s keeper?

and YHVH said

what hast thou done?
the voice of thy brother’s blood
cries unto me from the ground
and now thou shalt be cursed from the earth
which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood
from thy hand
when thou tillest the ground
it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength
a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth

and Cain said unto YHVH

satan tempted me because of my brother’s flocks
and I was wroth also
for his offering thou didst accept
and not mine

my punishment is greater than I can bear
behold
thou hast driven me out this day
from the face of YHVH
and from thy face shall I be hid
and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth
and it shall come to pass
that he that findeth me will slay me
because of mine iniquities
for these things are not hid from YHVH

and I
YHVH
said unto him

whosoever slayeth thee
vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold

and I
YHVH
set a mark upon Cain
lest any finding him should kill him

and Cain was shut out from the presence of YHVH
and with his wife
and many of his brethren dwelt in the land of nod
on the east of eden

Note there is no mention of priesthood – only that a mark and a different lifestyle would characterize Cain’s family from Seth’s family.

Ham’s curse:

To get from Cain’s mark to banning priesthood – we have to go through Ham:

and Noah began to be a husbandman
and he planted a vineyard
and he drank of the wine
and was drunken
and he was uncovered within his tent

and Ham
the father of Canaan
saw the nakedness of his father
and told his two brothers outside
and Shem and Japheth took a garment
and laid it upon both their shoulders
and went backward
and covered the nakedness of their father
and their faces were backward
and they saw not their father’s nakedness

and Noah awoke from his wine
and knew what his younger son had done unto him
and he said

cursed be Canaan
a servant of servants shall he be
unto his brothers

and he said

blessed be YHVH
god of Shem
and Canaan shall be his servant
god shall enlarge Japheth
and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem
and Canaan shall be his servant

Still no mention of priesthood restriction or black skin.  In fact, if this curse means anything about the rights of the priesthood [given the servant/minister role of priests], there’s a case to be made that Canaan was being given the priesthood [being a servant of servants, a servant to his brothers] — though I think it’s more likely that the priesthood isn’t even part of this story at all.

There’s nothing about the rights of the priesthood until we get to Enoch’s prophecies:

and again YHVH said unto me

look

and I looked towards the north
and I beheld the people of Canaan
which dwelt in tents
and YHVH said unto me

prophesy

and I prophesied
saying

behold the people of Canaan
which are numerous
shall go forth in battle
array against the people of Shem
and shall slay them that they shall utterly be destroyed
and the people of Canaan shall divide themselves in the land
and the land shall be barren and unfruitful
and none other people shall dwell there
but the people of Canaan
for behold
YHVH shall curse the land with much heat
and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever
and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan
that they were despised among all people

and it came to pass
that YHVH said unto me

look

and I looked
and I beheld the land of Sharon and of Enoch and of Omner and of Heni and of Shem and of Haner and of Hanannihah
and all the inhabitants thereof
and YHVH said unto me

go to this people
and say unto them

repent

lest I come out
and smite them with a curse
and they die

and the record of Abraham:

now this king of egypt
was a descendant from the loins of Ham
and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth
from this descent sprang all the Egyptians
and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land

the land of egypt being first discovered by a woman
who was the daughter of Ham
and the daughter of Egyptus
which in the Chaldean language signifies egypt
which signifies that which is forbidden
when this woman discovered the land
it was under water
who afterward settled her sons in it
and thus
from Ham
sprang that race
which preserved the curse in the land

now the first government of egypt was established by Pharaoh
the eldest son of Egyptus
the daughter of Ham
and it was after the manner of the government of Ham
which was patriarchal

Pharaoh
being a righteous man
established his kingdom
and judged his people wisely and justly all his days
seeking earnestly to imitate that order
established by the fathers in the first generations
in the days of the first patriarchal reign
even in the reign of Adam
and also of Noah
his father
who blessed him with the blessings of the earth
and with the blessings of wisdom
but cursed him as pertaining to the priesthood

now
Pharaoh
being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of priesthood
notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah
through Ham
therefore my father was led away by their idolatry

The assumption is that Noah’s curse of Canaan is the curse pertaining to the priesthood mentioned in Abraham’s record.

However, that blessing/cursing was given to Pharaoh:

Pharaoh
being a righteous man
[...]
and also of Noah
his father
who blessed him with the blessings of the earth
and with the blessings of wisdom
but cursed him as pertaining to the priesthood
now
Pharaoh
being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of priesthood [...]

and we do not have any scriptural record for what Noah said to Pharaoh.

Cain/Ham/Canaan have nothing to do with black Africans:

In summation:

• Cain’s mark mentions nothing about rights of the priesthood or about having black skin [because his descendants were Arabians]
• Ham/Canaan’s curse [although mentioning the rights of the priesthood] is said to pertain to Egyptians [who aren't black, but are Arabians]

Any appeal to Cain’s mark or to Ham’s curse is completely irrelevant with respect to black Africans and the priesthood because neither of them were black Africans.  Cain and Ham would be the ancestors of Arabian people.  Even though Egypt is technically in the continent of Africa [geographically-speaking] – Egyptians are Arabs [cultural/genetically-speaking].

Furthermore, even if it were possible to assert that the historical character named Cain [and/or Ham], is the forbearer of black Africans – to associate that with a priesthood-ban on them [by lineage], one would then have to demonstrate something that would be equally impossible to assert – i.e., that their lineage is also found in no other human-being on Earth.

You see, every generation back we go in time, the number of forebearers a person has increases at an exponential rate [2 parents, 4 grandparents, 8 g-grandparents, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, and so on].  So as a bit of mental exercise – let’s wind the clock back to 1400 AD [~30 generations].  At this point, the number of potential ancestors you would have (2³⁰) is two-times what the world population was at that same time.

When we re-wind the clock back to biblical time-periods [588, 1700, 2300, or 4000 BC] and ponder not only the exponential number of forebearers one will potentially have – but also how they have been scattered across the globe by things like the flood of Noah, the tower of Babel, the scattering of the 10 tribes of Israel, war, famine, persecution, etc. – it gets pretty silly to start talking about the odds that each-and-every African person alive today does not have even one of the “righteous” in their family tree and that each-and-every European person alive today does not have even one of the “cursed” in theirs?.

Racial distinctions in the gospel:

The best thing to do is to take it as granted that the current scriptural record we have in the Bible is a pretty incomplete picture concerning the affairs of God throughout the whole human race.  The Bible is the book that’s come by way of the Jew and is their record — and so we find that it deals primarily with Arabians [go figure].

Until the scriptural record is more complete — until we receive the prophets of the other nations, tribes, and people, with their prophetic records that will come forth from Western and Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, Pacific Islands, etc. — we cannot speak with certainty of how God has dealt with the other races and if there are promises made to them that we know that of.  Which is why the best thing to do [until then] is stick to an:

[god] hath made of one blood
all nations of men

and

there is neither jew
nor greek

approach to associating a state of righteousness or a cursed state to any of the races of human-kind that are around today.  Because if we allow ourselves to be guided by a race-based rendering of something like:

the order of this priesthood was confirmed
to be handed down from father to son
and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed
to whom the promises were made

the sword of judgment cuts both ways.  Personally, as a literal descendent of Scottish/Irish forebearers, who [as far as our scriptures tell us] received none of the “original promises” themselves – I’ll end-up cutting myself out too.

But to attempt to include myself as a European by saying something like the scattering of the lost 10 tribes would be sufficient to “count me in” to the blessed lineage — would also likely allow for the inclusion of a whole host of other races and nationalities that someone might be trying to separate themselves from in the first place.

[God] hath made of one blood all nations of men:

All races were [at one point] a single race — the family of Adam and Eve.  The division into separate races has been a story of adaptation to unique human conditions, meaning all that we currently call “race” is a form of the miraculous human ability to adapt to the environmental conditions they find themselves in.

As a part of the restoration of all things — the gospel will be taken to every tribe, nations, kindred, tongue, etc. on the earth.

for behold
I say unto you
that Zion shall flourish
and the glory of YHVH shall be upon her
and she shall be an ensign unto the people
and there shall come unto her
out of every nation under heaven

As a part of the gathering of the people of the Lord – these human races will be brought back into the one, single human family.  Meaning that since Zion will not be established by unrelated persons — every nation under heaven will become connected by and will b be engaging in inter-racial marriages.

Race is purely conventional – and has no application of eternal significance.  The main component of what we use for racial distinction is skin color, which is composed largely of just two things:

• Melanin, which is produced in the skin as a response to oxidative stress of UV light
• Blood, which is visible through the skin in the vascular system

Now, a resurrected body has no need for protection from oxidative stress, and it will also not quickened with hemoglobin.  Thus, the skin color will not appear as any mortal human on the earth has ever looked.

When the scriptures say that resurrected persons will come forth in either the resurrection of just or the resurrection of the unjust:

and [they] shall come forth
they who have done good
in the resurrection of the just
and they who have done evil
in the resurrection of the unjust

it is saying that there will only be two discernible groups [what we could call “races”] of human beings after the resurrection from the dead:  the just and the unjust.

All those who come forth in the resurrection of the just will have a new body, patterned after the body of Christ, which is patterned after the body of God [meaning we'll all have the same "genes"] – thus the color of their skin will all look exactly the same.

The fleshy-body that is sown in the earth upon death will arise as either wheat or tare [just or unjust], and this is according to the spirit that possessed that body at the time it died:

you do not sow the body that will be
but you sow bare grain
and it may chance be of wheat
or of some other grain

What makes a person “just” or “unjust” is not merits, nor lineage — but solely the state of the person’s right-brain-heart and their faith in Jesus Christ.  God looks only upon the right-brain-heart of mankind, which is something that has nothing to do with their genetic lineage or any supposed curses on black Africans.

So, given a future state in which no resurrected bodies will be colored by melanin and hemoglobin, and given that God has made of one blood every nation of mankind from the beginning, and that, as far as the gospel is concerned, “there is neither Jew nor Greek” – any race-based exclusion from the gospel [or from the priesthood] based on such flimsy ground as being related to someone who lived over 5,000 years ago makes a pretty poor “hill-to-die-on”.

Next Article by Justin:  The Written Records

Previous Article by Justin:  Deep Waters:  Having their Hearts Knit Together in Unity and in Love

In Search of a New Church Home:  Part II — Unitarian Universalism

Abrahamic Concubinage as an Inter-Tribal Function

Note: This is a GEMTAM chapter modified for publication on the LDS Anarchy blog. It contains more information than what is found in that chapter.

The Encyclopædia Brittannica, Eleventh Edition, says the following in its entry on concubinage:

CONCUBINAGE (Lat. concubina, a concubine; from con-, with, and cubare, to lie), the state of a man and woman cohabiting as married persons without the full sanctions of legal marriage. In early historical times, when marriage laws had scarcely advanced beyond the purely customary stage, the concubine was definitely recognized as a sort of inferior wife, differing from those of the first rank mainly by the absence of permanent guarantees. The history of Abraham’s family shows us clearly that the concubine might be dismissed at any time, and her children were liable to be cast off equally summarily with gifts, in order to leave the inheritance free for the wife’s sons (Genesis xxi 9 ff., xxv. 5 ff.).

The Roman law recognized two classes of legal marriage: (1) with the definite public ceremonies of confarreatio or coemptio, and (2) without any public form whatever and resting merely on the affectio maritalis, i.e. the fixed intention of taking a particular woman as a permanent spouse.¹ Next to these strictly lawful marriages came concubinage as a recognized legal status, so long as the two parties were not married and had no other concubines. It differed from the formless marriage in the absence (1) of affectio maritalis, and therefore (2) of full conjugal rights. For instance, the concubine was not raised, like the wife, to her husband’s rank, nor were her children legitimate, though they enjoyed legal rights forbidden to mere bastards, e.g. the father was bound to maintain them and to leave them (in the absence of legitimate children) one-sixth of his property; moreover, they might be fully legitimated by the subsequent marriage of their parents.

In the East, the emperor Leo the Philosopher (d. 911) insisted on formal marriage as the only legal status; but in the Western Empire concubinage was still recognized even by the Christian emperors. The early Christians had naturally preferred the formless marriage of the Roman law as being free from all taint of pagan idolatry; and the ecclesiastical authorities recognized concubinage also. The first council of Toledo (398) bids the faithful restrict himself “to a single wife or concubine, as it shall please him”;² and there is a similar canon of the Roman synod held by Pope Eugenius II. in 826. Even as late as the Roman councils of 1052 and 1063, the suspension from communion of laymen who had a wife and a concubine at the same time implies that mere concubinage was tolerated. It was also recognized by many early civil codes. In Germany “left-handed” or “morganatic” marriages were allowed by the Salic law between nobles and women of lower rank. In different states of Spain the laws of the later middle ages recognized concubinage under the name of barragania, the contract being lifelong, the woman obtaining by it a right to maintenance during life, and sometimes also to part of the succession, and the sons ranking as nobles if their father was a noble. In Iceland, the concubine was recognized in addition to the lawful wife, though it was forbidden that they should dwell in the same house. The Norwegian law of the later middle ages provided definitely that in default of legitimate sons, the kingdom should descend to illegitimates. In the Danish code of Valdemar II., which was in force from 1280 to 1683, it was provided that a concubine kept openly for three years shall thereby become a legal wife; this was the custom of hand vesten, the “handfasting” of the English and Scottish borders, which appears in Scott’s Monastery. In Scotland, the laws of William the Lion (d. 1214) speak of concubinage as a recognized institution; and, in the same century, the great Enlish legist Bracton treats the “concubina legitima” as entitled to certain rights.³ There seems to have been at times a pardonable confusion between some quasi-legitimate unions and those marriages by mere word of mouth, without ecclesiastical or other ceremonies, which the church, after some natural hesitation, pronounced to be valid.⁴ Another and more serious confusion between concubinage and marriage was caused by the gradual enforcement of clerical celibacy (see CELIBACY). During the bitter conflict between laws which forbade sacerdotal marriages and long custom which had permitted them, it was natural that the legislators and the ascetic party generally should studiously speak of the priests’ wives as concubines, and do all in their power to reduce them to this position. This very naturally resulted in a too frequent substitution of clerical concubinage for marriage; and the resultant evils form one of the commonest themes of complaint in church councils of the later middle ages.⁵ Concubinage in general was struck at by the concordat between the Pope Leo X. and Francis I. of France in 1516; and the council of Trent, while insisting on far more stringent conditions for lawful marriage than those which had prevailed in the middle ages, imposed at last heavy ecclesiastical penalties on concubinage and appealed to the secular arm for help against contumacious offenders (Sessio xxiv. Cap. 8).

AUTHORITES.–Besides those quoted in the notes, the reader may consult with advantage Du Cange’s Glossarium, s.v. Concubina, the article “Concubinat” in Wetzer and Welte’s Kirchenlexikon (2nd ed., Freiburg i/B., 1884), and Dr H. C. Lea’s History of Sacerdotal Celibacy (3rd ed., London, 1907).

(G. G. Co.)

¹ The difference between English and Scottish law, which once made “Gretna Green marriages” so frequent, is due to the fact that Scotland adopted the Roman law (which on this particular point was followed by the whole medieval church).

² Gratian, in the 12th century, tried to explain this away by assuming that concubinage here referred to meant a formless marriage; but in 398 a church council can scarcely so have misused the technical terms of the then current civil law (Gratian, Decretum, pars i. dist. xxiv. c. 4).

³ Bracton, De Legibus, lib. iii. tract. ii. c. 28, § 1, and lib. iv. tract. vi. c. 8, § 4.

⁴ F. Pollock and F. W. Maitland, Hist. of English Law, 2nd ed. vol. ii. p. 370. In the case of Richard de Anesty, decided by papal rescript in 1143, “a marriage solemnly celebrated in church, a marriage of which a child had been born, was set aside as null in favour of an earlier marriage constituted by a mere exchange of consenting words” (ibid. p. 367; cf. the similar decretal of Alexander III. on p. 371). The great medieval canon lawyer Lyndwood illustrates the difficulty of distinguishing, even as late as the middle of the 15th century, between concubinage and a clandestine, though legal, marriage. He falls back on the definition of an earlier canonist that if the woman eats out of the same dish with the man, and if he takes her to church, she may be presumed to be his wife; if, however, he sends her to draw water and dresses her in vile clothing, she is probably a concubine (Provinciale, ed. Oxon. 1679, p. 10, s.v. concubinarios).

⁵ It may be gathered from the Dominican C. L. Richard’s Analysis Conciliorum (vol. ii., 1778) that there were more than 110 such complaints in councils and synods between the years 1009 and 1528. Dr Rashdall (Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, vol. ii. p. 691, note) points out that a master of the university of Prague, in 1499, complained openly to the authorities against a bachelor for assaulting his concubine.

The above write-up adequately shows the differences between a wife and a concubine.  On the one hand there was the wife, who had permanent guarantees.  The marriage contract or covenant she entered into bound her exclusively and permanently to her husband, the only way out being through death or divorce.  The wife received an inheritance and held rights to the husband’s rank or titles, as did the children she bore him.  So, for example, if he was a king,  she became a queen and the children she bore him became princes and princesses who also held rights to an inheritance.

On the other hand, the concubine’s marriage covenant had no permanent guarantees.  She was bound to her husband exclusively and temporarily and held no rights to an inheritance nor to any of his titles, nor did any the children she bore him.  Her marriage contract, being of a temporary nature, could have a stipulated duration of time after which it would end or a stipulated manner by which it could end, such as at the discretion of her husband or herself, and when it ended she was sent away with her children.

The husband leaves his tribe

It is impossible to comprehend Abrahamic concubinage without an understanding of the context of the ancient world, which was tribalism, meaning that the ancients lived in tribes.  Moses wrote:

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Genesis 2:24)

If there was a man who lived in one tribe and a woman who lived in a different one and the man desired to marry her, he was, per this standard, to leave his tribe and take up residence in his wife’s.  The woman was always to stay with her tribe, under the protection of her tribesmen, her father and her brothers when marrying a man from a different tribe.

No interfaith marriages

Husbands and wives were also to be of the same religious background.  Paul wrote, “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 6:14.)  Interfaith marriages, then, were prohibited by the Lord because such permanent unions would tend to turn the believing spouse’s heart away from Him.  This was especially detrimental in the case of a believing husband and a non-believing wife, for the husband would leave his believing tribe and would be immersed in the unbelieving tribe of his wife.  The marrying of believing husbands to only believing wives would make gospel tribes somewhat insular, or set apart, from the tribes of the world, for they would end up taking wives and husbands only from other gospel tribes.

Concubines did things in reverse

Concubinage worked differently than normal, permanent marriage unions.  A concubine did not remain with her tribe, but left it to live with the tribe of her husband.  After her concubinage contract had ended, she was to leave her husband’s tribe with her children and return to her own.  Also, a concubine could be an unbeliever from one of the tribes of the earth, meaning one of the non-gospel Gentile tribes in the surrounding area.  Because her union was only temporary and she came to live among the believer’s tribe, it was less likely that she would have influence enough over the husband to turn his heart from the Lord.

The union of Abraham and Hagar is the prime example of this.  Hagar was an Egyptian slave possibly acquired as Pharaoh’s gift to Sarah when Abraham and Sarah were sojourning in Egypt.  She was not, therefore, of their religion and tribe.  So Abraham took Hagar to wife as his concubine, not as his wife.  Some time after she had given birth to a male child (Ishmael), her concubinage contract was ended and she was sent away with her son.  Ishmael eventually ended up marrying an Egyptian woman.

Benefits of concubinage

A concubine would bring many benefits to the tribe of her husband.  Being from a different tribe, she would bring with her different customs and ways of doing things, which would enrich his tribe and give them knowledge concerning her own.  She also would learn the customs of her husband’s tribe.  Specifically, she would learn their language, their arts and academics, their tribal organization and politics, their talents and industry, their religion and all their other customs.  And she would be totally immersed in a gospel culture, dwelling among a gospel tribe, so it would be more likely that she would convert to their religion, than that she would convert them to her religion.  If she or any of her children did end up converting to the Lord while residing within the gospel tribe, after her contract ended she would be sent back to her tribe as the perfect tribal missionary, as one who was already fully aware of all the ways of her non-gospel tribe, having grown up in it.

Concubines would also bring great benefits to their original tribes.  Upon her return, a concubine could teach her people all of what she learned while living among her husband’s tribe, including the language and religion of her husband.  In this way, she becomes an ambassador of peace between the two tribes, having lived in both for an extended period and knowing the customs and ways and languages of both.  This would do much for inter-tribal relations, allowing two foreign tribes to more easily interact with each other without any misunderstandings.  What is true for her would also be true for her children, who were raised in their father’s tribe and would now be living in their mother’s.  Each would be immensely benefited by the experience and become natural tribal ambassadors, having allegiances in both tribes.

Concubines could marry afterward

After returning to her tribe, a concubine would be free to contract marriage as a wife to a fellow tribesman or to someone of another people, while remaining among her own kind.  As a tribeswoman by birth, she would be entitled to an inheritance in her tribe.  If she was sent away with gifts from her husband, these would also benefit her people.

Genetic diversity and tribal missionary work

Another benefit, and a main one at that, would be the introduction of genetic diversity among the various tribes practicing concubinage.  A woman from a foreign tribe that became a concubine in a gospel tribe, would end up mixing her tribe’s genetic code (though her) with the genetic code of her husband’s tribe.  If she became a concubine of more than one husband of the new tribe, she would introduce even more genetic diversity into her children.  Then, when the concubinage contract(s) ended, she would take her children, the product of her and the new tribe, back to her old tribe, where these children could then pass on this genetic diversity through marriage into their mother’s tribe.

Without concubinage, gospel tribes become too insular, marrying only among themselves and not generating much genetic diversity.  Also, tribal missionary work becomes more difficult, for it is much easier to send tribal missionaries to a foreign tribe that has had concubines who have already lived in the missionaries’ tribe, who can put in a good word for the missionaries and open other doors, allowing the gospel to go forth unimpeded.

Tribal missionaries that spent much time in foreign tribes, preaching the gospel, could enter into concubinage contracts with women of that tribe for the duration that the missionaries were there.  This would allow the missionaries to marry non-believers without the danger of being unequally yoked in a permanent union.  If the concubine ended up converting to the Lord, the missionary could end the concubinage contract and either leave her there as a new ambassador of the gospel or arrange to bring her to his own tribe as a permanent wife. Whatever they decided to do, the children that came from these unions would create greater genetic diversity for whichever tribe they ended up in.

Concubines must go back

A concubine whose marriage contract does not end and who is not sent back to her father’s tribe defeats the whole purpose of concubinage.  The benefits that come from concubinage—benefits for both her, her children, her husband’s tribe and her father’s tribe—come only when the concubine and her children return to live with the tribe she originated from.  Not receiving an inheritance in her husband’s tribe is necessary, in order that she return from whence she comes.  Otherwise, concubinage is merely a method for the exploitation of women—having the benefits of a wife, without any associated responsibilities.

Abrahamic concubinage as revealed to Joseph Smith

A concubine is a noble, honorable calling and title, that accomplishes a great deal of good for two whole tribes.  Only when viewed in this manner, under tribal filters, does concubinage make any sense.

When Joseph Smith inquired of the Lord concerning how it was that the ancients were justified in having many wives and concubines, he was given the revelation found in D&C 132.  This revelation, for the most part, only speaks of wives.  The reason is because it was the purpose of the Lord that Joseph and the saints establish themselves into two bona-fide, fully functioning tribes of Israel using the principle of plural marriage.  The revelation ends with an enigmatic carrot on a stick:

And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present. (D&C 132:66)

The only thing that the Lord says about concubines in this revelation is that the ancients were justified in receiving them and that it was accounted to them as righteousness and not sin.  But there is no indication that Joseph was supposed to start contracting concubines, only that more would be revealed later.

Tribal formation first, concubinage second

It makes sense that the Lord wouldn’t get into all the details of the doctrine and practice of concubines at this point because concubinage serves an inter-tribal function and the saints had not, yet, even formed themselves into one gospel tribe.  The intention of the Lord was to have the saints form themselves first into two gospel tribes, a tribe of Ephraim and a tribe of Manasseh and then, and only then, were they to start entering into concubine arrangements with the tribes of the earth.  This would serve to counteract the insular nature of the two gospel tribes, who would marry among themselves, in believer-only marriages.

A commandment to practice concubinage

Although the Lord did not go into detail concerning concubines, there is enough in the revelation and in the Bible for modern, gospel-based tribes organized according to the Gospel-based, Multihusband-Multiwife, Tribal Anarchy Model to enter into concubinage contracts if they see fit.  In fact, the Lord gives a commandment that these things be done in the revelation itself:

Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand whereby I, the Lord, justified my servants…as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter [of having many wives and concubines]. Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law [concerning having many wives and concubines] revealed unto them must obey the same. (D&C 132:1-3)

So, once a gospel tribe is established using plural marriage, the Lord expects it to begin entering into concubinage contracts with the tribes of the earth, in order that the purposes, promises and prophecies of the Lord may be fulfilled about the people of the Lord becoming the salt and leaven of the earth.  The Savior said:

The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened. (Matthew 13:33)

Through converted concubines, returned back from whence they come, entire tribes will be converted.  Concubinage, then, is a true principle of the gospel and one which any gospel-based tribe may justifiably embrace.

Concubinage and wife contracts are equally impermanent

All covenants, contracts…that are not…sealed…as well for time and for all eternity…are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead. (D&C 132:7)

This scripture shows that a marriage contract between a husband and a wife and a marriage contract between a husband and a concubine are similarly temporary.  The only difference is that one is intended to last a little bit longer than the other.  The wife’s contract has an end at death, while the concubine’s contract has an end sometime during mortality, but neither in reality are permanent contracts.

It is the sealing power that will vicariously seal all such impermanent marriage contracts, including concubinage contracts, making them all permanent unions in the afterlife.  Because of this, it is not correct to speak of a concubine as “a sort of inferior wife.”  She is every bit as much a wife as any other and will be sealed to her husband permanently after her death just as every other wife will be, and she will inherit the same reward as a wife will in the eternities.

Concubinage has a heavenly origin

Lastly, concubinage appears to be patterned after a heavenly object (a comet, a planetoid, a planet or a brown dwarf) that enters an insular solar system for a time, causing new planetary birth (the electrical expulsion model of planetary birth) and then after passing through leaves the solar system with an entourage of captured, newly birthed, planetary objects.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The Will of God and Faith

Romans 9: 6-24 [English Standard Version]:

…it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.”

And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad — in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls — she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” As it is written [in Malachi], “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

What shall we say then?  Is there injustice on God’s part?  By no means!  For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?  Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory — even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

The two historical cases:

Looking at Paul’s logic — because God chose one of Abraham’s spouses over the others, it follows that claiming descent from Abraham was not sufficient to make one an heir to God’s promise:

And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.

Further because God chose one of Rebekah’s twins over the other, claiming descent from Isaac was not sufficient to make one an heir to God’s promise.

And Isaac intreated the Lord for his wife, because she was barren: and the Lord was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived.  And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to enquire of the Lord.  And the Lord said unto her, two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.

NOTE:  However, Rebekah was told that the older would serve the younger.  Given the Lord’s vernacular for presidency/leadership as voluntary servitude – perhaps this was a misunderstood revelation, and that misunderstanding led things to play out the way they did.  Just a thought.

The extrapolated case:

From these two historical cases, Paul theroizes that it is then likewise true that claiming to be “of Israel” cannot demonstrate that a person is right with God [or justified].

The implication made by using Abraham and Isaac as examples, is that being a justified believer is still a function of God’s choice [like choosing Sarah's son over Hagar's, and choosing one of Rebekah's sons over the other].   He either made you for glory or for wrath and you are in no place to dispute His choice for you.

This is the Calvinistic doctrine of “irresistible grace” — wherein they conclude that it is not possible for humans to have any role in justification — because how could we do anything more than God could do Himself?

What about faith?

However, Paul consistently stresses “faith” as the means of access to God and to a justified state with Him:

Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.  Is he the God of the Jews only?  is he not also of the Gentiles?  Yes, of the Gentiles also:  Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.

and

Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

and

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

and

But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.  Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.  But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

and

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.

Faith = Word of God + Belief + the Spirit:

So, if humans have access to God by virtue of faith — then it must still be God’s irresistible choice as to who “gets faith” and who does not — right?  To answer this question, it requires one to look at Alma’s preaching on the subject of faith that is found in Alma 32:

Now, we will compare the word unto a seed.

Equating the word of God with a seed is also done in Luke 8: 11;  1 Peter  1: 23; Romans 10: 17; and Galatians 3: 2-9.  The farmer analogy is quite accurate.  The right-brain-hearts of humans are soil, which can be at varying degrees of receptiveness for the seeds, which are the various doctrines of God, the devil, and of men.  The faith that will justify a person with respect to God comes as the ever-good seed is allowed to germinate and grow in the right-brain-heart.

Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart,

This “place” is given in the right-brain-heart.  It involves the concept of yielding [Mosiah 3:19] or being lowly, humble, and teachable.  Broken soil [or a softened right-brain-heart] is a result of a person humbling him/herself — thereby having a broken heart or contrite spirit.  This is equivalent to being “poor in heart” — which Alma observed that the Zoramites were:

of whom were poor in heart, because of their poverty as to the things of the world.

In their case, worldly poverty had brought them to this “lowliness of heart” state:

And now, as I said unto you, that because ye were compelled to be humble ye were blessed, do ye not suppose that they are more blessed who truly humble themselves because of the word?

Yea, he that truly humbleth himself, and repenteth of his sins, and endureth to the end, the same shall be blessed — yea, much more blessed than they who are compelled to be humble because of their exceeding poverty.

So, Alma describes two options for softening the right-brain-heart:  a person may wait for certain circumstances to bring about a state of humility [or soft ground], which will make him/her open and receptive to the word — or a person may exercise self-motivation by virtue of the power of the word alone [motivated by the promises of the Lord], and give place for that seed on his/her own.

Also, if a person’s circumstances do not cause him/her to be humble and they cannot seem to humble themselves before the Lord, then the Lord provides another tool for a man or woman to obtain the required humility:  fasting and prayer.

Nevertheless they did fast and pray oft, and did wax stronger and stronger in their humility, and firmer and firmer in the faith of Christ, unto the filling their souls with joy and consolation, yea, even to the purifying and the sanctification of their hearts, which sanctification cometh because of their yielding their hearts unto God.

This is how the ancients did it, because this is how it is done.

Continuing one with Alma’s preaching in chapter 32:

behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed,

The seed Alma spoke of was:

the Son of God, that he will come to redeem his people, and that he shall suffer and die to atone for their sins; and that he shall rise again from the dead, which shall bring to pass the resurrection, that all men shall stand before him, to be judged at the last and judgment day, according to their works.

This is the ever-good seed.  Any seed that is planted and persuades a person to believe in and plant this ever-good seed, is also a good seed.  While any seed that is planted and persuades a person not to believe in and plant the ever-good seed, is not a good seed.  None of this has anything to do with religion or churches.  All seeds are judged to be good or evil by how they measure up to the ever-good seed and whether they point people towards, or away from, it:

For behold, the Spirit of Christ is given to every man, that he may know good from evil; wherefore, I show unto you the way to judge; for every thing which inviteth to do good, and to persuade to believe in Christ, is sent forth by the power and gift of Christ; wherefore ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of God.

But whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do evil, and believe not in Christ, and deny him, and serve not God, then ye may know with a perfect knowledge it is of the devil; for after this manner doth the devil work, for he persuadeth no man to do good, no, not one; neither do his angels; neither do they who subject themselves unto him.

Continuing on in Alma 32:

if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord,

Unbelief is equated by Alma with resistance.  Resistance requires effort or work.  It means to oppose with force. The opposite of resisting would be to bow, give in, submit, succumb, surrender, or yield.  All of these words imply a lack of effort or ceasing to work.

As belief is an entirely passive act, any effort whatsoever on a person’s part will stand as an obstacle or impediment to the formula for obtaining faith.  It is like someone pushing you and simply allowing yourself to be pushed — or being in a river that is pushing you downriver and allowing yourself to be carried along.  No effort.  This is belief.

The moment there is resistance [in the slightest degree] to that push, even to just change the direction of travel one inch, it will decrease belief — ultimately turning it into its opposite [disbelief or doubt], which is a state of resistance to the Spirit of the Lord.

behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves — It must needs be that this is a good seed, or that the word is good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me.

This is a formula — akin to a scientific equation or cooking recipe.  Following the steps with the outlined ingredients will always produce the same result.  If a person varies one step or another — or rationalizes that a certain step is not required — or puts in some of their own effort into the formula — anything different causes “user error” and faith will not result.

The desire to believe:

But what can a person a person do if he/she is having problems with the formula?  There are certain signs following them that believe.  The purpose of these signs is to give the professed believer [and also the church] a means to discern justified believers in Christ [saints, who possess faith] from non-justified believers in Christ [Christians, who do not possess faith] — this is the fruit by which you may know them.  If one finds that he/she is not able to:

In my name they shall do many wonderful works; In my name they shall cast out devils; In my name they shall heal the sick; In my name they shall open the eyes of the blind, and unstop the ears of the deaf; And the tongue of the dumb shall speak; And if any man shall administer poison unto them it shall not hurt them; And the poison of a serpent shall not have power to harm them.

or

And these signs shall follow them that believe — in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover; And whosoever shall believe in my name, doubting nothing, unto him will I confirm all my words, even unto the ends of the earth.

Then Alma advises that:

But behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in you, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words

What will “awake and arouse your faculties”?  This was mentioned earlier in describing how to soften the soil:

• One could be compelled by circumstances to have a desire to believe.
• One could be motivated by virtue of the promises of the Lord in His word to desire to believe.
• One could fast and pray until a desire to believe stirs in his/her right-brain-heart.

Again, “let this desire work in you” is the same as being in that river of water that is pushing you downriver, and instead of resisting, just allowing yourself to be carried along.

God’s will is your faith:

God works according to the faith of the children of men — meaning according to the formula outlined above.  Thus, the doctrine of God saving people by virtue of His will and choice is true.  However, that He works according to our faith means that His “choice” cannot be outside the bounds of an agent’s faith.

There is no such thing as something operating solely according to the will of God without the context of our faith.  Things operate solely according to the faith of agents — and this is God’s will.  This is why, for example, when Alma and Amulek were beholding the destruction of the saints by fire — and Amulek says to Alma:

How can we witness this awful scene?  Therefore let us stretch forth our hands, and exercise the power of God which is in us [which power comes by faith], and save them from the flames.

we read that Alma replies:

The Spirit constraineth me that I must not stretch forth mine hand.

Because Alma and Amulek had the faith to stop the destruction — the Spirit needed to tell them that they should not use their gift because there was a wiser purpose in letting the saints die.  Should it be the case that God’s will can be done without regard for an agent’s faith — then there would have been no purpose in the Spirit telling Alma anything.  Alma would have just stretched forth his hand and watched as the flames kept on burning [Much like what many LDS experience with priesthood healings, etc.].

The principle is that God must act where there is faith, so the Spirit had to tell Alma not extend his hand [not to exercise his faith] so that the destruction would not stop.

Also, there are two examples from Paul.  In 1 Corinthians 14, he gives a command that members of the church who possess the gift of tongues refrain from using their gift in church meetings whenever a member with the gift of interpretation of tongues is not present:

…let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church;

No such instruction would be needed unless the gifts are available to be used at will by those who have faith.  If the gifts worked according to God’s will and choice alone, then the Spirit would simply not manifest tongues in cases when an interpreter was absent — and no one would need instruction from Paul.

Also, in Acts 21, we see Paul in a similar circumstance as Alma and Amulek.  Paul is told twice, through the gift of prophecy, not to go to Jerusalem.  In the wording of the Alma 14 story we could say:  ”The Spirit constraineth Paul that he must not go forth unto Jerusalem.“

And finding disciples, we tarried [at Tyre] seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.

and

And as we tarried [at Ptolemais] many days, there came down from Judæa a certain prophet, named Agabus.  And when he was come unto us, he took Paul’s girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.  And when we heard these things, both we, and they of that place, besought him not to go up to Jerusalem.

Yet, while Alma and Amulek chose to submit their faith to what the Spirit had told them — Paul chooses otherwise.  Exercising his faith — Paul feels it better to die at Jerusalem for the name of Jesus Christ.  When the people saw that Paul could not be persuaded, they acknowledged that:

The will of the Lord be done.

And His will is done — in these examples and in the example of exercising faith unto salvation.  It is God’s will that people work according to their faith — and His will is done when faith is used.  With respect to salvation, God chooses every person that He has the power to choose — and He only has power where there is faith.  Thus He “chooses” all those who have faith.

Next Article by Justin:

Previous Article by Justin:  The Tribal Church

See also:  The Faith of God Series, FPR post on LDS Cessationism, T&S post on LDS Cessationism, and W&T post on Alma 32

The Forgotten Commandment: Watch the Heavens!

4,742 words

© Anthony E. Larson, 2007

The Forgotten Commandment: Watch the Heavens!

Part I – The Commandment

Section 84 of the Doctrine & Covenants is a pivotal revelation for Latter-day Saints, or should be.

The preamble to this section says, “The Prophet designates it a revelation on priesthood.” In it, the Lord explains some of the roles of priesthood bearers, including a thorough explanation of missionary work and how it might be carried out.

 ”And this revelation unto you, and commandment, is in force from this very hour upon all the world, and the gospel is unto all who have not received it.” (verse 75.)

This makes it plain that this “revelation” is not only a disclosure of information, but it also carries a “commandment.”

In the process of explaining this mandate to teach the gospel, the Lord touches on an aspect of priesthood responsibility that is entirely overlooked in the church today when he gives this added command. “Nevertheless, let the bishop go unto the city of New York, also to the city of Albany, and also to the city of Boston, and warn the people of those cities with the sound of the gospel, with a loud voice, of the desolation and utter abolishment which await them if they do reject these things. (verse 114.)

Reading carefully, we see that this directive carries two parts. The first, is to teach the gospel: “warn the people … with the sound of the gospel.” The second is to tell them “of the desolation and utter abolishment” that might befall them.

Clearly, the first directive refers to missionary work, a mandate church members have heeded and apparently fulfilled rather well, given the remarkable growth of the church in the latter half of the 20^th century. But, the second reference seems quite vague. What is the “desolation” referred to? What is “utter abolishment?”

Webster’s Dictionary defines ‘desolate’ as “barren or laid waste … without inhabitants, deserted.” It also defines ‘abolish’ as “to do away with, to put an end to.”

Since the Lord applied these terms to three major American cities, a rather grim picture emerges. Without equivocation, God seems to be talking about reeking havoc in a catastrophe great enough to entirely wipe the cities of New York, Albany and Boston off the map, complete with all their inhabitants, if they do not accept the gospel.

But that is not all. To clarify and amplify, God reiterates the commandment. “And verily I say unto you, the rest of my servants, go ye forth as your circumstances shall permit, in your several callings, unto the great and notable cities and villages, reproving the world in righteousness of all their unrighteous and ungodly deeds, setting forth clearly and understandingly the desolation of abomination in the last days.” (verse 117.)

So, we learn that this mission was not exclusive to Bishop Whitney; verse 117 extends this commandment to all priesthood holders, “the rest of my servants.” We also learn that they should visit not just the three cities first named, but many others also, “the great and notable cities and villages.”

Then, the Lord repeats his charge that they teach about possible, impending destructions, “the desolation of abomination.”

This presents a problem for today’s priesthood bearers. Which of us can even begin to explain the “desolation” and “utter abolishment” the Lord referred to? What do those terms mean? What could cause such devastation?

While every general conference of the church has one or more talks about the vital importance of missionary work, where are the talks explaining or elucidating the second part of the commandment: teaching “clearly and understandingly the desolation of abomination?” More importantly, we must ask why this part of the commandment has not been acknowledged? How is it that we have focused so well and appropriately on missionary work without also teaching the other half of the equation, the promised devastation?

If we’ve not been instructed in these things or discovered them for ourselves, how are we to teach them, as we were commanded to do? How are we going to teach something we do not understand? In that case, how are we going to fulfill the Lord’s charge to teach it at all, let alone do so plainly?

As a matter of fact, any discussion of prophetic destructions has been almost completely banned from our discourse in the church. Over the last half-century, the subjects of prophecy and catastrophe in church discussion have become increasingly taboo. Where once they were central to our very character as Latter-day Saints, they have been almost completely marginalized in our day and age.

Our instruction manuals for teaching in the church almost entirely skirt around the subject of the last days and their associated destructions. The subject is almost never addressed from the pulpit, and even then it is treated in such an oblique manner as to avoid any substantive handling of the subject.

Yet, given the wording of this section, it would seem that we are under as great an obligation to teach about the impending destructions as we are to do missionary work.

So, let’s reverse this trend. Let’s more fully perform our duty as priesthood bearers. Let’s look at this once again to see if we might regain some lost ground and thereby properly fulfill this commandment from the Lord.

One might begin by asking, what is the “desolation and utter abolishment” of which the Lord spoke? What is the “desolation of abomination in the last days” that all priesthood bearers, “the rest of my servants,” are herein commanded to “set forth clearly and understandingly?”

A clue to those questions lies a little further on in that section. “For, with you saith the Lord Almighty, I will rend their kingdoms; I will not only shake the earth, but the starry heavens shall tremble.” (verse 118.)

The keywords in these verses are “rend their kingdoms,” “shake the earth” and “the starry heavens shall tremble.” Anyone schooled in the nature of planetary catastrophes that have punctuated Earth’s past and the prophetic metaphors they gave rise to will recognize what the Lord intended. These same metaphors have been used by the prophets to describe numerous episodes in Earth’s past when the entire world came to the brink of destruction-episodes such as Noah’s Flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Exodus and numerous other such widespread catastrophes.

The references are subtle but unmistakable. The metaphors “desolation of abomination,” or “desolation and utter abolishment” are coded expressions for planetary catastrophes of the most devastating kind where nature goes on a rampage, where almost all the works of mankind crumble in worldwide earthquakes while oceanic super-tsunamis rush in upon continents, wiping vast areas of the globe clean of any vestige of life, all as the heavens appear to reel about as a result of our planet’s wobbling on its axis of rotation.

As if to put a lock on his meaning, God added this unmistakable declaration. “For I, the Lord, have put forth my hand to exert the powers of heaven; ye cannot see it now, yet a little while and ye shall see it, and know that I am, and that I will come and reign with my people.” (verse 119.)

It is the powers of heaven that wreck destruction and havoc on the Earth, a frequent scriptural theme.

And just to clarify, the Lord says that there is nothing unusual to see in the heavens just now, “ye cannot see it now.” But the time will come when we will all see and know what the desolation of abomination is. That is, “yet a little while and ye shall see it.”

Finally, as a warning against dismissing the importance of this knowledge and its conveyance, the Lord said, “And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received-

“Which Vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.” (verses 54 and 55)

Make no mistake. Ignoring or dismissing this aspect of our priesthood callings by failing to obey the Lord’s commandment in this regard has brought condemnation upon us all. Perhaps not coincidentally, these are the very verses President Ezra Taft Benson quoted when he counseled church members to repent of their doubt and pride, saying also that the whole church was under condemnation.

Part II – Watch the Heavens

To assure the reader that the above is not a strained interpretation of a few obscure and selected verses, we should take a moment to learn why the Lord might want his priesthood to understand the cause and nature of planetary catastrophes.

In all ancient cultures, the priestly class dominated the religious life of any culture, including the symbolic center of their religious tradition: the temple. All ancient cultures had temples wherein the priestly class administered rites and rituals of salvation, whether or not they had the true priesthood.

We learn from Abraham that this was certainly true of the Egyptians. “Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations …. Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham ….” (Abraham 1:26, 27.)

We know from archeology and research into the Egyptian religion that they not only had temples, but they performed resurrection rituals, much as we do in our temples today. Thus, as Abraham implies, they obviously sought to imitate true priesthood orders and rituals. (See Hugh Nibley’s extensive writings on this subject.)

Some temples were elaborately constructed edifices, such as the Parthenon in Athens, Greece. Others were merely groups of standing stones, such as Stonehenge. In the Americas, pyramids were the temples of choice, as were the ziggurats of Mesopotamia. Native Americans in the southwestern United States constructed kivas. All these are easily identified as temples because of the rituals practiced therein.

But the temples weren’t only ritual centers. They were observatories, and their architecture abounds in astral alignments. Research has shown us that they assiduously tracked the movements of the heavenly bodies. As we have seen, they were absolutely obsessive about fixing and tracking the points where these bodies rose over the horizon, most especially the Sun during the summer and winter solstices.

A fundamental part of priestly responsibility was to watch the skies by tracking the movements of the Sun, the Earth, the Moon, the planets and the stars, which they accomplished with a variety of ingenious methods.

Most common among these ancient sky watchers was the practice of aligning stones or architecture such that the first rays of light from the Sun as it rose in the morning would fall on a well-marked spot on another stone or marker within a building. Thus, they could track the Sun’s rising on the horizon throughout the year as it varied, moving slightly more north or south each day until it reached its most extreme positions at the winter and summer solstices. This, then, was a simple but effective way of ascertaining that the Earth, not the Sun, was moving in its normal, prescribed path. Any deviation would easily be discerned.

This proclivity has long puzzled archeologists and anthropologists. Why did the ancients seem preoccupied with astronomy? Why did they track the movement of astral bodies? Why was astronomy so important to them that they practiced it and incorporated it into their most sacred shrines, their temples?

This was as true of God’s authentic prophets and priests as it was of the pretenders. We learn this from Abraham, for example. “But the records of the fathers, even the patriarchs, concerning the right of Priesthood, the Lord my God preserved in mine own hands; therefore a knowledge of the beginning of the creation, and also of the planets, and of the stars, as they were made known unto the fathers.” (Abraham 1:31.)

This notion is further confirmed when Abraham is shown stars and planets through the Urim and Thummim. It seems to be God’s desire that the prophets have an intimate knowledge of things astronomical. But to what end, if not to watch for irregularities in the skies?

This is reflected in our modern temples, where astral symbols abound, as they also did in ancient temples. This was and is information about the Sun, the Moon and the many stars or “great lights, which were in the firmament of heaven”-the very icons we find adorning the walls of our sacred temples.

But, what does astronomy have to do with religion and priesthood? It’s really quite simple.

God always warned the world’s inhabitants of impending planetary disasters. The scriptures are replete with such accounts. Adam and Noah warned of the coming Great Flood; Abraham warned Lot to flee Sodom and Gomorrah; Moses warned the Israelites, Pharaoh and the Egyptians of the plagues that would shortly befall them; and Samuel the Lamanite warned the Nephites of the destructions to accompany the crucifixion of the Savior.

Not only that, there are an even greater multitude of warnings regarding identical destructions and devastations in the last days, before the second coming. John wrote extensively in his Revelation. Isaiah, Malachi, Zechariah, Habakkuk, Nahum, Joel and even the Savior himself told of these planet-wide catastrophes as a “desolation of abomination.” Hence, there are a multitude of past and future warnings from the prophets in our scriptures of the “desolation and utter abolishment” that awaits the world in our day, just as they occurred in the past.

 It is only natural, then, that God would charge his priesthood with the sobering task of watching the heavens to discern any change in the motions of the Earth, Sun, Moon or the planets. Alterations in any of those would likely portend trouble.

So, this is the easily discernable reason why all ancient cultures, including those led by prophets, were so invested in watching the heavens. Any deviation in the movement of the stars or planets meant almost certain disaster for Earth’s inhabitants. So, tracking them was the sure way to know at the earliest possible moment if something went awry.

A rather practical, down-to-earth approach for such an esoteric discipline as astronomy, wouldn’t you say?

Since modern astronomy denies the possibility of any deviation in the orbits of the Earth, the Sun and the other planets in our solar system, they are left with no basis for understanding the ancients’ preoccupation with the heavens. They chalk it up to superstition, and that’s where it ends.

But ancient and modern revelation, along with all the texts left behind by other ancient cultures, repeatedly and compellingly insist that the order of the heavens was altered in historic times, in spite of the insistence to the contrary by modern science.

The prophets repeatedly spoke of a change so great, so sweeping that it completely alters both the heavens and the Earth. “But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. … Nevertheless, we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth ….” (2 Peter 3:7, 13.) “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.” (Revelation 21:1.)

This principle is most clearly enunciated in latter-day revelation. “And the end shall come, and the heaven and the earth shall be consumed and pass away, and there shall be a new heaven and a new earth.

“For old things shall pass away, and all things shall become new, even the heaven and the earth ….” Doctrine and Covenants 29: 23, 24.)

All this being true, then it only makes sense that God would want to reestablish this practice of watching the heavens among his priesthood in the latter days. And knowing this explains why the priesthood was assigned the duty of “watchmen” in the “watchtowers.” While a watchtower in a fortress or walled city might be useful in spotting an army of approaching foes, an astronomical observatory might effectively be thought of as a “watchtower” and the priesthood as “watchmen” where the possibility of planetary disorder exists.

Hence, the Lord implores his people, and especially those ordained to the priesthood to “Watch, therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.” (Matthew 24:42.)

Also, “Gird up your loins and be watchful and be sober, looking forth for the coming of the Son of Man, for he cometh in an hour you think not.” (Doctrine and Covenants 61:38.)

This, then, is a duty traditionally assigned to God’s priesthood bearers. That he would again restore this assignment to the priesthood in these latter days is perfectly natural and in harmony with the ancient pattern. That means that this is information and understanding that every latter-day priesthood holder should master, as we have been commanded, in order to fully discharge our sacred duties.

Not only can we better fulfill our callings through this study and practice, this information will further enhance our gospel understanding to a considerable degree, allowing us to better understand the scriptures, the words of the prophets and the symbolism of our temples. This is true because the symbolism that dominates the gospel actually originated in ancient astral events.

 Part III – The Reiteration

Lastly, in order to better understand the 84^th Section, we must turn to the 88^th Section, where the Lord reiterates in much more detail what he gave in the earlier revelation. Read this revelation with the counsel and commandment of the 84^th Section in mind to bring greater clarity and meaning to the Lord’s expressions.

Let’s review Section 88 verse by verse, beginning about half way through.

“77 And I give unto you a commandment that you shall teach one another the doctrine of the kingdom.”

God here referred to the same commandment he already gave in Section 83, as will be plainly seen as we proceed.

“78 Teach ye diligently and my grace shall attend you, that you may be instructed more perfectly in theory, in principle, in doctrine, in the law of the gospel, in all things that pertain unto the kingdom of God, that are expedient for you to understand ….”

This is the very instruction needed to prepare a teacher to explain what the desolation of abomination is, how to watch for it and how to explain it. While we are presently doing a good job of teaching gospel principles and law, we have fallen down in the other two named categories: theory and doctrine. Otherwise, the knowledge of these planetary destructions would be common among us. Since they are not, this is prima fascia evidence of our ignorance.

And what are those things that we have failed to study and fully understand?

“79 Of things both in heaven and in the earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass … and the judgments which are on the land ….”

 You see, it is in studying the “things both of heaven and in the earth” that we discover the changes wrought by past planetary catastrophes, because those changes are explicit in ancient history or “things which have been.” Of course, by studying “things which are,” we find a basis for comparison with the past. In so doing, we learn that our world and its heavens are vastly different than they were. Additionally, in studying “things which must shortly come to pass,” we learn that coming planetary disorder will be nearly identical to past catastrophes, giving us yet another basis for comparison and a vivid idea of what the future holds for this world when planetary disorder once again nearly destroys our planet, causing “desolation and utter abolishment.”

“80 That ye may be prepared in all things when I shall send you again to magnify the calling whereunto I have called you, and the mission with which I have commissioned you.”

This is the heart of the matter. We cannot be fully prepared to “magnify the calling” we’ve been given if we have not prepared ourselves with this vital knowledge, which we now utterly lack.

“81 Behold, I sent you out to testify and warn the people, and it becometh every man who hath been warned to warn his neighbor.”

This is a restatement of the mission: We must “clearly and understandingly” tell them of the “desolation and utter abolishment” that awaits this world.

“84 Therefore, tarry ye, and labor diligently, that you may be perfected in your ministry ….”

Without this knowledge of planetary catastrophe, we cannot be “perfected” in our knowledge. And we cannot properly teach if our knowledge is incomplete or incorrect. Hence the Lord’s counsel to “tarry” while we “labor diligently” to learn these concepts.

 ”… to go forth among the Gentiles for the last time, as many as the mouth of the Lord shall name, to bind up the law and seal up the testimony, and to prepare the saints for the hour of judgment which is to come; …”

Notice here that this mission to teach of planetary catastrophe is not only necessary to teach the nonmembers or “Gentiles,” it is needful “to prepare the saints for the hour of judgment.” Thus, this mission is as much to the members of the church as it is to potential converts. This is the second part of the commandment, which we have completely overlooked.

“85 That their souls may escape the wrath of God, the desolation of abomination which awaits the wicked, both in this world and in the world to come.”

Just to clarify that both sections 84 and 88 are talking about the same things, notice that the Lord once again cites the “desolation of abomination,” while yet further defining it as the “wrath of God.”

And here’s the payoff. So that we might be certain of what he’s talking about, the Lord describes the desolation’s most prominent elements.

“87 For not many days hence and the earth shall tremble and reel to and fro as a drunken man; and the sun shall hide his face, and shall refuse to give light; and the moon shall be bathed in blood; and the stars shall become exceedingly angry, and shall cast themselves down as a fig that falleth from off a fig-tree.”

It is these variously described, symbolic elements that are seen to comprise the effects that accompany a planetary disaster.

In Section 84, he cited another such symbolic, yet very real, element. ” I will not only shake the earth, but the starry heavens shall tremble.”

It is the comprehension of these metaphors, and the many other symbolically described elements, that are crucial to one’s understanding of the very things we’ve been commanded to teach, that is “set forth clearly and understandingly.” It is these elements of planetary catastrophe that we must master in order to teach them to others.

“88 And after your testimony cometh wrath and indignation upon the people.”

The Lord said the same thing with more obscure language in Section 84 when he said, “For, with you saith the Lord Almighty, I will rend their kingdoms.”

That is to say, first comes the priesthood’s warning, then comes the destruction. It’s the same pattern followed throughout world history: God calls a prophet to warn the people of impending disaster and call them to repentance. That done, the promised destructions are poured out.

For good measure, the Lord then lists many more elements of a planetary encounter.

“89 For after your testimony cometh the testimony of earthquakes, that shall cause groanings in the midst of her, and men shall fall upon the ground and shall not be able to stand.

“90 And also cometh the testimony of the voice of thunderings, and the voice of lightnings, and the voice of tempests, and the voice of the waves of the sea heaving themselves beyond their bounds.

“91 And all things shall be in commotion; surely, men’s hearts shall fail them; for fear shall come upon all people.”

Again, it is these natural phenomenon that constitute the prophesied desolation.

Next is an entirely metaphorical narrative that cannot be understood until one is thoroughly schooled in the prophetic tradition that arose from past planetary calamity. It is coded language, symbolic allusions to very real things that will be seen and heard.

“92 And angels shall fly through the midst of heaven, crying with a loud voice, sounding the trump of God, saying: Prepare ye, prepare ye, O inhabitants of the earth; for the judgment of our God is come. Behold, and lo, the Bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.”

It is in the decoding of such metaphors or symbolic language that a corrected view of ancient planetary catastrophe becomes vital. With it, we can see what such allegorical declarations truly mean.

Now comes the “piece de resistance” of this revelation.

“93 And immediately there shall appear a great sign in heaven, and all people shall see it together.”

It is this “great sign” that is the cause of these overwhelming natural phenomenon that will sweep the Earth.

Some have supposed that since the word “sign” is used here that there would be some stunning, symbolic manifestation in the heavens that would signal the onset of the destructions. But, the training and education that comes with studying past planetary encounters tell us otherwise.

Joseph Smith explained in more explicit terms what that “great sign” would be.

 ”There will be wars and rumors of wars, signs in the heavens above and on the earth beneath, the sun turned into darkness and the moon to blood, earthquakes in divers places, the seas heaving beyond their bounds; then will appear one grand sign of the coming of the Son of Man in heaven.  What will the world do?  They will say it is a planet, a comet, &c.”  (History of the Church, 5:337.)

Of course, the entire world will call this sign a planet or a comet because that’s exactly what it will be-a planet-sized orb that also looks and behaves like a tremendous comet.

And just so there are no loose ends to this exposition, make note that Joseph connects this “sign” with all the same devastating natural destructions as the two revelations we’ve been considering. That can lead to only one, inescapable conclusion: The planet or comet is not only a sign, it is the very agent-the single cause-of all the natural destructions that are part of God’s desolation.

 Epilogue

 After all this exposition, these points are worth making one last time: It is the Lord who decreed that the priesthood’s role is to be the conservators and expositors of this knowledge among church members. Not only that, they were charged with watching the heavens for deviations that might portend renewed catastrophes.

Sadly, present-day priesthood holders not only do not understand these things, they are inclined to discount and suppress them, thinking they are too fantastic or bizarre to be credible. Most elders in the church know nothing of the simplest aspects of astronomy, thinking it something entirely and completely foreign to the gospel of Christ. Yet, a survey of teachings by general authorities from Joseph Smith on forward has revealed that these subjects have been amply treated and clarified in this dispensation, to say nothing of the preponderance of evidence found in our scriptures and the other records we have from the past.

Today’s priesthood holders have no concept of such a mandate from the Lord, even though it is plainly stated in latter day revelation. Neither have they properly searched our scriptures, otherwise these things would have been self evident. Therefore, today’s priesthood holders are unable to comply with the Lord’s mandate to teach these truths “clearly and understandingly.”

Perhaps its time we stopped treating prophecy and prophetic imagery as the redheaded stepchild of the gospel. Maybe it’s time we reversed our course by taking seriously this commandment. By admitting our oversight, we can begin to correct it.

Remember God’s counsel: “And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received-

“Which Vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.” (Section 84:54, 55.)

Will we allow this to continue?

website

videos

The Keys to Prophecy VII: A New Heaven, a New Earth

721 words

© Anthony E. Larson, 2005

The Keys to Prophecy VII:

A New Heaven, a New Earth

Our culture knows nothing of the incredible changes wrought in the heavens anciently.  This is so because of our ‘scientific’ view that there have been no significant changes in the solar system’s arrangement during recorded history.

But the scriptures and the prophets are insistent, in spite of our ‘scientific’ beliefs:  The heavens have repeatedly changed throughout ancient history.  This is a primary message the ancients and the prophets sought to convey to us across the millennia.

The result: Our modern ignorance of the true past blinds us to the unanimous declarations of our distant ancestors.

The concept of sweeping changes in the sky and the earth are found everywhere in the scriptures.  For example, in the Doctrine & Covenants we read: “And the end shall come, and the heaven and the earth shall be consumed and pass away, and there shall be a new heaven and a new earth.

“For all old things shall pass away, and all things shall become new, even the heaven and the earth, and all the fullness thereof, both men and beasts, the fowls of the air, and the fishes of the sea.” (D&C 29:23, 24.)

Also, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. (Revelation 21:1.)

Perhaps the apostle Peter said it best when he spoke of the Deluge, explaining that it was the defining event that changed the ‘old heavens’ into the sky we see today.  “For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water.  Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:  But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”  (2 Peter 3:5-7.)

Then, he went on to further explain that a similar change was in store for us in the last days.  “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.”  (Ibid. 3:10.)

We read the same sort of language in the texts of all ancient cultures, where we find the pervasive, ever-present fear that something terrible that happened in the past would repeat itself in the future.  Indeed, all ancient cultures relate that there have been dramatic changes in the heavens, calling the epochs in between “ages” or “suns.”  The Greek philosopher Hesiod associates these ages with various metals, as does Daniel in his Old Testament vision of the statue with a head of gold, a torso of silver, belly and thighs of brass and legs of iron.

These fearsome changes were universally attributed to stars or planets in the form of gods, goddesses, beasts or serpents.  Surely, then, Joseph Smith was correct to call these images of the ancients “stars” and “planets,” as we have seen.

Even our language retains this key.  The words for world-changing cataclysms are catastrophe (cat-astro-phe) and disaster (dis-aster).  Both bear the same ‘astr’ root as the goddess-stars of antiquity: Aster, Astarte, Ashtoreth or Hathor.  In fact, one interpretation of the word “disaster” is literally “from the star.”

This the ancients feared above all: destruction from the stars that changed everything.

No wonder they were fiercely dedicated sky watchers, including prophets like Abraham, preoccupied with the motions of planets and stars.  No wonder they endlessly adorned their texts, temples and tombs with symbols and metaphors of star gods, goddesses and beasts derived from the appearance of those planets.

But because our culture and science turn a blind eye to these declarations, Latter-day Saints frequently fail to appreciate the many statements by Joseph Smith that echo the beliefs of the ancients: Planets and stars are the origins of almost all scriptural and prophetic imagery.

 Stars and planets on the Salt Lake Temple reflect an ancient, customary obsession with the heavens.  On the west wall buttresses, near the bottom of the photo are Sun Stones.  In the middle are the stars of the constellation Ursa Major, the Big Dipper.  Immediately above those is a repeated pattern of circles within a ring, called Saturn Stones by Brigham Young.

That’s why those images dominate the exterior of LDS temples, just as they did their ancient counterparts.  Our temples reflect both realities, the past and the present heavens.

The prophets, both ancient and modern, understood this key.  So should we.

webpage

videos

The Keys to Prophecy V: Stars and Planets

758 words

© Anthony E. Larson, 2005

 The Keys to Prophecy V:

Stars and Planets

Up to this point in our examination of the many clues to the extravagant images of prophecy, we have learned that we need not look to mystical texts or veiled mysteries for our answers.  Nor have we found that the answers lie in interpreting prophetic imagery with modern eyes.

Instead, we have found the answers in a more mundane source, in the scriptures and in ancient history-evidence that has been hiding in plain sight all along.

We discovered that the dragons, man-beasts, women, kings, angels, stars and other extravagant images encountered in the scriptures are but descriptive word pictures of the images that the ancients worshipped, the same icons seen in ancient temples, tombs and monuments.  We have seen that the imagery of prophecy and mythology spring from the same, ancient source, hence their similarities.

The next step is a bit larger leap of logic, but a crucial one: What do those images represent?

Looking at the Egyptian gods, we often see large circular icons on their heads, what scholars call “sun disks.”  The juxtaposition of the disks and the gods is extremely meaningful.

A common Egyptian theme, Ra (Re) is pictured seated in a bark or ship with a disk above his head.  This same scene can be seen on Facsimile No. 2, Figure 3, in the Book of Abraham.

Scholars explain that the ancients were sun worshippers, so those disks must represent the sun.  However, Joseph Smith contradicted that assumption when he gave us another key, and it has been before our very eyes for generations now.

Those disks and creatures, as Joseph repeatedly asserts in his explanations of the Pearl of Great Price facsimiles, represented planets and stars, not the sun.  The only exception is in Figure 5 in Facsimile No. 2, first called by Joseph a “governing planet.”  He then adds the comment that the Egyptians called it the Sun, which is true of the late, corrupted Egyptian traditions his papyrus represented.  But according to the earliest beliefs, her name designates this cow goddess as a star.

The cow depicted in Figure 5 was called Hathor, as we have seen.  Along with her equivalents in other cultures-Astarte, Aster and Ishtar-her name bore the root ‘s-t-r’ sound of our word ‘star’ (the ‘s’ and ‘t’ were pronounced with the ‘th’ sound in Hathor.) 

Keep in mind that the ancients’ designated all celestial objects as stars.  The word ‘planet’ (derived from the Greek ‘planeta,’ meaning ‘wanderer’) is a recent invention, thanks to the telescope that allows us to differentiate between stars and planets. 

Hence, Joseph Smith’s designation of a ‘s-t-r’ goddess as a planet is symbolically consistent and extremely meaningful.  He thus implies that the stars they worshipped were actually planets, the very thing the juxtaposed disks suggest.

Putting both the creature and the disk together-common practice in early Egyptian religious art-was symbolically accurate and a proper way to emphasize that they both represented the same thing, a planet or star.  In fact, this was a functional way to label the figures, since most people were illiterate.  Instead of text that read “star,” those pagan gods often carried or wore a symbol that bespoke their astral origin.

Some of the more elaborately rendered disk images, painted and rendered in relief, look to be nearly virtual snapshots of planets, a few complete with a sun-lit crescent.

Joseph Smith’s explanation of disk images such as these was that they represented planets, which is what all such Egyptian disk images resemble.

Let’s look closely at how emphatic Joseph Smith was in his explanations of these disks and creatures.

Kolob is said by Abraham to be “the greatest” of the stars (Kokaubeam), but it is represented in Facsimile No. 2, Figure 1 by a figure Egyptologists identify as Amon-Re or Khnum, the creator-god, thus implying that the god was an astral body.

The baboons on either side have what scholars call “moon disks,” presumably because of the crescent beneath the disk, placed over their heads in the traditional Egyptian manner.  But these disks do not represent the moon any more than others represent the sun.  Joseph insists that they are stars in his explanation of Figure 5.

What becomes clear is that the objects the early Egyptians called stars would be called planets in our time.  What we see in the disk illustrations are not stars, but planets.  Additionally, only planets have sun-lit crescents, as depicted in ancient art, not stars.

Joseph Smith understood.  He did not confuse the issue, as do modern scholars.  Indeed, one can suggest that what looks like confusion at first blush was no mix-up at all.  By freely substituting the two terms, Joseph honored the ancient tradition.  He acknowledged the ancients’ reality that some of today’s stars, now mere pinpoints of light, were actually great, nearby planets in antiquity, which dominated Earth’s heavens and were worshipped by their ancestors as gods.

Indeed, this hypothesis fits much better with Abraham’s vision of the ancient heavens and Joseph Smith’s explanations of the facsimile images than any current view.

webpage

videos

Bringing Stan Tenen and The Meru Foundation to the Attention of all LDS [alternate title: Doing what4anarchy's Job]

Some Background Information

what4anarchy and I have a running joke—at least, I think it’s funny; he isn’t all that amused—where every time he mentions the name Stan Tenen, I can’t help but chuckle. The joke is that over the years he has mentioned Stan so many times in conversations—in fact, I’d say that in pretty much every conversation we have it is fairly guaranteed that he will mention Stan—that I kid him that Stan is his prophet, that he is engaging in Stan worship or prophet worship.

Now, although he has mentioned him to me for years, it still took what4anarchy awhile before he actually got a Stan Tenen video in front of me; and despite my teasing, I did watch it. But I think I was really tired from working and ended up falling asleep, not remembering everything/anything, etc.

Well, to his credit, what4anarchy kept after me and got another media production in front of me: a Meru Foundation dvd. This time I was awake. Although it was still the same tall, long-haired Jewish guy at a white board lecturing in a small classroom setting that I had seen earlier, I didn’t fall asleep. My kids did not appreciate that I was spending hours watching this guy talking about “weird” things. They wanted to see a “real movie,” an “entertaining movie,” not some “boring” movie.

It struck me that my young, inexperienced children were defining the word “boring” to mean anything that engages the mind to think deeply, whereas anything that disengages it so that they don’t have to think things through, but only receive visual and audio stimulation, is “exciting.” My own definition of those two words would be quite the opposite.

As I said, this time I was awake.

Afterward what4anarchy asked me what I thought and he wanted to know if I “got it.” Well, I got it. And here’s what I thought:

MY THOUGHTS

Now, before I begin, you need to understand that what4anarchy and myself part company when it comes to “striving with the masses.” (By “the masses” I’m referring to a strictly LDS audience.) He will continually strive with them, trying to open their minds. I will give them the time of day, but the instant I see a closed mind, I shut my mouth and say nothing more. But he will attempt to bait them again and again, hoping for a bite in which some more truth important to the gospel can be thrown in. In fact, he even uses Stan as bait. Stan. Before hearing Stan Tenen speak (without sleeping through it) that didn’t impress me. Now it does. You see, Stan Tenen is on a whole ‘nother level than your average church-going member.

Mental laziness

We LDS (in general) are mentally lazy, just as all of us Americans (in general) are mentally lazy. Stan cannot be watched and comprehended without engaging the mind. So, in my estimation, trying to open up Stan to a LDS is a futile effort. It is like trying to get young, inexperienced children to watch a guy at a white board talk about geometric shapes. They ain’t going to do it! Even if you force them to sit and watch, they will be thinking of other things and will learn absolutely nothing. There is no way children can do it. Adults can do it, but children can’t, unless they are above average in maturity.

And that’s basically what I told what4anarchy. “Yes, Stan and The Meru Foundation research is amazingly pertinent to a study of the restored gospel, despite he being a non-LDS Jew. You know it and now I know it. It will benefit us, but there is no way LDS can be shown this and they’d be interested. It doesn’t come from Salt Lake. It’s about the Hebrew language (not the English language in which the modern prophets of God speak, if you get my drift.) Stan’s a mathematician, not a theologian. This is scientific, not religious. They’ll never go for it.” Etc., etc.

So why am I doing it? Because I inadvertently mentioned Stan in a recent comment on this blog and since I’ve now let the cat out of the bag and since what4anarchy was really the man to talk about Stan but he’s too busy to do it, I guess I’ll do it just to do it and get it over with. But I don’t expect anyone at all to actually be interested in him.

Why Meru Foundation Research Is Important

Stan found a fundamental gesture language in Hebrew, which contains both the one and the infinite all locked together. Using the gesture language alone, he has been able to uncover secrets of the Universe and about God, things which only temple-attending LDS should know. When a temple-attending LDS (that doesn’t sleep through sessions) takes what Stan Tenen and The Meru Foundation have discovered and learned using this gesture language, and then super-imposes it upon the restored gospel knowledge base, suddenly new “mysteries of godliness” open up to view. To those LDS who never access Tenen’s work or who never study Hebrew in the way he has done, revealing the hidden “gesture language,” they will remain perpetually in the dark concerning these other mysteries.

Personally, I think that is as it should be. But in case there are some interested in learning more about Stan and his work, click any of the following video links to open up a new window and see some of the free video nuggets he has allowed out. Then, if you are still interested, go into his web site and dig deeper. Good luck!

The Videos

All of these are on Google video:

A Good Introductory Video

First Light: An Overview of Meru Foundation Research (30:36)

The “Extreme Kabbalah” Series

Hebrew, Ayin to Tav (1:31)

Geometric Metaphor in Torah (1:10)

Genesis is Woven (1:18 )

Genesis in Base-3 (1:31)

Framing Meru Research: Reconciling the Irreconcilable (1:35)

Finding Geometry in Genesis (4:07)

Bible Math: Wreaths, Baskets, Braids, and Knots (2:35 not currently available)

Bible Literalism (1:16)

Bible Codes (1:57)

Beyond Babel: The Gesture Alphabet of Genesis (1:14)

All Letters are from Yud (1:59)

Modeling Genesis (1:47)

Mind–Hand–World (1:31)

Logic and Hierarchy of Genesis (1:45)

Literal Meaning in the Bible (1:22)

Hebrew Flame Letters (1:18 )

Vortex Flame Letters: Separating Sense from Nonsense (1:25)

A Universal Mode of Life (3:58 )

Torah and Pi (2:05)

Torah: A Universal Constant (1:34)

Toku K’varo: The Hand Unifies Mind and World (2:29)

The Tree of Life (2:29)

The Meditation in Genesis (1:52)

The Letter-Text of Genesis as Creation (1:44)

The Letter Bet (1:21)

The Hand of Genesis (1:46)

The God of Abraham (3:58 )

The Genesis Torus (“Donut”) (1:18 )

The First Word of Genesis and the Bible Codes (1:53)

Solving Babel: Universal Gesture Language (1:24)

Self-Reference in Genesis and the Alphabet (1:20)

The Letters of Genesis: A Natural Unfurlment (1:31 on YouTube)

Hebrew, Greek, Arabic Letters from Genesis (1:11 on YouTube)

Introducing Hebrew Gesture Letters

Dance of the Hebrew Letters (34:34)

Next Stan Tenen article: A note from Stan Tenen

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The Noachian Flood, Part One: The Role of Plasma

As stated in a previous post, there has been a lot of new discussion in the LDS cyber-community over the Noachian Flood due to a recently published article in Dialogue JOURNAL. However, none of this discussion included the plasma science and plasma mythology viewpoint. It is the purpose of this post to show that plasma science throws additional light upon this subject.

Rens van der Sluijs wrote some excellent articles on plasma mythology, which are published on the Thunderbolts.info web site, one of which addressed the Noachian Flood. (See The Flood from Heaven.) According to van der Sluijs, there have now been collected “several hundred versions” of flood myths “from all parts of the world.” Although he admits that not all of these versions are related, the earliest ones all “derive from a common source and form a true literary tradition.”

He explains that some of these stories probably commemorate local floods. (This is a common interpretation of the Noachian Flood among LDS.) Yet, he also says that “the myths that speak of a universal inundation” tend to have a common feature: “the cosmic axis in the center of the world.” Apparently, few researchers have ever explored this feature.

The axis mundi is important in plasma science because Earth and all other celestial objects are charged bodies and can exhibit double layers, or plasma sheaths, as well as plasma columns, connecting one charged body to another charged body. A recent article and photo of a plasma column connecting Jupiter to one of its moons is demonstrative. Plasma exhibits many other types of behavior, all demonstrable in the laboratory.

From plasma mythology, we begin to see a picture of a stack of fixed planets, one on top of another, connected through their poles by visible plasma columns, with the topmost planet (or “most high” planet) exhibiting the wing-like formations of plasma shock. The plasma column connecting Earth to the planet above it (whichever one it was) over time is recounted in the mythology as being a world mountain, a cosmic tree and so on. This reminds me of a scripture:

Abraham said, “And I, Abraham, had the Urim and Thummim, which the Lord my God had given unto me, in Ur of the Chaldees; and I saw the stars, that they were very great, and that one of them was nearest unto the throne of God; and there were many great ones which were near unto it; and the Lord said unto me: These are the governing ones; and the name of the great one is Kolob, because it is near unto me, for I am the Lord thy God: I have set this one to govern all those which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest. And the Lord said unto me, by the Urim and Thummim, that Kolob was after the manner of the Lord, according to its times and seasons in the revolutions thereof; that one revolution was a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. This is the reckoning of the Lord’s time, according to the reckoning of Kolob. And the Lord said unto me: The planet which is the lesser light, lesser than that which is to rule the day, even the night, is above or greater than that upon which thou standest in point of reckoning, for it moveth in order more slow; this is in order because it standeth above the earth upon which thou standest, therefore the reckoning of its time is not so many as to its number of days, and of months, and of years. And the Lord said unto me: Now, Abraham, these two facts exist, behold thine eyes see it; it is given unto thee to know the times of reckoning, and the set time, yea, the set time of the earth upon which thou standest, and the set time of the greater light which is set to rule the day, and the set time of the lesser light which is set to rule the night. Now the set time of the lesser light is a longer time as to its reckoning than the reckoning of the time of the earth upon which thou standest. And where these two facts exist, there shall be another fact above them, that is, there shall be another planet whose reckoning of time shall be longer still; and thus there shall be the reckoning of the time of one planet above another, until thou come nigh unto Kolob, which Kolob is after the reckoning of the Lord’s time; which Kolob is set nigh unto the throne of God, to govern all those planets which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest…If two things exist, and there be one above the other, there shall be greater things above them; therefore Kolob is the greatest of all the Kokaubeam that thou hast seen, because it is nearest unto me. Now, if there be two things, one above the other, and the moon be above the earth, then it may be that a planet or a star may exist above it; and there is nothing that the Lord thy God shall take in his heart to do but what he will do it. (Abraham 3: 1-9, 16-17)

(It is important to understand that the Egyptians used the word “star” to mean both what we call stars and planet. A planet to us was a star to them. A star to us was also a star to them. So, each time in the above scripture it reads star, it is talking about a planet. In fact, in plasma cosmology, as all celestial bodies are charged bodies moving in a sea of plasma, they are all capable of discharging in glow mode, like stars do, given the right set of circumstances. So, the Egyptian use of the word stars when talking of planets is, technically, correct.)

In the Noachian Flood, the clues of plasma mythology and the existence and destruction of the axis mundi, which “was a stupendous high-energy plasma discharge tube with a semi-permanent character,” paint a picture that the tube’s “existence was terminated amid catastrophic circumstances.” In other words, Earth become cut off from the other planets in the stack, and eventually the other planets also broke away to wander in their current paths around our present Sun.

With the “disruption of this plasma column,” the Flood ensued. Many of the flood myths record that “the flood comes down from the sky.” The water of the flood may have been both water and discharging plasma. Also, according to van der Sluijs, “a significant number of flood myths insist that the water was no ordinary water, but a different substance – hot and fiery. Jewish legend had it that the rain was hot, scalding the skin of the sinners. The Makah of Washington, the Quileute, the Chimakum, the Salinan of California and the Ipurina of Brazilian Amazonia agreed that the earth was overwhelmed by a hot flood coming down from the sky.”

For more information on plasma mythology and the plasma formations that the ancients saw in the sky from their vantage point, read the following articles found on the Thunderbolts.info web site: The Naval Stone, The Mountain of the Gods, The Vortical Tree, The Bifurcated Mountain, The Pedestal of the Sun, Electric Universe: Part IV Plasma and World Mythology, Mystery of the Cosmic Thunderbolt (1), Prediction #5: Plasma Formations in the Ancient Sky, Plasma in the Lab and in Rock Art, Electric Universe: Part III The Nine Steps to Heaven, Mystery of the Cosmic Dragon, Origins of Rock Art.

So, plasma science opens up the possibility that a global flood did occur, since the breakaway of Earth from the rest of the stacked planets would cause world-wide catastrophe. The resulting plasma discharges, which might last a long time, would have very varied effects, but eventually they would die down until the planet settled into its new, free-floating environment. We also learn that the water covering the earth might not have been just the plain, ordinary kind, but might also have been, in fact, plasma.

Now, one of the principal arguments against a global flood is that there isn’t enough water to cover the entire planet. Plasma science solves this problem. I will explain this next.

Next Plasma Theology article: The Noachian Flood, Part Two: Electrically manufacturing OH

Previous Plasma Theology article: The sun “borrows” its light and the planets or stars were “fixed”

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The sun “borrows” its light and the planets or stars were “fixed”

According to Facsimile 2 in the Book of Abraham, Joseph Smith interpreted Figure 5 this way:

Joseph Smith said, “Is called in Egyptian Enish-go-on-dosh; this is one of the governing planets also, and is said by the Egyptians to be the Sun, and to borrow its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrash, which is the grand Key, or, in other words, the governing power, which governs fifteen other fixed planets or stars, as also Floeese or the Moon, the Earth and the Sun in their annual revolutions. This planet receives its power through the medium of Kli-flos-is-es, or Hah-ko-kau-beam, the stars represented by numbers 22 and 23, receiving light from the revolutions of Kolob.” (Abraham Facsimile 2, Figure 5)

Modern, mainstream science teaches us that the Sun is a giant nuclear fusion reactor. Millions of tons of hydrogen are converted through this reaction into millions of tons of helium and gamma rays each day. (Visit nineplants.org for additional, mainstream information on the Sun. Most of the Sun’s anomalies, though, are left out.) We are also taught that the Sun’s energy source comes from itself, not from outside sources.

In contrast, Mormonism teaches that the planet Enish-go-on-dosh (the Sun) borrows its light from Kolob through the medium of Kae-e-vanrish, which is the governing power. It also teaches that this planet receives its power (Kae-e-vanrish) from two other stars (or planets), which in turn receive their light from Kolob. (I will reserve discussion of Kolob for another article.)

Other LDS scriptures also teach that the universe is connected together to, shall we say, “power lines” (Kae-e-vanrish, the governing power) and that through this outside source of power or light, all things remain in their present state, giving light or power to each other. (See D&C 88: 4-13, 42-47.) So, Mormonism teaches that the Sun’s power comes from an outside source, whereas mainstream science teaches that the Sun’s power comes from an inside source.

The mainstream scientific view is one of individual, isolated bodies, radiating their inner energies outward. The LDS scriptural view is one of a connected circuit, each body receiving power from the previous one or ones and sending on the power to the next one or ones in line, but none of the bodies being the central power source (God being that source.)

Another interesting aspect of Figure 5′s interpretation by Joseph Smith is that the planets in Abraham’s day were fixed. The Lord stated that in Joseph’s day the courses of the planets were fixed (D&C 88: 43.) But in Abraham’s day, not just their courses were fixed, but the planets themselves were fixed. Currently, when we look at the planets of our solar system, we see nothing fixed. Before continuing, it may be helpful to look up the word fixed in Noah Webster’s 1828 dictionary, which was the dictionary in use at the time of the Abrahamic facsimile interpretation:

FIX’ED, pp. Settled; established; firm; fast; stable.

Fixed stars, are such stars as always retain the same apparent position and distance with respect to each other, and are thus distinguished from planets and comets, which are revolving bodies.

(from
http://1828.mshaffer.com/d/word/fixed
)

So, these fifteen planets, during the time of Abraham, were fixed, meaning that these planets always retained the same apparent position and distance with respect to each other, just as stars do now today. I stress that these were planets, not stars, in a fixed position, which does not correlate to what we see today.

Mainstream science would call our scriptures fantasy, as they don’t harmonize with the mainstream scientific theories about the planets and stars, nor with the assumed-to-be-true, mainstream history of this solar system. So, let’s turn to plasma science and plasma mythology to see if there is harmony with LDS scriptures.

First off, plasma cosmology teaches that the Sun’s power comes from outside, not inside. (See Solar Power, Internal or External?.) Plasma cosmology also teaches that all bodies in space are connected to each other via electrical circuits. (See The Electric Universe: Part 1, Bodies and Circuits.) Secondly, plasma mythology teaches that in antiquity the planets were not as far away as they now are. This is one of the reasons why the ancients knew so much about these now distant bodies, knowledge that is impossible to obtain without either the technology we now have or the planets themselves being much closer to Earth. Plasma mythology also teaches that anciently, there was a giant plasma column at the poles, which probably connected a stack of fixed planets. (See Saturn in Ancient Times and Stacked Ancestors.)

Note: None of these plasma researchers are LDS. Yet, their research shows that our LDS scriptures may, in fact, be descriptions of real plasma events and formations that occurred in the past and that will occur in the future.

Next Plasma Theology article: The Noachian Flood, Part One: The Role of Plasma

Previous Plasma Theology article: There is no conflict between science and religion

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The oath and covenant of the priesthood

The Lord said, “Therefore, as I said concerning the sons of Moses—for the sons of Moses and also the sons of Aaron shall offer an acceptable offering and sacrifice in the house of the Lord, which house shall be built unto the Lord in this generation, upon the consecrated spot as I have appointed—and the sons of Moses and of Aaron shall be filled with the glory of the Lord, upon Mount Zion in the Lord’s house, whose sons are ye; and also many whom I have called and sent forth to build up my church. For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies. They become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the elect of God. And also all they who receive this priesthood receive me, saith the Lord; for he that receiveth my servants receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth my Father; and he that receiveth my Father receiveth my Father’s kingdom; therefore all that my Father hath shall be given unto him. And this is according to the oath and covenant which belongeth to the priesthood. Therefore, all those who receive the priesthood, receive this oath and covenant of my Father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved. But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come. And wo unto all those who come not unto this priesthood which ye have received, which I now confirm upon you who are present this day, by mine own voice out of the heavens; and even I have given the heavenly hosts and mine angels charge concerning you. And I now give unto you a commandment to beware concerning yourselves, to give diligent heed to the words of eternal life. For you shall live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God.” (D&C 84: 31-44)

There have been a gazillion talks in the church on the oath and covenant of the priesthood. Virtually all of them state the same thing. I have a different take. Here is my understanding of this scripture:

The sons of Moses are the Melchizedek priesthood holders who are sanctified. The sons of Aaron are the holders of the priesthood of Aaron who are sanctified. The Lord explains that “whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods…and…are sanctified by the Spirit…become the sons of Moses and of Aaron and…the elect of God.” (See D&C 84: 33-34.) Also, the elect (chosen) of God is defined as the sanctified.

There has been a day of calling, but the time has come for a day of choosing; and let those be chosen that are worthy. And it shall be manifest unto my servant, by the voice of the Spirit, those that are chosen; and they shall be sanctified; and inasmuch as they follow the counsel which they receive, they shall have power after many days to accomplish all things pertaining to Zion. (D&C 105: 35-37)

So, if we have obtained the two priesthoods but have not been sanctified by the Spirit, we are not the sons of Moses and of Aaron, nor are we the elect.

The Lord said, “For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies.” (D&C 84: 33)

Most GAs and other speakers interpret the above scripture to mean that if we magnify our calling, we will become sanctified by the Spirit. Then they talk of ways we can magnify our calling so that we can become sanctified. I, however, do not share this view.

The Lord is explaining in this verse how to discern between a faithful priesthood holder who is magnifying his calling, and a faithless priesthood holder who is not magnifying his calling. The key to that discernment is in the last phrase: the faithful ones are sanctified by the Spirit.

Sanctification by the Spirit is always attendant with the powers and gifts of the Spirit. This is why the Lord said that “the sons of Moses and of Aaron shall be filled with the glory of the Lord” in D&C 84: 32. This is why the Lord said the chosen “shall have power” in D&C 105: 37.  Sanctification by the Spirit with attendant powers and gifts is the key to determine the faith of the saints or the faith of the priesthood holders. This is why there are signs that follow those that believe on the Lord, so that we may determine who has faith and who does not.

Mormon said, “For behold, thus said Jesus Christ, the Son of God, unto his disciples who should tarry, yea, and also to all his disciples, in the hearing of the multitude: Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature; and he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned; and these signs shall follow them that believe—in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover; and whosoever shall believe in my name, doubting nothing, unto him will I confirm all my words, even unto the ends of the earth. (Mormon 9: 22-25)

This is why the very definition of good works, the scriptural definition, is to work by the power and gifts of God, in other words, good works are the work of the sanctified, who are attended with the powers, gifts and fruits of the Spirit and the signs of true believers in Christ. Only the sanctified do good, as they exercise faith as a principle of power, as “without faith it is impossible to please [God]” (Hebrews 11: 6.) All others are in a state of unbelief, with no attendant powers of heaven to magnify their calling.

Moroni said, “And now I speak unto all the ends of the earth—that if the day cometh that the power and gifts of God shall be done away among you, it shall be because of unbelief. And wo be unto the children of men if this be the case; for there shall be none that doeth good among you, no not one. For if there be one among you that doeth good, he shall work by the power and gifts of God” (Moroni 10: 24-25)

So, the magnifying of our calling comes from working by the powers and gifts of God, which comes from being sanctified by the Spirit and not the other way around. We first become “sanctified by the reception of the Holy Ghost” (3 Nephi 27: 20) and are then enabled to magnify our calling by working by the powers and gifts of the Spirit.

Jesus said, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 5: 16)

Magnifying a calling means making it easier to see. The light we are shining are the good works, which is defined as the powers and gifts of God. So, when we magnify our calling, men can witness the powers and gifts of the Spirit and then turn and glorify God. This is the meaning of the scripture, but before any of this happens, we must be sanctified by the Spirit.

“All they who receive this priesthood receive me, saith the Lord” in D&C 84: 35. The expression “receive this priesthood” is defined in verse 33 as those who obtain the priesthoods and who are sanctified, which santification magnifies their calling. The unsanctified do not “receive the priesthood,” they only have the priesthood conferred upon them. Two vital elements must be present for one to “receive the priesthood”: the priesthood must be conferred and sanctification by the Spirit must have happened.

Only the sanctified priesthood holders receive the oath and covenant of the Father. Only the sanctified priesthood holders receive the promised blessings: receiving Jesus, receiving the Father and finally, receiving the Father’s kingdom, which means receiving all the Father hath. And only the sanctified priesthood holders receive the penalty for breaking the covenant and altogether turning therefrom, the penalty being the second death, meaning that they “shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come.”

So, what, then, is the covenant of the priesthood? The Lord said, “All those who receive the priesthood, receive this oath and covenant of my Father.” The covenant is to “receive the priesthood” as defined in verse 33, meaning to obtain the two priesthoods and to become sanctified by the reception of the Spirit unto the renewing of one’s body. If those two parts aren’t completed, you don’t receive the priesthood, nor do you receive (or enter into) the covenant of the priesthood. The covenant is part of the priesthood, it is connected to it, or, as the Lord says, the “covenant…belongeth to the priesthood.” The covenant of the priesthood is received or entered into when you “receive the priesthood.” As a covenant is an agreement between two persons, in this case, between a mortal son of God and God himself, if you keep your end of the agreement, which is to keep receiving the priesthood, or, in plainer words, to continue to possess and use the priesthood in a sanctified state, the Father promises with an oath that you will receive what he says you will receive (all that he hath.)

The final verses that are often quoted (43 and 44 of section 84) are not the covenant of the priesthood, as many will proclaim. The covenant is found in verse 33. The oath is found in verse 38. Verses 43 and 44 are a warning and a commandment, as the Lord has just finished explaining that the sanctified priesthood holders can receive the second death if they break and altogether abandon the covenant and also that those who do not “receive the priesthood” are also in big trouble, as they have no oath or promise of the Father. So, the Lord is giving very helpful instructions to those who haven’t received it, yet, and to those who have received it already, namely, “to give diligent heed to the words of eternal life…[and]…to live by every word that proceedeth forth from the mouth of God.”

Next Priesthood article: Let the Aaronic Priesthood Do Home Teaching and Let the Elders Administer the Sacrament

Previous Priesthood article: Discharging Priesthood Duties

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist