Shutting the mouths of false teachers


And..the church…had peace…save it were a few contentions concerning the points of doctrine which had been laid down by the prophets…  (Hel. 11:21-22)

And it came to pass that after there had been false Christs, and…after there had been false prophets, and false preachers and teachers among the people…  (Words of Mormon 1:15-16)

…and their mouths had been shut, and…all these having been punished according to their crimes…  (Words of Mormon 1:15-16)

…there began to be much strife. But it came to pass that…many of [the] brethren who knew concerning the true points of doctrine, having many revelations daily, therefore they did preach unto the people, insomuch that they did put an end to their strife…  (Hel. 11:23)

In other words, for this post, in addition to the scriptures, I’m going to use my own revelations to correct the errors promoted by false teachers currently found among the saints.

There have only been three known churches of Christ

The first church of Christ was founded by Alma Nephi, when he baptized Helam (and also himself) in the waters of Mormon, followed by the subsequent baptism of the rest of the group.  This church was formed about 147–145 B.C. and began with about 204 people.  The account of its establishment is found in Mosiah 18.

The second church of Christ was founded by Jesus Christ during his ministry among the Jews.

The third church of Christ was founded by Joseph Smith, Jun., which was organized and established in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, USA, with six people, on 6 April, 1830.

Three verses of scripture mention an ancient church

Here is the first part of the entry of “Church” from the Bible Dictionary:

From the Greek, Ecclesia, meaning “an assembly called together.” The church is the organized body of believers who have taken upon themselves the name of Jesus Christ by baptism and confirmation.  To be the true church it must be the Lord’s church and must have His laws, His name, and be governed by Him through representatives whom He has appointed (3 Ne. 27:1–12; D&C 115:4).

This is true.  God Himself must recognize it as His church, it must bear His name, have His revealed word as its foundational text, be built upon His gospel and rock, and possess His priesthood.  Every latter-day saint understands this definition of the church.  So far so good.  Now let’s look at the next part of this Bible Dictionary entry:

In this sense, the church began with the days of Adam and has been on the earth among mankind whenever there were a group of believers who had the priesthood and revelations of heaven.

This is false.  If you take up the Standard Works, and look at the Old Testament (whether you look in the King James Version, or in the Joseph Smith Translation, it doesn’t matter), you will find no mention of any church during that period of time.  This is because there was no church of Jesus Christ during those times.  Prior to the establishment of Jesus Christ’s church in the Old World, and to the establishment of Alma Nephi’s church in the New World, the laws and ordinances of God were administered to the people tribally.  Continuing on with this BD entry:

The word church is used only twice in the four Gospels (Matt. 16:18; 18:17) but is frequently mentioned in Acts, the epistles, and Revelation.

This is true.  This is because Jesus organized and established a church among the Jews and it continued after His resurrection under the direction of His apostles.

The Old Testament uses the term congregation for church.

This is false.  The Old Testament uses the term congregation to mean “an assembly of persons” and more specifically, “an assembly of persons met for the worship of God, and for religious instruction.”  An assembly of persons, belonging to a tribe or tribes, meeting together to offer sacrifice to their God (to worship God) or meeting in a synagogue for religious instruction is not a church.  Nor does it constitute a church of Christ.  Such assemblies need not have entered into any covenant with God, witnessed by baptism, nor received any laying on of hands, etc., to congregate and worship or to receive and give religious instruction.  Thus, the Old Testament uses the term congregation, not church, for these gatherings.  More of the BD entry:

The word kingdom is often used in the scriptures to mean the church, since the church is literally the kingdom of God on the earth.

This is false.  The word kingdom means kingdom.  (Duh!)  A kingdom is “the inhabitants or population subject to a king.”  The kingdom of God, then, are the people that submit to the law of God as administered by His priests, whether it is administered tribally, or via the church of Christ.  Thus, in the Book of Mormon, we find that the Nephites, when they were established under kings—from the reign of first Nephi, who consecrated his brothers Joseph and Jacob as priests and teachers, all the way to the last Nephite king, Mosiah, who also had his consecrated priests—all Nephite kings had priests, for these patriarchal orders were patterned after the kingdom of God, and God Himself, who is the King of the Universe, has priests.  And these priests, in pre-Alma days, or in pre-Jesus days, operated tribally, administering the ordinances and laws of God to the people under a tribal protocol.  These tribal orders, then, were as much the kingdom of God as were the churches of Christ, which also had ordained priests to administer the gospel ordinances and laws.  Kingdom, then, can apply to both the tribal and church protocols, and does not automatically mean or indicate that a functioning church of Christ is present.

Here’s more of the BD entry:

The Book of Mormon, as it speaks of Old Testament events, uses the word church (1 Ne. 4:26), and the Doctrine and Covenants speaks of the church in Old Testament times (D&C 107:4).

The first part is true and the second part is a supposition.  It is true that Joseph Smith translated the Egyptian word found in 1 Ne. 4:26 into church, but this did not mean a church of Christ, but merely “an assembly of believers.”  In other words, a “congregation of believers.”  The Jews in the land of Jerusalem at that time cast out, killed by stoning and other means, or tried to kill all those who believed in this prophesied Messiah that would suffer and die for the sins of the world.  They in no way, shape or form belonged to any church of Christ.  But they certainly professed a belief in Moses and his law, and also the prophets (the ones that didn’t prophesy of Christ or of the Jews’ destruction, that is), therefore, this was a congregation of believers in Moses and the law and the prophets, but not in Christ, who attended the Jewish synagogue.  Joseph translated it as church, for a church is an Ecclesia, meaning “an assembly called together,” and that’s what this congregation was.  But this wasn’t a church of Christ, but merely a gathering under tribal authority and protocols.  Here is the scripture in question:

And he spake unto me concerning the elders of the Jews, he knowing that his master, Laban, had been out by night among them.  And I spake unto him as if it had been Laban.  And I also spake unto him that I should carry the engravings, which were upon the plates of brass, to my elder brethren, who were without the walls.  And I also bade him that he should follow me.  And he, supposing that I spake of the brethren of the church, and that I was truly that Laban whom I had slain, wherefore he did follow me.  And he spake unto me many times concerning the elders of the Jews, as I went forth unto my brethren, who were without the walls.  (1 Ne. 4:22-27)

Now look at the Bible Dictionary entry for Synagogue:

A Jewish meetinghouse for religious purposes. The furniture was generally simple, consisting of an ark containing the rolls of the law and other sacred writings, a reading desk, and seats for the worshippers. Its affairs were managed by the local council of elders, who decided who should be admitted and who should be excluded (Luke 6:22; John 9:22; 12:42; 16:2). The most important official was the Ruler of the Synagogue (Mark 5:22; Luke 13:14), who was generally a scribe, had care of the building, and superintended the various services. There was also an attendant who performed clerical duties (Luke 4:20). The Sabbath morning service was the most important in the week and included a fixed lesson (Num. 15:37–41; Deut. 6:4–9; 11:13–21) and two lessons for the day, one from the law and the other from the prophets. A sermon was generally preached in explanation of one of the lessons (Luke 4:17; Acts 13:15). The existence of synagogues in every town in which Jews were living, both in Palestine and elsewhere, was a great help to the spread of the gospel, early Christian missionaries being generally able to get a hearing there (see Acts 13:5, 14; 14:1; 17:1, 10; 18:4), and the synagogue worship provided in many respects a model for early Christian worship.

Okay, so hopefully that explains the use of the word church in 1 Ne. 4:26.  So now to address D&C 107:4.  Here are the first four verses of that section:

There are, in the church, two priesthoods, namely, the Melchizedek and Aaronic, including the Levitical Priesthood.  Why the first is called the Melchizedek Priesthood is because Melchizedek was such a great high priest.  Before his day it was called the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God.  But out of respect or reverence to the name of the Supreme Being, to avoid the too frequent repetition of his name, they, the church, in ancient days, called that priesthood after Melchizedek, or the Melchizedek Priesthood.

The Bible Dictionary author supposes that this mention of a church in ancient days in “the Doctrine and Covenants speaks of the church in Old Testament times,” but that is just an assumption, a supposition, a mere guess.  There is no evidence, whatsoever, that any church of Christ was found in Old Testament times, whether before Melchizedek, during his times (and he was a contemporary of Abraham, who likewise mentions no church), or after him.  As the most ancient church of Christ established on this earth was the one formed by Alma Nephi on this American continent, this D&C verse may be speaking of Alma’s church.  It need not apply to anything more ancient than that.

Stephen’s testimony in Acts 7 also mentioned a church in the times of Moses, but again, this wasn’t a church of Christ, but a congregation of the tribes.  Non-KJV bible translations use assembly or congregation, instead of church.  Here are his words in the KJV:

This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel,

A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear.

This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us: to whom our fathers would not obey, but thrust him from them, and in their hearts turned back again into Egypt, saying unto Aaron,

Make us gods to go before us: for as for this Moses, which brought us out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him. (Acts 7:37-40)

So there you have it.  There are only three verses in all of the scriptures that speak of a church in pre-Jesus or pre-Alma times, and two of the verses (1 Ne. 4:26 and Acts 7:38) are really talking of a tribal congregation or assembly, while the other passage (D&C 107:4) is speaking, in all likelihood, of either Alma’s church or Jesus’ church.  That is the extent of all the “evidence” for the existence of a church of Christ before Christ and Alma.

Nonetheless, as latter-day saints know absolutely nothing about the gospel administered tribally, to deal with the apparent operation of God’s priesthoods in antiquity, they have taken the church model and protocols and applied them to the past.  Even though there is no church mentioned or found in the ancient text, they, nevertheless, using their “church filters,” cause their eyes to see an ancient church everywhere, in every time period.  “It’s there, in the word congregation!  Or it’s over there, in the word kingdom!  Lo!  The church of Christ is everywhere!  It has been here since the very beginning!  This isn’t a restoration of the church of Christ that was established in Jesus’ day, but a restoration of the church of Christ from Adam’s time!  Our religion is that ancient!”  And so the sayings go.

How the false teachers use Abinadi and Alma

False teachers, working from the same false church-from-the-beginning reference point, have crafted a false narrative by superimposing the gospel as administered tribally upon the gospel as administered by the church.  Specifically, the application of Abinadi’s prophecy to Noah and his priests and people, by false teachers and false prophets—who attempt to use it as an example that God can, and does, use outsiders to correct and call the ministers of His church to repentance—is a misapplication.  Where these false teachers err is in their assumption that Abinadi and Noah and his priests and people were actually in any church of Christ.  They weren’t.  They weren’t living under church protocols, but under tribal protocols, which are different.

The only model that can be applied to the current church of Christ, founded by Joseph Smith, is a church model.  In other words, you must use a church example, not a tribal one, to show how the church of Christ is supposed to function.  So, we’ve got three churches: one founded by Alma the Nephite (the most ancient one), one founded by Jesus the Jew, and one founded by Joseph the Gentile of Ephraimite lineage.  You can look at the Nephite church, which begins with the baptism of Helam, or at the Jewish church, which begins with Jesus’ church, and apply those to the Gentile church, but you cannot turn to Abinadi and Noah and his priests and say, “See?  Abinadi wasn’t in the priesthood hierarchy and yet God used him to call them to repentance!”   So what?  There was a tribal protocol in place during that time that provided for that and Abinadi followed it precisely.

Tribal rights are passed on through literal lineage

Not all tribal functions have been revealed, as yet, but we do know a few things.  For example, lineage played a part in tribal priesthood.  Therefore, Aaron and his firstborn sons had (and still have) a right to the bishopric, by birth.  That’s a tribal protocol which is currently found in the church of Christ.  There is literal lineage (father to son) and priesthood lineage (priesthood father to priesthood son.)  In other words, priesthood rights can be passed on tribally, through literal seed (father to son, or for Aaron and all his firstborn sons), and that is a tribal operation, but also they can be passed on via the laying on of hands, from one unrelated man to another unrelated man.  The first man becomes the “priesthood father” of the second man, who becomes the “priesthood son.”  Thus, this conferral of priesthood by the laying on of hands is spoken of as having a lineage and seed.  So, I can trace my Aaronic “priesthood lineage” from the man who ordained me (who is my priesthood father), to the man who ordained him (my priesthood grandfather), and so on, back to Oliver Cowdery, and thus back to John the Baptist.  And so forth with the Melchizedek priesthood.

An example of the two kinds of seed (literal and priesthood) can be seen from the following scripture:

And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations; and I will bless them through thy name; for as many as receive this Gospel shall be called after thy name, and shall be accounted thy seed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their father; and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, in thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal. (Abr. 2:9-11)

Another example is of evangelical ministers, which is a tribal office that is currently found in the church (since we need it here until the tribal functions are fully restored) :

It is the duty of the Twelve, in all large branches of the church, to ordain evangelical ministers, as they shall be designated unto them by revelation—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.  (D&C 107:39-40)

And again, verily I say unto you, let my servant William be appointed, ordained, and anointed, as counselor unto my servant Joseph, in the room of my servant Hyrum, that my servant Hyrum may take the office of Priesthood and Patriarch, which was appointed unto him by his father, by blessing and also by right; that from henceforth he shall hold the keys of the patriarchal blessings upon the heads of all my people, that whoever he blesses shall be blessed, and whoever he curses shall be cursed; that whatsoever he shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever he shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (D&C 124:91-93)

Not only were priesthood rights transmitted by birth under the tribal model, but so were gifts.  In the Nephite society, it was the seed of Jacob, all the Jacobite sons, who had a right to the gift to prophesy.  As such, any male Jacobite, filled with the Spirit, was duly authorized to preach repentance to anyone, including priests, teachers and kings.  As they were Jacobites—their surname being Jacob-Nephi—they were within the Nephite tribal congregations, therefore they weren’t from the outside.  Also, as they were Jacobites, they had a right to prophesy.

Abinadi was likely a Jacobite, descended from Abinadom.  Thus, he was fully within his rights to call these people to repentance.  The whole thing followed tribal protocols, but not church protocols, for under church protocols, we are not to command him who is at our head.

But thou shalt not write by way of commandment, but by wisdom; and thou shalt not command him who is at thy head, and at the head of the church; for I have given him the keys of the mysteries, and the revelations which are sealed, until I shall appoint unto them another in his stead. (D&C 28:5-7)

Also, the elders of the church are not to be taught by others, but are to be the ones who do the teaching.

Again I say, hearken ye elders of my church, whom I have appointed:

Ye are not sent forth to be taught, but to teach the children of men the things which I have put into your hands by the power of my Spirit; and ye are to be taught from on high.  (D&C 43:15-16)

So, God will not use outsiders to call any of the church elders to repentance.  God will only use church ministers to call them to repentance.  (This means that if you’ve been excommunicated, repent and come back in.  If you start calling any part of the church to repentance, that is evidence that you do not have the Spirit of God.)

Additionally, the record states that “there was a man among them whose name was Abinadi” (Mosiah 11:20), so Abinadi was actually a part of Noah’s people and kingdom.  So, he was in no way an outsider.

An affront to the king’s right to judge

After Abinadi gave his prophecy to the people, they were livid, and when king Noah learned of his words, he also was fuming mad, and he said,

Who is Abinadi, that I and my people should be judged of him, or who is the Lord, that shall bring upon my people such great affliction?  I command you to bring Abinadi hither, that I may slay him, for he has said these things that he might stir up my people to anger one with another, and to raise contentions among my people; therefore I will slay him.  (Mosiah 11:27-28)

The reason for all this anger was two-fold.  The first reason was because, under tribal prototol, it was up to the kings to judge the people.  King Mosiah later would say,

Therefore, if it were possible that you could have just men to be your kings, who would establish the laws of God, and judge this people according to his commandments… (Mosiah 29:13)

Also, when there was iniquity in the church, Alma went to the king to have him judge them, according to tribal protocol:

And he said unto the king:

Behold, here are many whom we have brought before thee, who are accused of their brethren; yea, and they have been taken in divers iniquities. And they do not repent of their iniquities; therefore we have brought them before thee, that thou mayest judge them according to their crimes. (Mosiah 26:11)

Secondly, it was the prerogative of the kings to call upon the prophets, priests, teachers and other leaders, as helps, in their mission of judging the people and establishing peace:

…behold, it came to pass that king Benjamin, with the assistance of the holy prophets who were among his people—for behold, king Benjamin was a holy man, and he did reign over his people in righteousness; and there were many holy men in the land, and they did speak the word of God with power and with authority; and they did use much sharpness because of the stiffneckedness of the people—wherefore, with the help of these, king Benjamin, by laboring with all the might of his body and the faculty of his whole soul, and also the prophets, did once more establish peace in the land. (Words of Mormon 1:16-18)

This was the tribal protocol for just kings. And in the whole history of the Nephite people, there had only been just kings. Jarom said, “our kings and our leaders were mighty men in the faith of the Lord; and they taught the people the ways of the Lord” (Jarom 1:7.) But Noah was an anomaly. He was an iniquitous king.  In the case of an iniquitous king, judgment reverted to the LORD under tribal protocol, but this had never happened before, for Noah was the first wicked Nephite king.

This is why Noah’s question is two-fold: “Who is Abinadi, that I and my people should be judged of him, or who is the Lord, that shall bring upon my people such great affliction?”  When Noah asks, “Who is Abinadi?” it isn’t because Abinadi is an unknown person, some passerby that happened to enter into the land, and it isn’t because Abinadi isn’t a part of the priests of Noah, like many of the false teachers like to assert.  No, what Noah is saying is, “Is Abinadi king, or am I king?  Who has the right to judge this people, him or me?”

Assuming that Abinadi was, indeed, a Jacobite (and if so, his name would have been Abinadi Jacob-Nephi), Abinadi had the right to prophesy, but this always happened with the king’s advance notice and approval, and under the king’s guidance, not out-of-the-blue, without any notification whatsoever to the reigning king.  So, king Noah felt affronted.

Additionally, the prophecy of Abinadi went contrary to what the king and his priests were saying.  They proclaimed celebration and prosperity, while Abinadi’s prophecy was of affliction and bondage.  Noah assumed, therefore, that as the people appeared to be prosperous and content, and they gave their common consent to all he did(!), that he must be a just king, and therefore Abinadi must be the one out of sorts.  Therefore Abinadi must be a false prophet.  And also the name of “the Lord” that Abinadi invoked must not be the real Lord, but a false god.  (This is why king Noah asks, “Who is the Lord?”)  Abinadi, then, was the obvious guilty party, under tribal protocol (assuming a just king, that is.)  And so he and his people did not believe the prophecy.  They thought it was all made up:

And it came to pass that they were angry with him; and they took him and carried him bound before the king, and said unto the king:

Behold, we have brought a man before thee who has prophesied evil concerning thy people, and saith that God will destroy them.  And he also prophesieth evil concerning thy life, and saith that thy life shall be as a garment in a furnace of fire.  And again, he saith that thou shalt be as a stalk, even as a dry stalk of the field, which is run over by the beasts and trodden under foot.  And again, he saith thou shalt be as the blossoms of a thistle, which, when it is fully ripe, if the wind bloweth, it is driven forth upon the face of the land. And he pretendeth the Lord hath spoken it. And he saith all this shall come upon thee except thou repent, and this because of thine iniquities.  And now, O king, what great evil hast thou done, or what great sins have thy people committed, that we should be condemned of God or judged of this man?  And now, O king, behold, we are guiltless, and thou, O king, hast not sinned; therefore, this man has lied concerning you, and he has prophesied in vain.  And behold, we are strong, we shall not come into bondage, or be taken captive by our enemies; yea, and thou hast prospered in the land, and thou shalt also prosper.  Behold, here is the man, we deliver him into thy hands; thou mayest do with him as seemeth thee good.

So none of this has anything, whatsoever, to do with Abinadi not being a part of the body of Noah’s priests, but this is how the false teachers would like to spin it.

Okay, so my point is that Abinadi acted under proper tribal protocols.

A brief aside

It is not my intention to fully expound this Abinadi episode, but I will point out a couple of things, before moving on to Alma’s actions.

First, Noah, priests and people were focused on the law of Moses, thinking that salvation came by it, and they discarded the Ten Commandments, whereas Abinadi pointed to the Ten Commandments, saying that those who obeyed those commandments would be saved.

The people essentially broke every single one of the Ten Commandments.  They all “became idolatrous” (Mosiah 11:6-7.)  That broke the Second Commandment.  The king and priests spoke “vain words” (Mosiah 11:7,11) to the people.  That might indicate that they broke the Third Commandment.  The king and priests did not work, but were “supported in their laziness” (Mosiah 11:6.)  That broke the Fourth Commandment.  King Noah “did not walk in the ways of his father” (Mosiah 11:1.)  That indicates that he broke the Fifth Commandment.  The people “did delight in blood, and the shedding of the blood of their brethren” (Mosiah 11:19) and also they consented to the death of Abinadi.  This broke the Sixth Commandment.  They had “many wives and concubines” (Mosiah 11:2,4,6,14) and spent time with harlots and committed whoredoms.  That broke the Seventh Commandment.  They returned from war with the Lamanites, “rejoicing in their spoil” (Mosiah 11:18.)  That might indicate that they didn’t just get their own stuff back from the Lamanites, but took (stole) additional things that the Lamanites possessed.  That would break the Eighth Commandment.  The high priests would “speak lying” (Mosiah 11:11) words to the people.  That would violate the Ninth Commandment.  Finally, king Noah levied a tax upon the people (see Mosiah 11:4,6,13.)  This would violate the Tenth Commandment (per the post, Thou shalt not “covet”.)

Second, despite breaking pretty much every single commandment of God, notice that Abinadi does not say to them that their priesthood was now null and void, that they had no more keys, that because of their apostasy and sinful ways, the “church was no longer true,” etc., as the false teachers like to spin it, but instead, Abinadi continues to recognize the authority of these corrupt priests to the very end, ending his sermon in this fashion:

Therefore, if ye teach the law of Moses, also teach that it is a shadow of those things which are to come—teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father. Amen. (Mosiah 16:14-15)

So, this was not a case of “Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man!” that the false teachers would like it to be.  Now, let’s look at Alma.

Alma, the priest of Noah

Alma repented of his sins, ran away when Noah tried to kill him, wrote the words of Abinadi, and then began preaching in private.

Keep in mind that the tribal protocols were still intact under Noah and his priests.  But Alma couldn’t return, because they would just try to kill him again.  He was now an outsider, but he still had priesthood authority.  He was also under the obligation to teach the people the truth of Abinadi’s words.  He couldn’t teach them tribally and then tell them to go back and submit to the tribal authority of Noah as believers in Christ, because once it came out that they believed as Abinadi did, they would likely be killed, as well. So, what was Alma to do?

The answer is that he used his priesthood to form a church of Christ.  Noah and his priests operated under the tribal model, so Alma used his faith to have his converts operate under the church model.  This would protect them from the oppressions of king Noah, for they could meet in secret, be baptized in secret and so forth.  On the one hand, they would still participate in tribal functions, under Noah and priests, as well as in church functions, under Alma.

The church rises, the tribe goes away

But notice that once the church comes into existence, Satan inspires the king to destroy it, so they run away.  Then they are found by the Lamanites and finally escape to king Mosiah.  King Mosiah, a seer with his own tribal priests, seeing that Alma’s immense faith has caused a church of Christ to be formed before Christ had come to establish it(!), starts to set in motion the cessation of the priesthood within the tribal protocols.  He turns the monarchy into a system of judges without priests, gives Alma full authority over the church and the ordination of priesthood, and hands all sacred items to Alma’s son Alma.  Alma the younger then becomes first chief judge, high priest of the church, and all priesthood is now centered in the church.  From this point on, the priesthood no longer operates tribally, but within the church of Christ, exclusively.  The church of Christ has full sway over which ordinances are salvific, and which are not.

This pattern follows with the other two churches, too.  The church established by Jesus had exclusive authority.  The church established by Joseph Smith has exclusive authority.  No ordinances are salvific without church authorization, for either of these three churches.  All those who claim that they can baptize without church authorization, using Mormon priesthood, and that those baptisms are legitimately salvific in the Lord’s view, are wrong.  The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints possesses the keys over all the ordinances of salvation, exclusively.

Three published revelations given to me

Okay, hopefully that covers the Abinadi-Alma point that is always brought up by false teachers.

As the cry of false teachers and false prophets is always the same—the church is apostate, the keys are no longer valid, the practices of the church no longer conform to the revelations, etc.—I am going to use Abinadi logic to deal with these assertions:

And it came to pass that after Abinadi had made an end of these sayings that he said unto them:

Have ye taught this people that they should observe to do all these things for to keep these commandments? I say unto you,

Nay;

for if ye had, the Lord would not have caused me to come forth and to prophesy evil concerning this people. (Mosiah 13:25-26)

Joseph Smith organized and established the church of Christ on 6 April, 1830.  I joined The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in 19__, at the age of nine.  About a month before my baptism, I received a revelation from the Holy Ghost, in which the Spirit said to me:

“This [The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints] is the ONLY true church!”

This revelation was received while I was attending a Mormon church service for the very first time, and it was accompanied by a baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost.  The meaning of the revelation was that the members of this particular church had valid ordinances of salvation.  In other words, that their priesthood authority was the only priesthood which was valid and authorized by God.

Now, all those who say that this church is apostate, or that the priesthood is no longer here, or some of it is missing, or the ordinances have changed, or that the keys are not valid, etc., and point to any point of time between 1830 and 19__, the year I received this revelation, are in error.  I say to them like Abinadi said to those priests:

Did the church become false at any time during this period from 1830 to 19__?  I say to you,

No, it didn’t;

for if it did, the Lord would not have caused me to receive a revelation that the church was true in 19__.

Now, either the church was true in 1830, and then became false, and then was restored back to true by 19__, or it has remained true the entire time, from 1830 to 19__.  As we have no record of any restoration that has occurred after Joseph Smith’s death, and, in fact, no such restoration will occur, except by the hand of the Josephite, then the church must have been true during this entire time.

So, that covers the period from 1830 to 19__, but what about the period since 19__?  Could there have been an apostasy since then?  Could the keys have been lost since the year I received that revelation?

No, because there is also this revelation, which I received in 2014:

Behold! Thus saith the Lord:

Thou shalt shut thy mouth, for none of my saints shall be authorized to speak against the leaders of my church, to criticize and correct them publicly, unless I send them. And thou shalt be sent, but the time is not yet, neither for thee, nor for any others, therefore, thou shalt heed these words and hold thy tongue.

Notice in particular that the Lord says, “the leaders of my church.”  Again,

Did the church become false at any time during this period from 19__ to 2014?  I say to you,

No, it didn’t;

for if it did, the Lord would not have caused me to receive a revelation that this was still His church in 2014.

So, this Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is still the Lord’s church, as of 2014.  And since 2014, there has been no indication from the Spirit, whatsoever, that the church has ceased being the Lord’s church, therefore, it’s still true, the keys are still here, the priesthood is still valid, and the Lord still recognizes it as His.

Anybody, then, who goes around saying this church no longer holds the keys, or is apostate, or does not have the priesthood (or not all the priesthood), or the ordinances have been changed or corrupted, or the Lord has rejected the church, and so forth—anyone who teaches such doctrine is a false teacher, because they go against these revelations of mine.

There is only one response that a false teacher can say to this, and that is, “These revelations are not true.”  But they are true, and this can be demonstrated by anyone praying to God about them.  God will tell any earnest seeker of truth that the above two revelations are true, and as they are true, these other phonies are false teachers.

Now, before I address the final point that false teachers always bring up, which is the fact that the practices of the church do not match the revelations of Joseph Smith in a great many instances, I will put up the third revelation, which is the tribal revelation, to show that this tribal doctrine and protocol, in which the kingdom of God was administered to the people tribally, is not something I made up on my own, but which was revealed to me by the Holy Ghost in 2010:

Be of good comfort, for verily, thus saith the Lord:

The priesthood existed before the organization of the church and is to serve both church and tribe. Although the tribes of Israel are not gathered, yet they are known to me, along with all the tribes of the earth.

For the Lord beholds no man alone, but sees the lineage of all families, of all the children of men, and of these lines form tribes.

I have yet to restore tribal functions,

saith the Lord,

nevertheless, the church ordinances of baptism, confirmation, administration of the sacrament, and priesthood ordinations, may be performed within a tribe, as tribal ordinances, under tribal authority or keys. Thus the priesthood may operate within a tribe, independently from the church, and within the church, independently from a tribe.

Nevertheless, thou shalt not substitute the church for the tribe, nor the tribe for the church.

Yet thou mayest establish thy tribe using these priesthood ordinances, and conform your tribal practices to the revelations of my servant Joseph Smith, Jun.,

saith the Lord.

¶ Because thou fearest to sin, thou shalt not administer of the sacrament at home to thy family, as a church ordinance, unless the bishop permitteth it.

For it is not meet nor right to establish a home church, apart from the body of the saints; nevertheless, thou art permitted to administer of the sacrament, as a tribal ordinance, to those that pertain to thy tribe.

For I require the saints of my church to meet together often, to worship me as a group, and thou shalt also worship me at all times, and the church is ordained and established unto this end,

saith the Lord.

Likewise the tribe is to worship me, as a group and individually. Wherefore, establish thy tribe, if thou wilt, using the priesthood, that ye may worship me as a group, in conformity to my revelations, given to my servant Joseph, that I may pour out my Spirit and gifts upon thee and thine, that thou shalt have no more cause to mourn and murmur concerning the meetings of my church. But take care not to go beyond the bounds I have set, until I have seen fit to reveal the tribal functions. Amen.

This shows that the priesthood “is to serve both church and tribe,” which means that before the churches established by Alma and Jesus, the kingdom of God was administered tribally, for that is what existed back then: tribes of Israel and tribes of the earth.

Two published revelations given to Joseph Smith

There are also two revelations which were given to Joseph Smith that show that the church still has all of its keys.  The first is:

Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness. (D&C 13:1)

Those are the words of John the Baptist to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery when he gave them the Aaronic Priesthood. Notice that he says that that priesthood will remain on earth until the sons of Levi offer a sacrifice to the Lord in righteousness. Have the sons of Levi done this, yet? No, they haven’t. Therefore, this priesthood and all its keys are still here in the Lord’s church.

Here is another revelation of Joseph Smith:

Therefore, thus saith the Lord unto you, with whom the priesthood hath continued through the lineage of your fathers—for ye are lawful heirs, according to the flesh, and have been hid from the world with Christ in God—therefore your life and the priesthood have remained, and must needs remain through you and your lineage until the restoration of all things spoken by the mouths of all the holy prophets since the world began. (D&C 86:8-10)

This does not refer to the literal seed, but to the priesthood seed and priesthood lineage and priesthood fathers. So, the fathers of Joseph and Oliver were John the Baptist and also Peter, James and John, and Joseph and Oliver were lawful heirs, according to the flesh, for these priesthoods were conferred by the laying on of hands, of flesh and bone people, therefore it was done “according to the flesh.” Some people go way out in left field and think this scripture is speaking of the literal seed, or that Joseph and Oliver had priesthood rights by birth, from their mortal fathers, etc., but no such imaginary scenario exists, for they were Gentiles and had no right by birth to the priesthood, but via ordination by the hand of these resurrected personages. And so the lineage spoken of here is not the literal seed of Joseph and Oliver, but their priesthood seed. For example, owing to my priesthood lineage, Oliver Cowdery is one of my priesthood fathers. And I am one of his priesthood sons. And so forth. I am a part of his priesthood posterity.

Now, this priesthood (which includes both priesthoods) was to remain “until the restoration of all things.”  Again,

Has the restoration of all things occurred, yet?  I say to you,

No, it hasn’t;

therefore, this priesthood and all its keys are still with the church.

There is no getting around these revelations, neither mine nor Joseph’s.  If the false teachers are teaching correct doctrines, then both my revelations and also Joseph Smith’s are false.  If Joseph’s and my revelations are true, then the false teachers are in error.  It can’t be both ways.  As all these revelations are true, everyone can expect these two priesthoods, and their keys, to remain in this church until the restoration of all things.

These are the keys

As for what keys they have, this is what the Lord says about that:

For unto you, the Twelve, and those, the First Presidency, who are appointed with you to be your counselors and your leaders, is the power of this priesthood given, for the last days and for the last time, in the which is the dispensation of the fulness of times, which power you hold, in connection with all those who have received a dispensation at any time from the beginning of the creation; for verily I say unto you, the keys of the dispensation, which ye have received, have come down from the fathers, and last of all, being sent down from heaven unto you. (D&C 112:30-32)

So, it is to the Twelve and First Presidency that we should look as key holders.  Now, notice what they have done with their keys since the death of Joseph Smith:

The church is out of order

According to the law of expediency, the church leadership must operate according to what is expedient.  In the absence of the revelations of a seer (Joseph Smith or Joseph-Nephi) they are to use this law and their keys, to keep the work moving forward, building up the church upon the foundation Joseph Smith laid, until the next seer (Joseph-Nephi) arrives to add to the body of revelation and restore the rest of all the things.

Because of hinderment, and especially if the hinderment is continual, things can quickly get out of order.  So, let’s say you start with 10 numbered blocks, from 1 to 10, which Joseph Smith restored, and let’s say that there are, in total, 1000 blocks to be restored.  Those 10 blocks represent the foundation of the restoration of all things, as well as the foundation of the church, which was accomplished by Joseph.  The order is from 1 to 10, but even in Joseph’s time, there was hinderment, so, for example, the law of consecration and stewardship had to be put on hold, and we got a new revealed block, which was the law of tithing.  After Joseph’s death, the leadership, holding the keys, had to move the work forward as best they could, under whatever inspiration they could get.

But again, hinderment comes, for Satan opposes this work, and maybe the order must be changed a little, so that there is no halt in the work.  Maybe blocks number 4 and 5 get swapped.  Later, there is more opposition, and the law of expediency requires that to keep the work moving forward, blocks 2 and 7 must be swapped.  Maybe with so much opposition, block 10 must have its practice ceased, but the block must remain, so it is hid under block 9.  And so on, as time goes on the blocks get more and more out of order.  Yet they are all still there.

The uninspired man, and in particular the false teachers and false prophets, will say that this is not the true church, for look at all the blocks.  They are out of order!  They no longer conform to the revelations of Joseph Smith!  But remember, these are uninspired, false teachers.  They cannot see the hand of God if it was placed right in front of their blind faces.

And it shall come to pass that I, the Lord God, will send one mighty and strong, holding the scepter of power in his hand, clothed with light for a covering, whose mouth shall utter words, eternal words; while his bowels shall be a fountain of truth, to set in order the house of God, and to arrange by lot the inheritances of the saints whose names are found, and the names of their fathers, and of their children, enrolled in the book of the law of God; while that man, who was called of God and appointed, that putteth forth his hand to steady the ark of God, shall fall by the shaft of death, like as a tree that is smitten by the vivid shaft of lightning. (D&C 85:7-8)

This prophecy cannot be fulfilled unless the house of God first gets out of order.  This is really, then, two prophecies: one of the house of God getting out of order, and one of the house of God being set in order.  Those who say: “That the house of God being out of order, or it not conforming to the revelations of Joseph Smith, is evidence that it is no longer the house of God” are false teachers, for this prophecy of Joseph Smith prophesies that the house of God will first get out of order, yet it still will be the house of God, for later on it (the house of God) will be set in order.  It never ceases to be the house of God during this process.  Therefore, all those who seek to “steady the ark of God” to restore order to it, are the ones who are uninspired.  The house of God getting out of order is a state which conforms to the revelations of Joseph Smith.  And the leadership, acting under the law of expediency, and getting this house more and more out of order, are acting under inspiration of God.

It was always the intention of God to have the house get all jumbled up, and then one day He had always planned that this guy, called a mighty and strong one, would come and set the whole mess right.  So, if you want to follow a false teacher out of this church, do it with the understanding that these people haven’t got a clue as to the workings of the Spirit.

A key to discerning the time of apostasy

When did the most ancient church of Christ (the one established by Alma Nephi) go into apostasy and cease to exist?  The answer is when God took away His twelve disciples.  (Later, under Mormon, it was when He took away all of His disciples.)  And when did the church established by Jesus among the Jews go into apostasy?

Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servants, concerning the parable of the wheat and of the tares:

Behold, verily I say, the field was the world, and the apostles were the sowers of the seed; and after they have fallen asleep the great persecutor of the church, the apostate, the whore, even Babylon, that maketh all nations to drink of her cup, in whose hearts the enemy, even Satan, sitteth to reign—behold he soweth the tares; wherefore, the tares choke the wheat and drive the church into the wilderness. (D&C 86:1-3)

Once again, the answer is when the apostles were taken away. (The tares had been sown in the church while the apostles were still ministering, but only when they were taken away did the tares become capable of choking the wheat and driving the church into the wilderness.) And in our day, when will the church go into apostasy?

Now, I say unto you, and what I say unto you, I say unto all the Twelve:

And again, I say unto you, that whosoever ye shall send in my name, by the voice of your brethren, the Twelve, duly recommended and authorized by you, shall have power to open the door of my kingdom unto any nation whithersoever ye shall send them—inasmuch as they shall humble themselves before me, and abide in my word, and hearken to the voice of my Spirit.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, darkness covereth the earth, and gross darkness the minds of the people, and all flesh has become corrupt before my face.

Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth,

saith the Lord.

And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth,

saith the Lord;

first among those among you,

saith the Lord,

who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house,

saith the Lord. (D&C 112:14,21-26)

Again, the answer is the same: the day of vengeance, wrath, burning, desolation, weeping, mourning and lamentation will begin first among the Twelve apostles.  (And this day has not come, yet.)  So, when the Lord removes the twelve Gentile apostles, that is the day when the tares, which are already sown among the wheat of this church, will begin to choke the wheat. But as long as we have the twelve apostles among us, the church is not apostate, it still has the priesthood, the keys are still here, the ordinances are still valid, and so forth. Even my prophecies concerning the breakup of the church and of the descent into wickedness (by the tares of this church) bear out this principle, for the church breakup and wickedness of the tares only occurs when the quorum of the Twelve are taken out of the picture. So, all of this shows that a key to know whether this church is still valid in God’s eyes, is the existence of the quorum of the twelve apostles. If that quorum exists, the church is still true.  And since we do have the Twelve among us still, this (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) is still the Lord’s church and believe it or not, all the expedient disordering that is being done with their keys is under inspiration of God.  So, hopefully this post will do something to help shut the mouths of the false teachers who are spreading lies among the saints.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The U.S. Constitution (USC) Sucks, The New Articles of Confederation (NAC) is Better: Part 4 of an Open Debate—The NAC’s Marriage Sections


The Right to Travel

Before I get into the marriage sections, I want to address Section 3 of Article II, which says, in part:

…the people of each State shall have free ingress and regress to and from any other State, and to and from other countries, by any mode of conveyance whatsoever in which they desire to exercise their right to travel, without abridgment, regulation, restriction or license…

The right of travel is nearly non-existent in this country under the USC, though I happen to know a guy who has continually won in the courts each time the cops pull him over and find that he doesn’t have a license, but is merely traveling, and the cops now, when they pull him over, recognize him and just tell him to keep on traveling.  But that is in my area.  In your area, they may be quite adamant that there is not, nor ever was, any right to travel, but under the original Articles of Confederation, it was written right into it, though not as expressly as the NAC has it.  Therefore, the NAC is orders of magnitude better than the original Articles. Under the NAC, people are going to finally know what real freedom feels like…

NAC Article III. Section 1.

Neither the united States in Congress assembled, nor any State of this Confederacy, shall have power to abridge, regulate, or license, a man’s right to take a wife, for men shall always be free to marry wives, without restriction and without permission from ecclesiastical or secular authorities, but, for the resulting marriage, whether confarreatio, or coemptio in manum, or usus, or any other form, with or without manus, and with or without a vow, every State shall issue certificates upon presentment of statements or affidavits by the man and his wife, which shall certify the marriage and its form, and such certificates, if available, shall be used in all marriage controversies at law, which controversies shall be judged according to the marriage form and the covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations or expectations that were made and entered into by the persons involved.

This section ought to be considered a restoration, for in the beginning marriage was ordained unto man (and not unto woman) by God:

and again

verily I say unto you

that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God

for marriage is ordained of God unto man [not woman]

wherefore

it is lawful that he [man] should have one wife

and they twain shall be one flesh

and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation

and that it might be filled with the measure of man

according to his creation before the world was made

(D&C 49:15-17)

So, at the beginning of time, God gave to man a right to take a wife.  He (man) could do it under his own power and authority.  He didn’t need God’s permission, nor permission from other men, or from governments or anything.  This authority and right to take a wife was in him alone.

(Now, I will not explain in this post exactly what marriage is, and although I have written on this blog much about marriage, I have yet to tell what it is, and for those of you who have read my previous writings, don’t think you know what I teach from my previous writings, because these teachings are not there, but are yet to be published…)

Anyway, Section 1 restores this right and power and authority, which was had from the very beginning.  Another thing it restores is the power of manusManus existed from the beginning and was the only form of marriage practiced by man from the start.  Manus was the form given to men by God.  Later on, a new form, developed by man, came forth, which was marriage without manus.  As man had a right to marriage, he also had a right to the form of marriage he chose, therefore with or without manus were equally valid forms of marriage.  Up until quite recently, almost all marriage was assumed to be with manus, but there has been a radical shift in the laws and in the interpretations of the judges, and now all marriage is assumed to be without manus.  The LDS temple ceremony, however, is manus marriage, keeping the ancient form.  Thus, there is a huge contradiction, because the temple sealing is with manus but the civil portion of the ceremony is considered to be without manus.

Also anciently, all marriage was without a vow*, and all marriage was considered to be without a vow.  Taking a wife without a vow was the form of marriage God gave to man at the beginning, but, as man had a right, he later added a form of marriage with a vow.  When a man takes a wife with a vow, he vows to [fill in the blank].  When a man takes a wife without a vow, he doesn’t promise a thing.  At some point in history, marriage with vows became the norm and every marriage was considered, and still is, to be entered into with a vow (by the man).  Again, the LDS temple ceremony keeps the ancient form of marriage, and thus all temple marriage sealings are entered into by the man without a vow, yet the civil law considers that marriage as made with a vow (of monogamy, specifically) anyway.

The disharmony between the LDS temple ceremony and the civil law comes because the LDS Church requires a marriage license from the State before they will marry or seal people in the temple.  The marriage license is marriage by privilege, without manus and with an (assumed and unstated) vow (of monogamy).

The NAC, then, restores the right to marry, as well as the ancient forms of with manus and without a vow, but also keeps the more recent forms of without manus and with a vow.  In other words, men are given their full rights in marriage, and can decide what is best for them, or which form of marriage is best for them to enter into.  Currently, men do not have such a choice, but must choose only one form: without manus and with a vow.

(* The Nephites, although commanded by God not to take more than one wife, did not marry with a vow.  Those Nephites who engaged in polygamy broke God’s commandment, but did not commit adultery.)

No marriage license

The NAC forbids marriage licenses for marriage by right.  Notice that I wrote “marriage by right.”  The NAC does not prohibit “marriage by privilege.”  A marriage license is a marriage privilege, granted by the State.  It gives one permission to do something that otherwise would be illegal to do.  It can be granted and it can be revoked.  If a man wants to marry by privilege, he may still do so under the NAC, by paying the State some money and getting a marriage license.  But if he wants to marry by right, he needs no permission or license from any entity.  Perhaps you might wonder, “Why in the world would a man choose to marry by privilege if he can marry by right?”  Well, if the woman he wants to marry refuses to marry him unless he gets a marriage license (marriage by privilege) and he really wants this woman, he might do that.  Marriage by privilege, of course, means that you marry without manus and with a vow, and also that the State is the arbitrator in the case of divorce, etc.  So, the NAC will still allow marriage licenses.

The State certifies

Another restoration from the very beginning is the role of the State as certifying agent.  That’s right, in the very beginning, according to my understanding, the man entered into a marriage with manus and without a vow and whatever government he was under acknowledged his marriage as validly performed under his own authority.  The governments of the world, in the ancient world, were servants of the men in this regard.  They recognized that all men had power and authority in and of themselves from the very beginning to marry wives and recognized all such marriages as marriages.  They never did as States do today and refused to recognize this or that marriage because there was no marriage license.  Such nonsense, committed by the governments of today, is a usurpation of masculine authority, which has occurred over time until the States of today now totally control marriage and man has no more power or authority over it.

The NAC, then, restores these ancient orders by taking the usurped masculine powers from the State and giving it back to men.  The effect of this can only be that marriage will increase among men again, for many men are avoiding marriage because it is no longer beneficial to them.  It has become a raw deal, one in which the risks out way the benefits.  Once the NAC is installed, marriage will be a benefit and blessing to men again, and they will begin to marry again in droves, choosing whichever form they deem best for them.

Same-sex marriage (SSM)

What of same-sex marriage?  Well, the NAC doesn’t address same-sex marriage, except for this part:

Article X. Section 5.

As the decisions of the supreme court of the former national government were made according to that law which was the United States Constitution and its treaties, which law is no longer binding upon the States, nor upon the people thereof, neither shall such decisions be binding upon any of the States, nor upon their people.

Now, under the USC, which doesn’t mention marriage, at all, the Supreme Court was able to determine that the U.S. Constitution did not allow plural marriages.  Under the USC, which doesn’t mention marriage, at all, the Supreme Court was able to determine that the U.S. Constitution allows a man and another man, or a woman and another woman, to be married.  The U.S. Constitution, which doesn’t mention marriage, at all, apparently still has much to say about which forms of marriage it permits, and which it doesn’t, without ever using the words “marry” or “marriage.”  The USC, then, is a magical document with magical powers beyond my comprehension.  But thank goodness the Supreme Court can comprehend such magical things!  Perhaps it is because they themselves are wizards performing some sort of magic?

The NAC, on the other hand, is not magical.  It takes a simplified approach.  It encodes heterosexual marriage as a right of man and does not seek to restrict that right in any way.  It also does not mention anything other than marriage by right.  Therefore, under the NAC, States are still free to permit SSM (by issuing a marriage license), or ban it altogether (by refusing to issue a marriage license); free to permit polygamy (by issuing a marriage license) or ban it (by refusing to issue a marriage license).  But they are not free to restrict in any way man’s right to heterosexual marriage and are required to recognize such marriages, as governments did anciently.

So, the recent decision of the Supreme Court on SSM is null and void under the NAC, meaning that SSM will become a State’s matter, each State deciding whether they will permit (license) SSM or not.

Divorce under the NAC

The NAC changes the game for divorce, too, at least for manus marriages:

Article III. Section 3.

No State shall have power to divorce men who exercise their right to marry wives with manus, from their wives, nor shall the right and power of such men to issue a writ of divorcement, on their own authority, be abridged or regulated in any way, and such writs shall be binding and valid and final and unalterable decrees in the eyes of the law, so that the law shall view a wife so divorced as loosed from the law of her husband.

This is yet another restoration, for anciently there was no power (outside of the man himself) to divorce a man who married with manus, from his wife.  Only he (the man) had power to divorce, using the same power he used to marry: his own.  Thus, the power to divorce wives was always in men from the beginning.  When Moses allowed men to issue bills of divorcement, he did not confer any more authority than men already had.  He just gave them divine permission to use their rights, power and authority in this way.

Now, under the USC, there is an unfavorable environment for men to marry.  Why?  Because if they marry by privilege with a marriage license, without manus and with a vow, and the marriage goes south, they can lose their house, their money, their kids and even their liberty (jail time).  The risks far out way the benefits of current marriage practices under the USC and many men are walking away.  The NAC, though, creates a favorable environment for men to marry, because they not only get to set all the terms of the marriage from the get-go, as men did anciently, but also all the terms of the divorce, even controlling whether a divorce can happen or not.  This minimizes, or altogether eliminates, risk and gives men who marry by right (with manus) only benefits.  Men will not walk away from such marriage, but will rush into it, reversing all current marriage and divorce trends.  New marriage statistics will shoot sky-high and divorce statistics will become nearly non-existent, under the NAC.

State divorces still can happen

The NAC doesn’t speak on other forms of divorce.  A man is still free to marry by privilege and go through the courts for a divorce and lose everything.  The NAC doesn’t say you can’t sell yourself to the State and then get dragged through the mud by a wife wanting a divorce.  Some men are masochists by nature, so the NAC leaves intact all these other forms and merely gives men more choices, while still allowing the masochists their fun.

Conferral of citizenship by manus

Article XII. Section 2.

Men who are natural-born citizens of any State, that marry wives by right, with manus, shall have power to confer naturalized citizenship upon their wives, provided a wife first passes an English proficiency test and enters into a covenant to obey, honor and sustain the laws of the State of which her husband is a resident, both of which shall be administered by the State of which her husband is a resident; and such men shall naturalize their wives by issuing a writ of citizenship, which writ shall be certified by the State of which her husband is a resident, which certified writ shall be binding and valid in the eyes of the law.

This also is a restoration, for this power existed in olden days and in ancient times.  Thus the NAC returns these stolen powers and rights back to the men and codifies them.  All of these things, taken together, rearrange the centers of power found in the national and State governments, creating a new center of power and jurisdiction, held by men, which really isn’t a new jurisdiction, but an old jurisdiction, for men always held these rights and powers and jurisdictions, in ancient times and from the beginning.

This stuff is in the NAC because I wrote it with a view of the restoration of all things.  It may not seem readily apparent just how important these things are, but their effect will be huge in both shackling the State, re-empowering the people and in furthering the restoration of all things.

Conclusion

The marriage sections of the NAC, I suppose, will be controversial, but they need not be, for they do not force change in current practices, merely adding ancient practices to the modern ones, giving people many more options.  Feel free to disagree on any point mentioned in this post.  Bring your strongest reasons against the NAC and let’s have an open debate.  And for those who like the NAC and want to install it as the Supreme Law of the land, here is my advice and prediction (and also see this comment, and this comment and this comment) :

A continual strategy of debate will install the NAC in this country and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong. I say that Americans will jump at the chance to debate the NAC and to show that the Constitution is better, but, according to the rules of the debate, they will have to read the NAC first, and once read, they will be hard pressed to defend the Constitution. Thus, everyone who hears, or watches, or reads, or participates in, a NAC debate, will become convinced that the NAC is what this country needs.

To read the other parts of this series, click any of these links:

Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5,

Part 6, Part 7, Part 8, Part 9, Part 10,

Part 11, Part 12, Part 13.

Also see: The New Articles of Confederation (NAC) and The Right to Abolish, Revert and Replace Amendment.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Repost of “The Mormon Priestess”


The following post is simply reposted to the LDS Anarchy blog from Feminist Mormon Housewives [originally authored by Elisothel].

*note*It has been reblogged onto this site with permission from the author

The original source = The Mormon Priestess

[use “MormonPriestess” as the password]. 

In my opinion, the author’s expositions are based on suppositions that I do not share.  In other words, I don’t think she is pointing out sufficiently interesting doctrinal points or where she is pointing out interesting points, the conclusion she draws from them are not sound.  So this post is now here so that anyone who is interested may pick it apart according to whatever standards they hold, without the kind of censor one would get from fMh.

The rituals and liturgy of the LDS temple reflect a very consistent internal logic of gender theology.  This essay is my attempt to outline that internal logic, especially with an eye toward the temple ceremony’s messages to women about their identity and spiritual condition.

Women operate as priestesses to God in temple initiatory rituals, which were also used as the template for female-conducted healing and blessing rituals in the early restored church.  Just as the inititiatory ritual blesses parts of the body, pioneer priestesses blessed the body parts of the expectant mother, and healed the body parts of the ill.  Women also operate as priestesses to God when administering in the True Order of Prayer at an altar in the temple.

I suspect that women may start to see themselves more as priesthood actors, which is a wonderful thing.  Elder Oaks explained temple priestesshood as being Melchizedek priesthood power that women utilize under the keys of the temple president.  If only men hold keys and offices, but both men and women can use priesthood power, it is possible that, should the leaders decide it,  women’s exercise of their power in the church could recapture the female priestess practices of the early Restoration era, and perhaps even extend to other areas.

This model of women using priesthood is compelling, and I am so grateful that women and men will be able to speak of it openly going forward, but it is overshadowed by another narrative. The word priestess is actually part of the formal, liturgical temple vocabulary, but it does not denote a woman who is using godly power under the direction of a temple president.  In the temple, woman are promised that they will become “Priestesses unto their Husbands.” Women pledge spiritual allegiance to a husband who will someday be exalted as a god like Heavenly Father, whereupon the wife’s power, her priesthood, will come through the exalted husband.  In this model, the woman is eternally dependent on her husband for a connection to God the Father.

Priestesshood In the Female Initiatory: Priestesses to Elohim and to Husband

The initiatory process undertakes a symbolic cleansing, annointing, and dressing of the body.  Since the initiatory is body-centric, and since men and women have different bodies, male temple workers administer only to men, and female temple workers must administer to women.

The washing is reminiscent of baptism, absolving the initiate of sin and promising purification.  The body is then anointed to receive future blessings.  A symbolic adornment of ritual clothing called the “garment of the holy priesthood” is performed, and the clothing declared “authorized”.  Female temple workers declare authority to enact the initiatory rituals:

“Sister _______, having authority, I wash you preparatory to your receiving your anointings, and whereas you have obeyed the principles of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with a true and honest heart, and have been faithful in keeping your covenants, your sins are forgiven and you are clean every whit.”

“Sister _________, having authority, I pour this holy anointing oil upon your head [for and in behalf of _________, who is dead] and anoint you preparatory to your becoming a queen and a priestess unto your husband, hereafter to rule and reign with him in the house of Israel forever.”  

“Sister_______, having authority, I place this garment upon you, which you must wear throughout your life.  It represents the garment given to Adam when he was found naked in the garden of Eden and is called the garment of the holy priesthood.”

(Since 2005, the wording has changed to “under proper authority the garment placed upon you is now authorized and is to be worn throughout your life…”  This wording reflects the new practice of initiates already wearing the garment instead of it being presented to them. The wording “under proper authority” is also used by the men when they perform this ceremony.)

The garment each patron is given is a piece of ritual priesthood clothing.  This priesthood raiment is further developed through the endowment ritual in the shoes, robes, headwear, and other accouterments for both men and women.  Women are clothed in priesthood robes “preparatory to officiating in the ordinances of the Melchizedek Priesthood.”

Certainly, a female temple worker administering initiatories is administering ordinances….however, though the female temple worker is acting as a priestess for God when administering the ordinances, she declares that each patron’s destiny is to become  a priestess not to God, but to her husband.

Priestesshood In the Endowment

The temple ceremonies mention priestesshood only three times.  As discussed above, in the initiatory ordinance a woman is anointed to become “a priestess unto your husband.”  The endowment ritual commences with introductory wording that bridges the initiatory ordinance with the upcoming endowment:

“Brethren, you have been washed and pronounced clean, or that through your faithfulness you may become clean, from the blood and sins of this generation. You have been anointed to become hereafter kings and priests unto the most high God, to rule and reign in the house of Israel forever. Sisters, you have been washed and anointed to become hereafter queens and priestesses to your husbands. Brethren and sisters, if you are true and faithful, the day will come when you will be chosen, called up, and anointed kings and queens, priests and priestesses, whereas you are now anointed only to become such. The realization of these blessings depends upon your faithfulness.”

Modern Mormon women are not instructed on the meaning of the label “priestess unto your husband” or “queens” beyond their own personal interpretation.  No official definition is offered in modern General Conference talks, Church manuals, Relief Society classes, or official proclamations, nor is there any formal instruction for women to understand how to use their priesthood power, unless they are called as a temple worker.

The only venue that DOES explain “priestess unto your husband” is the temple itself. The meaning of the phrase is communicated over and over again in the temple rites, and we often miss it because both men and women see what they want to see – that they are all participating in the endowment ritual from Adam’s perspective.   Women are used to this.  We do, after all, largely use the language of male spirituality at church and as a community (we are to “become like Heavenly Father” even though this is literally impossible for a woman).  It is no wonder that women often seem to interpret their temple journey as a parallel version of Adam’s journey, with expectations of parallel blessings and spiritual status.

The Law of Obedience

Usually when Mormons discuss the status of women in the temple, they focus on the Law of Obedience. Before the changes to the temple ceremony in 1990, Eve said the following:

“Adam, I now covenant to obey your law as you obey our Father.”

And the female participants in the ceremony were instructed:

We will put the sisters under covenant to obey the law of their husbands.“You and each of you solemnly covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar that you will each observe and keep the law of your husband and abide by his counsel in righteousness.”

After the changes to the temple ceremony introduced in 1990, Eve said:

Adam, I now covenant to obey the law of the Lord, and to hearken to your counsel as you hearken unto Father.

And the female participants in the ceremony were instructed:

We will put each sister under covenant to obey the law of the Lord, and to hearken to the counsel of her husband, as her husband hearkens unto the counsel of the Father. You and each of you solemnly covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar that you will each observe and keep the law of the Lord, and hearken to the counsel of your husband as he hearkens to the counsel of the Father.

This change of “obey” to “hearken”, and the omitting of “your (the husband’s) law in the Lord” to “law of the Lord” were considered the significant changes that possibly reflected a more equitable position of women in the gospel.

However, regardless of the nature of the verb in this vow, the relationship between Adam and Eve was completely unaltered:  in both cases Eve covenants to Adam, and not to God.  Both Adam and Eve refer to Elohim as “Father” before they are called to covenant, but when called to covenant, Adam says his covenant to “Elohim”.  Nowhere in the temple endowment does Eve say God’s name (though she does say Lucifer’s name), including when she covenants.  The single time she portrays a covenant relationship, she utters Adam’s name.

The Two Endowments

The old version of the endowment contained the following paragraph, which has been removed from the current transcript:

ELOHIM: Eve, because thou hast hearkened to the voice of Satan, and hast partaken of the forbidden fruit, and given unto Adam, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception. In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children; nevertheless, thou mayest be preserved in childbearing. Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee in righteousness.

This paragraph establishes the curse of Eve as an eternal God-Man-Woman hierarchy.  Though the above quote was omitted from the current version of the endowment, this hierarchy is repeated and made clear in the Law Of Obedience, where God instructs how Eve is to obtain her salvation:

Inasmuch as Eve was the first to eat of the forbidden fruit, if she will covenant that from this time forth she will obey the law of the Lord and will hearken unto your counsel as you hearken unto mine, and if you will covenant that from this time forth you will obey the law of Elohim, we will give unto you the law of obedience and sacrifice, and we will provide a Savior for you, whereby you may come back into our presence and with us partake of eternal life and exaltation.

EVE: Adam, I now covenant to obey the law of the Lord, and to hearken to your counsel as you hearken unto Father.

ADAM: Elohim, I now covenant with thee that from this time forth I will obey thy law and keep thy commandments.

God stipulates that if Eve covenants with Adam, and Adam covenants with God, then a savior will be provided for them.  That is, Adam and Eve’s redemption is contingent upon the pattern established in this exchange, wherein Eve covenants to Adam and Adam covenants to God.

This moment creates a pattern that is binding on the remainder of the ceremony.  It is the only moment where the Adam and Eve actors speak their covenants. Once Adam’s covenant to Elohim is spoken, the patrons become participants instead of observers when, immediately following the actors’ exchange of covenants, the audience makes three successive covenants for themselves: the Law of Obedience (to mimic Adam and Eve), the Law of Sacrifice, and the covenant not to reveal the first token, name, and sign.  As soon as the patrons mimic the law of obedience, they take the place of Adam and Eve for the rest of the ceremony and are represented by a witness couple at the altar.

The moment the patron makes the Covenant of Obedience, that person declares his/her God.  The One that a person ultimately obeys is the One the person ultimately worships.  Adam declares Elohim, but Eve declares Adam because Elohim told her that her salvation depended on her doing so.  At no time in the temple does Eve explicitly covenant to Elohim.  Adam is established as her master.  I posit this is true for every covenant Eve makes.

A female temple patron usually understands that she goes to the temple to make covenants with God (again, we adopt the language of the male spiritual experience), but she does not.  Female patrons make covenants to the future exalted husband.  Her future exalted husband will replace her Father as her god.  This transaction starts with the husband learning the wife’s name (a symbol of stewardship, like Adam naming Eve),  continues through the husband/wife ceremony at the veil, reaches into the sealing ceremony where the wife gives herself to the husband and the husband receives her (but does not give himself), and will progress through every successive covenant they make (second anointing, god resurrecting a man but husband resurrecting the wife, etc).

During the endowment, every covenant made after the Law of Obedience follows this wording:

“You and each of you solemnly covenant and promise before God, angels, and these witnesses at this altar that you will each observe and keep/observe the law of (obedience/sacrifice/the gospel/chastity/consecration)…”

or:

“I, _______, covenant before God, angels, and these witnesses, that I will never reveal the (first/second) token of the (Aaronic/Melchizedek) priesthood, with its accompanying name and sign.”

In both phrasings for all remaining covenants, patrons covenant before witnesses, but the phrasing does not say to whom.  The whom is established with the first covenant: Elohim receives covenants for Adam, Adam receives them for Eve.  As the ceremony continues, Adam will administer ordinances  to Eve, not just receive her covenants, mimicking how God is administering to Adam.

We don’t readily see this because in the physical space of our view, the witness couple representing Adam and Eve are at the same altar with Elohim presiding, so it looks like both the man and woman covenant to Him and receive from Him.  However, the male proxy for Elohim only gives tokens to Adam. Also, in modern temples, it is temple workers who administer tokens to patrons so when a female temple worker gives tokens the relationship is not obvious.  But in a live session, Elohim gives tokens to Adam over the altar, Adam gives them to Eve, then Adam and Eve give them to the patrons.  All tokens women get are through their husbands, not from God.

This hierarchy of tokens is reinforced in the ceremony at the veil where Elohim accepts the husband’s tokens as his Lord, and the husband accepts the wife’s tokens as her Lord.

Two different endowments are going on, as if there are two different temples in the same room – one for men and one for women – where each individual views not just his/her own endowment, but also the parallel but distinctly different endowment of the opposite sex.  The endowment creates two individuals of different spiritual status, and acts out the relationship between the two in the veil ceremony, names, tokens, and marriage rites.

Woman, therefore, cannot have priesthood in this mortal life, because God only administers to men.  A woman’s power comes not from God the Father but instead directly through the husbandgod’s exaltation.  In mortality, the husband is not yet divine, so the woman is not yet a priestess.  Once he is exalted (calling and election made sure, which can happen after death or during the second anointing), the woman inherits her priestesshood and she can administer to her husbandgod with power.

The Two Exaltations

The dual-endowment insight suggests two different exaltations. If a woman’s deity is her husband, and she provides his eternal increase (children), and she is his priestess, this means she is not, herself, a deity. A priest and a deity have a specific relationship – one worships the other. The deity loves and upholds covenants to the priest, but the priest is not the deity’s peer.

Even when a Mormon man, who is a priest to Elohim, is exalted, this does not make him the peer to Elohim.  Elohim remains the exalted man’s god, or his Patriarch, forever.  An exalted man remains a priest to Elohim and worships Him. Every increase the exalted man gains is also an increase to Elohim, so man will never catch up to or surpass Elohim – Elohim is that man’s god forever.  Mormonism proclaims that as sons of God all men can also become gods, and this implies there are many gods…but a man does not worship them all, just the god who covenants with and exalts him.

If a woman could be  priestess unto God, she could be exalted by Elohim and unto Elohim, and become a goddess.  But she is a priestess to her husband in her afterlife, not to Elohim. Ultimately therefore, I believe the temple establishes that it is the man who has the direct access to Godly power and apotheosis, and woman has as her promise access to her husbandgod’s power (priestesshood) but NOT, under this definition, access to apotheosis.  She shall be exalted but not become a goddess.  Thus we do not worship her, pray to her, or entreat her for favor.  She is not a source of divine power to the human family, but a source of power to her divine husband.  She is a “Mother in Heaven” but not a “Heavenly Mother.”  The man alone will become a Heavenly Father, a deity, and a deity can have many, many priests (sons) and priestesses (wives).

Church leaders seem divided on the issue of whether or not women are exalted into goddesshood.  Joseph Smith may have believed they were, as is reflected in D&C 132:20:

“Then shall be gods, because they have no end;  therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them.  Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.”  (The “they” refers to a married couple, as established in verse 19.)

When Bruce R. McConkie interpreted this scripture to mean that women would be goddesses in his famous book Mormon Doctrine, Marion G. Romney – who was appointed By President McKay to identify errors in the book – listed “women to be gods” as one of those errors.

Certainly there are many women these days who believe that female exaltation means goddesshood – but few believe that a goddess is to be prayed to, worshiped, considered a source of scripture or priestesshood, or to operate in most other capacities reflective of the Mormon idea of “godhood.”  President Hinckley expressly forbade praying to Heavenly Mother in his famous 60 Minutes broadcast.  So what is the Mormon notion of female exaltation?  This is still a question.  Our most developed doctrine of female afterlife remains polygamy.

Nor does the temple shed much light on the nature of eternal womanhood.  Often women are told that men have priesthood and women have motherhood.  Elder’s Oak’s talk alluded to the power of creating life as something only women can do.  However, the power to create life depends on a mother and a father (indeed, this is the basis for the Church’s arguments against gay marriage), so men are also endowed with the power to create life.  To complicate things, in the temple, the creative triad of Elohim, Jehovah, and Michael create life without women being present at all.  Elohim and Jehovah create Michael, not Elohim and a Mother in Heaven.  If motherhood/creation is a woman’s endowment of power, where is that exercised in the primal account of creation?  It is not mentioned.  Not only that, but Elohim and Jehovah also create Eve.  And they create Eve FROM Adam.  No woman was used to create man, or woman, and in fact according to the account, woman was created FROM, BY and FOR man.  Priesthood, it seems, can create life without a female input, so how am I supposed to take the argument that motherhood is a compliment to priesthood seriously?  If indeed, a mother were instrumental in the creation of Adam and Eve, why isn’t she shown in the temple?  Would she be a goddess if she were?

Some may suggest that men and women partake of the endowment together so that each knows their place in the relationship.  The woman can know that her priestesshood to husbandgod will follow the pattern of her husband’s priesthood to Fathergod.  With this knowledge she can assist her husband (as his helpmeet) to his godhood whereby she will inherit his power as his priestess. To be the husbandgod’s priestess, I believe, means to provide progeny (eternal increase). Consider again the paragraph omitted from the pre-1990 ceremony:

“ELOHIM: Eve, because thou hast hearkened to the voice of Satan, and hast partaken of the forbidden fruit, and given unto Adam, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception. In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children; nevertheless, thou mayest be preserved in childbearing. Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee in righteousness.”

To be “preserved in childbearing” is often interpreted to mean that a woman’s mortal life will not be lost during the childbirth process.  However, women do die in childbirth, and there are many women/girls who never experience giving birth at all.  If this statement by God were to apply to every women, it would have to be talking about birth/childbearing in an eternal sense – the begetting of spirit children with her exalted husband.  If we interpret the above paragraph to be discussing woman’s childbearing of spirits, then “thou mayest be preserved in childbearing” is talking about how childbearing preserves a woman’s own eternal (not mortal) life.  That is, her access to salvation/preservation, despite her curse of spiritual death (eternal separation from God), is to bear children for her husbandgod.

She disobeyed God the Father, and fell from Him, so to ensure her access to salvation, God provided woman a husbandgod, with whom she can also be a creator.  She is a creator (mother), and a kindombuilder (queen), but she does not wield ultimate authority (goddesshood) over those creations.  Her authority is limited to her ability to directly administer power under her husband.  Hence we continue to learn that the man “presides” because ultimately that is the order of things.

In this model the family is central to the gospel because the family is the kingdom that each couple seeks to build in their exaltation.  Eve’s fall (spiritual death and subsequent disqualification for priesthood) is healed not through Jesus, but through her husband’s exaltation because he is the pathway to God the Father and thus the pathway to overcome spiritual death/separation from God.

Because of Jesus and the atonement woman can be resurrected (live forever) and sanctified (cleansed from sin), but it is through the husband that she is exalted (receives power and eternal increase).  It is little wonder that wifehood and motherhood are women’s highest identities, roles, and attainments in Mormonism, since according to the temple they are the bases of female salvation.

The Two Falls (Adam’s Fall, Eve’s Curse)

In the temple version of the Garden of Eden account, the primary Fall that takes place is Eve’s while Adam remains in good standing with God.  Eve retains a curse – not to suffer during the childbirth process – but to be demoted away from direct access to God the Father, a condition that Mormons define as “spiritual death”.  The temple teaches that Eve’s fall is qualitatively different from Adam’s, and that thus her journey back to God is also different from Adam’s, requiring an eternal submission to her husband as her god.

Both Adam and Eve transgressed, yet the temple reflects that Adam’s redemption is full and allows him to become a priest to Elohim and a god in his own right, so why would Eve have to covenant to Adam and not get to covenant with Elohim, also receiving a full restoration of her relationship with Elohim?

I suggest that Eve’s “curse” was a “fall”  in that she eternally lost her potential to be a priestess to Elohim.  Her only access to exaltation is to be a priestess to another god to whom she is completely devoted body and soul, and to whom she will exercise obedience (unlike her disobedience to Elohim).  For woman, the husbandgod replaces the Fathergod.

In the temple account, Eve’s sins were to listen to Satan, and to remove Adam’s agency to keep both of God’s commandments.  Adam’s only sin was to listen to Eve, and in doing so he actually was doing mankind a favor.  The transgressions are qualitatively different.  To mend all things, Adam must not listen to Eve again but instead, she must obey him in order to set right her tragic series of events.

In the omitted text, one of Eve’s sins is listed:

ELOHIM:  Eve, because thou has hearkened to the voice of Satan….

And later, in text that is still in the ceremony:

ELOHIM:  Inasmuch as Eve was the first to eat of the forbidden fruit, if she will covenant that from this time forth that she will obey….

Both Adam and Eve had to keep both commandments (don’t eat of the tree of knowledge, multiply and replenish the earth), so as soon as Eve broke one, she removed Adam’s ability to keep both commandments even though he had done nothing wrong.  That is, her act interfered with Adam’s free agency.  After she had sinned by partaking of knowledge, Adam could either keep the fruit commandment and lose all progeny by remaining alone in Eden, or else he could break the fruit commandment but still be able to gain progeny.  Adam is put in a position where he has HAS to break a commandment, so he chooses the one that he perceives to be the most important – that is, he chose progeny (“I will partake, that man may be”).  In this context, his act was valiant.  Adam was still punished for his transgression to eat the fruit and to listen to Eve (his penalty was to die /gain mortality and be ejected from the garden) – but unlike Eve, he did NOT remove agency from another or listen to Lucifer (in fact, earlier in the ceremony he rejects Lucifer), so Adam did not lose his potential to gain priesthood unto God.

In this view, Eve’s sin was qualitatively different from Adam’s, and the temple suggests that her act was one that invited spiritual death that could only be overcome by eternally submitting to Adam’s agency, the very agency which she had wounded in Eden.  This is the temple narrative for why women must submit to men and not have direct access to God.

Our modern discourse about Eve does not reflect the temple’s perspective.  In modern rhetoric she is cast as a hero:

“Eve set the pattern. In addition to bearing children, she mothered all of mankind when she made the most courageous decision any woman has ever made and with Adam opened the way for us to progress. She set an example of womanhood for men to respect and women to follow, modeling the characteristics with which we as women have been endowed: heroic faith, a keen sensitivity to the Spirit, an abhorrence of evil, and complete selflessness. Like the Savior, “who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,” Eve, for the joy of helping initiate the human family, endured the Fall. She loved us enough to help lead us.”  (Sherri Dew, Ensign, Nov 2001)

Elder Oaks has put forth some of the most interesting doctrine of Eve, when he discussed the Fall at length in another landmark General Conference address, the Great Plan of Happiness, in 1993:

“It was Eve who first transgressed the limits of Eden in order to initiate the conditions of mortality. Her act, whatever its nature, was formally a transgression but eternally a glorious necessity to open the doorway toward eternal life. Adam showed his wisdom by doing the same. And thus Eve and “Adam fell that men might be”.

Some Christians condemn Eve for her act, concluding that she and her daughters are somehow flawed by it. Not the Latter-day Saints! Informed by revelation, we celebrate Eve’s act and honor her wisdom and courage in the great episode called the Fall.   Joseph Smith taught that it was not a “sin,” because God had decreed it. Brigham Young declared, “We should never blame Mother Eve, not the least.” Elder Joseph Fielding Smith said: “I never speak of the part Eve took in this fall as a sin, nor do I accuse Adam of a sin. … This was a transgression of the law, but not a sin … for it was something that Adam and Eve had to do!” 

I see this as a marker of great progress and promise.  Perhaps the temple ceremony will be changed to reflect Mother in Heaven’s creative capacity, as well as Eve’s heroism…instead of ignoring one and using the other as a reason to put all women under men’s presiding power.  The temple has so much promise to exalt women! We seem to be heading in the right direction.

However, the current temple ceremony indeed teaches us that Eve fell and must submit to be reclaimed.  Man may not be punished for Adam’s transgression, but women are still punished for Eve’s.  If women are not punished for Eve’s transgression, why the need to submit to a husbandgod?  If Eve’s action was heroic, courageous, and necessary, why is Eve not commended for her sacrifice and woman anointed a priestess to Elohim?

The obvious problem with the temple portrayal of Eve’s curse and necessary submission to Adam is that the atonement of Christ should be powerful enough to overcome anything Eve did.  Why couldn’t Eve repent to fully regain her access to Elohim without a husband intercessor?  The temple doctrine suggests that woman is paying for Eve’s sin instead of letting the Savior atone for it.  Why would Christ not be her intercessor, as Christ is intercessor for Adam himself, by which she could then become a priestess to Elohim?  I believe this is the great conundrum of how women are portrayed in the temple narrative: it limits and contradicts the power of atonement.

The Two Endowment Rituals Enshrined in More Than Words

The analogy, Man is priest to Fathergod  as Woman is priestess to Husbandgod permeates the temple through ritual acts.  I could go into far more detail about how tokens, names, the headwear, the veil ceremony, the sealing ceremony, and even the second anointing reflect the relationship of God/Man/Woman and Husband acting as god to the wife.

In any case, the point is that just by virtue of being a woman, I cannot covenant to, access, or return to my Fathergod without a husband.  If I can use priesthood power under a man, great.  But how can we name a woman equal, who cannot receive a token from the Father’s hand, who cannot receive a priestesshood from Him, who is dependent upon her husband to heal her spiritual death, all because of a sin she did not herself commit?

To call a woman equal under the terms Elder Oaks described in conference would be to ordain her a priestess to Elohim, which priestesshood she practices, like her brothers, under the keys of an authorized leader.

This is not simply a question of what is a woman’s power – it is a question of who is a woman’s god, and how does a woman heal her breach with the Father, and why isn’t the atonement enough to make her worthy of priesthood?  It is a question of what is a woman’s eternal inheritance, and the nature of her future divinity.

I cannot expect the temple to change without a completely innovative, foundational shift in Mormon thought. Of course, the gospel has built-in mechanisms for change in its construct of ongoing revelation.  I do hope women start see themselves as agents of priesthood power, and are further introduced into new ways of ministering and administering in the Kingdom.  But we need more.  Our spirits shrivel in the darkness.  If this Restoration is ongoing, please, let us heal the remainder of the Great Apostasy.

Before the Restoration, our Church fathers longed for their divine Father, yearned for details of their eternal identity, and experienced a righteous desire for direct divine access without a priest standing between them and their God.  Their prayers were answered and we laud them as heroes.

Those of us who are women longing for our divine mothers, who yearn for details of our eternal identity, and who experience a righteous desire for direct divine access without a priest standing between us and our God, remain unanswered and patiently wait for the scorn from those who mock us to go away.

One day, I hope to teach my daughters that they can exercise their priestesshood power under a leader with keys.  I hope to watch them heal and bless.  I hope to teach them that Eve was a hero who sacrificed herself on behalf of humankind, and for them to learn this also when they attend the temple.  I hope they see their creative power of motherhood on display there.  I hope they meet a goddess there.  I hope to teach them that they covenant with God, and that He gives them tokens.  I hope I can witness a sealing ceremony where my daughter and her husband give and receive each other, and know each other’s names.  I hope each of my daughters knows that her identity in the universe is as a Daughter of God, not as wife of a Son of God.

For I know that to be true of myself.

I thank Elder Oaks for his bold words, and hope many more will be forthcoming about the nature of women wielding priesthood, and how we can expand our capacities.  I hope the Church leaders discern how much we Mormon women yearn for their leadership.  I hope they know there is real curiosity and real pain behind our questions.  There is so much more for we sisters to learn about ourselves.  I hope someday we get to show how much more powerfully we could build Zion, when trusted with a power and a chance.

A commandment to practice polygamy found in the New Testament


The following has been lifted from this page and was not written by me.  I thought it was interesting enough to put on this blog and allow people to comment on it.  I will insert the scriptures in block quotes for easy reading.

————————————–

 Polygamy Commanded of God in NT?

There absolutely is an example in the Bible, where God actually does command a situation of polygamy —in the New Testament, even.

1_Corinthians 7:10-11 & 27-28.

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:

11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

—–

27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.

28 But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless such shall have trouble in the flesh: but I spare you.

In 1 Corinthians 7, the Apostle Paul differentiates when he is making his own “recommendation” (in verses 6, 12, and 25)

6 But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment.

—–

12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

—–

25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.

and when he is expressing the “commandment of the Lord” (verses 10-11).

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:

11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.

Indeed, in verses 10-11, Paul clarifies that the instruction in those two verses is the “commandment of the Lord”. (It should therefore also be noted that the other areas in which he clarifies as being only his “recommendation” can NOT be used to otherwise and incorrectly assert that God Himself is creating some sin or doctrine. After all, Paul’s ultimate “recommendation” therein is celibacy!)

With that realized, it is clear for readers of the Bible that Paul makes it emphatically clear that verses 10-11 are different. Namely, verses 10-11, in the exact way in which they are actually written, are the “commandment of God”.

“And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.”  1 Corinthians 7:10-11.

Paul further specifies that that above “commandment of the Lord” was only addressed to believers-married-to-believers. In the next verses (i.e, 12-16), he clarifies that he is subsequently addressing believers-married-to-unbelievers, and that that subsequent instruction is not the Lord’s words, but his own again.

12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

Verses 10-11 show that, if a believer WIFE leaves her believer HUSBAND, the

  • believer WIFE is commanded of God to either:

remain unmarried, or
be reconciled back to her husband

  • believer HUSBAND is commanded of God to:

not put away any wife, and to
let any departed wife return back to him

The key point is that the HUSBAND is NOT given the same commandments of instruction. Only the WIFE is commanded to remain unmarried, but the HUSBAND is not given that commandment. He is commanded of God to let her be married to him, either way!

Accordingly, the HUSBAND is of course, still free to marry another wife. That fact is further proved by the later verses of 27-28.

“Art thou bound unto a wife?
seek not to be loosed.
Art thou loosed from a wife?
seek not a wife.
But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned;
and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned.”
1 Corinthians 7:27-28.

The Greek text of verse 27 is clearly only addressing married men –whether or not the wife has departed.

As such, the married man whose wife is still with him does not sin when he marries another wife (who is not another’s wife). And likewise, the married man, whose wife has departed from him, he also does not sin when he marries another wife (who is not another’s wife).

And herein comes the “commandment of the Lord”, of polygamy, as in the following situation.

A believer WIFE departs from her believer HUSBAND. She is commanded of God to remain unmarried, per verses 10-11. Her HUSBAND, however, then subsequently marries another wife (who is not another man’s wife). The HUSBAND and the new wife have not sinned, per verses 27-28. The departed WIFE then seeks to be reconciled back to her HUSBAND.

In that situation, verses 10-11 show the following instruction as the “commandment of the Lord”. The HUSBAND is commanded of God to let the departed wife be reconciled back to him. AND…. he is commanded of God to not put away a wife, including the new wife.

As such, verses 10-11 show that it is an outright “commandment of the Lord” of polygamy for the family in that situation.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 is indeed a Commandment of God — in the New Testament — that, when a previously-departed believer wife returns, her believer husband and his new (believer) wife (from verse 27-28) MUST let the previous wife be reconciled to her husband.

There truly IS a “commandment of the Lord” for a situation of polygamy to be found in the Bible —and it’s in the New Testament Scriptures, as well!

————————-

Here are the same verses as found in the Joseph Smith Translation, in case anyone wants to do a comparison:

Joseph Smith Translation

—–

6 And now what I speak is by permission, and not by commandment.

—–

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband;

11 But if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband; but let not the husband put away his wife.

—–

12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord; If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

13 And the woman which hath a husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.

15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases; but God hath called us to peace.

16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?

—–

25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord; yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.

—–

27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.

28 But if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless, such shall have trouble in the flesh. For I spare you not.

Okay, now for my own comments.  It seems to me that the crux of this argument lies in this statement of his:

The Greek text of verse 27 is clearly only addressing married men –whether or not the wife has departed.

I cannot speak about the Greek text (since I do not know Greek), but it seems to me that the context of the chapter, as translated into English, supports this view.  Namely, that the words “bondage,” “bound,”  and “loosed” do not refer to marriage and divorcement, but to marital togetherness and marital separation.  For example, (and I will use the JST for these scriptures), verse 5 says,

5 Depart ye not one from the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

This “departure” is not referring to marital divorce, but marital separation.  It cannot refer to divorce because two divorced people “coming together again” without getting married would be considered a sin, and Paul would never recommend that people engage in sin.

Next we get verses 10 and 11:

10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband;

11 But if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband; but let not the husband put away his wife.

Again, “depart” must mean marital separation, not marital divorce.  Also, “put away” only means marital separation, not marital divorce, for I happen to have done an in-depth study on this very expression years ago, and discovered this very thing.  For example, Moses commanded that after a wife was put away by her husband (which is marital separation) that he give her a writ of divorcement (which is the marital divorce.)

To continue, verses 12-13 state:

12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord; If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.

13 And the woman which hath a husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.

These verses can only be speaking of marital separation or marital union, in which the two are together.  They do not speak of divorce.

Next, there’s verse 15:

15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases; but God hath called us to peace.

“Departure” is used in this chapter to indicate marital separation, not marital divorce, and this verses equates “departure” with “not being under bondage,” or in other words, with being “loosed.”  Thus, departure=separation=loosed and reconciliation=togetherness=bound.  The chapter is consistent in its contextual meanings of these terms, so far.

Finally, verses 27 and 28 state:

27 Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife.

28 But if thou marry, thou hast not sinned; and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned. Nevertheless, such shall have trouble in the flesh. For I spare you not.

Since the context of the chapter reveals that bound means together and loosed means separated (not divorced), we could write verse 27 like this:

27 Art thou together with a wife? seek not to be separated. Art thou separated from a wife? seek not a wife.

With this meaning in mind, then verse 28 does, in fact, allow a man whose wife has separated from him to marry another woman without sinning.  Also, it allows a woman to marry an already married man whose first wife has separated from him, without committing sin.  And, per verses 10-11, if the first wife return to him in reconciliation, the man is commanded to receive her and not put her away.  Or, in other words, this does indeed make a New Testament commandment of the Lord to engage in polygamy.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

SOULMATES OR CELLMATES – TRADITIONAL MARRIAGE AS/IS SECRET COMBINATION


DECLARATION OF INTENT

“It is not my intention to persuade or dissuade anyone with regards to marriage.”

That was the way I planned to start this post. But I feel that it would be misleading to lead with that statement. To even think that I can persuade anyone or dissuade them from anything would be equally dishonest as attempting it. People will do what they will to do. People who use their divinely innate will-power to enable some people to lord over others are perhaps using a very low level of personally channeled will, but they are nonetheless using will-power to allow for a certain set of circumstances to prevail in the world. In many instances those who typically demonstrate weak will with regards to major and minor life decisions even share the same titles or labels as those who exercise will-power more firmly, more thoughtfully. They share space and time with others who identify as fighters for the cause of freedom. Many find it popular to designate themselves as Libertarian, or Anarchist these days. But the real difference can be seen in terms of consistency and target. There are those who make showy demonstrations of will-power on specifically ordered occasions where the greater group deems such displays appropriate. This occurs with a type of consistency in regularly scheduled events that serve as safety valves to preserve the status quo like political rallies, testimony meetings, etc. But our blinding hypocrisy shines through when vocalization impresses us with a false sense of accomplishment, and when physical action is directed from shallow grass-roots committees, only ever towards the wrong targets.

Why am I talking about the fight for freedom on global, national, and local levels after premising my remarks with an allusion to marriage? Because the illusion, or mirage that we call marriage has everything to do with the fight for freedom on a personal, local, regional, and global scale. So instead of leading with a negative declaration, let me rather state clearly what my intentions are in the affirmative. In the absence of will power, the most complete collection of virtues and talents is wholly worthless. So, I will, with my writing here, encourage men and women to use their personal supply of divine will-power consciously. That in doing this they may multiply and replenish their personal will, which is their personal portion of spirit, that they may build their spirit-bodies stronger and stronger still, till that increase develops a firm resolve within themselves to embody Christ qualities. These Christ qualities, like spiritual muscle, will enable personal resolve to transcend selfishness and crash through the partitioning walls that divide members of the human race like so many 6x6x6 office cubicles in this art-official reality. Only once this is accomplished can we say that we have lived up to our covenants to “always remember Him.” Cell walls becoming seen for the permeable membranes they truly are, it will be easy in that day for us to join hands and literally re-member the whole Body of Christ which is to rise up in power and great glory, free at last. Awaken. Remain vigilant. Nobody wants to miss out on the wedding celebration of the Bride Groom.

FAMILY HISTORY AND PRE-HISTORY, EXISTENCE AND PRE-EXISTENCE

family (n.)
Early 15c., “servants of a household,” from Latin familia “family servants, domestics collectively, the servants in a household,” thus also the estate and property, including members, of a household. Abstract noun formed from famulus “servant, slave,” which is of unknown origin. Derivatives of famulus include famula “serving woman, maid,” famulanter “in the manner of a servant,” famulitas “servitude,”

The family is said to be the fundamental unit of society. So, if society is disjointed, corrupt, oppressive, and iniquitous, is it then the fault of the family? What family? Which family? Who is this “Royal Family” who captivates the attention of the masses like Princess Die, or Prince WillIAm? What are we even talking about when we use this term “The Family”? The much used phrase has become as arbitrary and ironic by this point as the official titles of those who use it the most in their rhetoric today. Catholic Fathers are not fathers at all, in any real role, to anybody, not biologically nor spiritually speaking. But they find that people of the world listen when they speak about the sanctity of “The Family”. Political personas amplify their popularity through proclaiming themselves protectors of “Family Values”. And they amass precious photo-ops through tactics like “baby kissing.” The group which lead the LDS people are called “The Brethren”, but it is unclear how, and on what levels they relate to their followers. If we are all brothers and sisters in Christ then why the distinction, when did it begin to be made, and what does it mean for “The Family”? To their credit, “The Brethren” have tried to be as clear as possible, within the bounds that the Legislative Branch of the U.S. Government has set, about what they mean when they say, “The Family.”

In the first few lines of The Family: A Proclamation to the World, we have The Family being de-fined (stripped of its finery) and obliged to pledge allegiance to The World. The order of this New World of Earthly Existence is discussed in this document as if it were patterned after the Old World where we lived during our “pre-existent” stage with The Creator. At this point “The Brethren” evoke “The Father”. “In the pre-mortal realm,” they say, “…spirit sons and daughters knew and worshipped God as their Eternal Father…” It would seem that here we have found an unmistakably clear mental snapshot which would constitute a pre-mortal portrait of “The Family.” But, here come the selling points (or we should say sealing points). By the end of that same paragraph we are no longer talking about “The Family” but “families”. What on earth has happened to the Divine Family we enjoyed while enjoined in heaven? Did the War in Heaven culminate in a Big Bang, some kind of nuclear blast that destroyed the Divine Family and resulted in a supposedly more favorable dispersion of billions of nuclear families scattered about the universe? Obviously that scenario is not totally accurate. If it were then there would be no need to reorganize single individuals into traditional family units. Nuclear families existing eternally or even naturally as the result of some divine decree or pre-existential action, even an inadvertent one, would eliminate the search amongst males and females of planet Earth to find an adequate and appropriate helpmate. Can “traditional family values” be rightly called an extension or expansion of our family of origin in heaven above?

Notice there is no mention of a Heavenly Mother in the Proclamation to the World or anywhere else in Mormon or other Christian accounts of our pre-mortal existence for that matter. So we can not establish any doctrinal basis for the nuclear family as an eternal order from before the foundations of the world. There do exist sources which take one further back, and cover with more depth pre-mortal and pre-existential states, but they are not to be had inside correlated Christianity. The reality of what occurred before we were physically born into this world is more multifaceted in its complexity, yet much less complicated than the euphemistic reports we have received. It will become especially clear if we are willing to consider exactly where we end up upon withdrawing from the pre-mortal realm into physical existence, but immediately before being welcomed into the world. The conspicuous absence of a Mother in Heaven from Christian theology has a simple and even obvious explanation. But it is not one that most people are prepared to hear, understand, or accept. No, it does not mean that the early Mormon view of a polygynous paternal God is entirely accurate. But, neither does it support the monotheistic idea of a monogamous masculine deity, solar and solo, seated in his heavenly throne. Are we to picture Heavenly Father as a perfect but single parent? No, this would completely contradict statements made in the Proclamation let alone nature’s way. But neither need we assume that it was ever necessary to break up the Family of God into mini-monogamous models? Do such models accurately reflect that pre-mortal portrait of the Divine Family when gathered as one? Is it truthful to say that such flawed families as we have had here since primitive times up to the current day represent an unbroken continuation of that heavenly configuration which was abandoned at some point in our Earthly history?

The Pearl of Great Price gives descriptions of the Fall of Mankind as well as the rise of Secret Combinations. Secret Combinations are Secret Societies on their outermost and not so secret levels. But Secret Combinations have inner workings that are much more fundamental and therefore much more likely to be overlooked, remaining a secret to us. We make the common mistake of assuming ourselves innocent inasmuch as we are unaware of any affiliation or involvement on our part within a Secret Combination. As far as we know, we have not agreed to any binding contract which was authored by and tailors to the terms of Satan. Any time any two things are combined in any degree of unconsciousness a Secret Combination is formed. Once this happens, the only way to undo a Secret Combination is to expose it to the light of consciousness – to transform the Secret Combination into an Open Combination. The plight of the Nephites in the Book of Mormon (3 Nephi 4-7) shows us that we can imprison, convert, or kill every last member of a Secret Society and think we have uprooted the oath-bound bands once and for all, but as long as the basic structures of Church and State remain intact they will in a very short time begin to combine or conspire in the same secret manner to do evil. The secret is not one which is so much kept by so-called insiders of these types of groups; rather the secret is kept from the minds of any and all working within the machinations of Church and State. This is the case no matter how base or pure their intentions may appear. In fact, the more naïve one is, and the more convinced one is of his or her own personal righteousness based on public performance of civic and or religious duty, the more deceived and dangerous one becomes in the Secret Combination.

But all of that is only on the most superficial levels. The real roots of Secret Combinations go much deeper, almost as deep as the foundations of the Holy Family. In order to transmute the Secret Combinations that beset us into Open Combinations that liberate us, we will have to go through the same process of repentance that our First Parents went through to be redeemed from The Fall. It all began with Mom & Dad, and just as they “made all things known unto their sons and their daughters” (Moses 5:12), so we will have to look to Adam & Eve for some “spiritual sex education” if we want to know anything of the Plan of Redemption. In the books of the Pearl of Great Price, Adam and Eve are presented as both literal and figurative parents of the human race. When taken as a literal symbol we can clearly see how the DNA of Adam and of Eve is literally within us all – that the self expression of that DNA is made manifest in myriad ways. When understood on more subtle layers of symbolism we ironically see even less difference between our first parents and us, their offspring, and we come to consider ourselves, men and women, as Adams and Eves respectively. The word אדם ‘adam’ literally means ‘human’ in Hebrew. The name ‘Eve’ in Hebrew is pronounced – Havah, and written – חַוָּה. It derives from the Hebrew verb חוה meaning ‘to breathe’, and is related to the verb חיה (hayah) ‘to live’. It has been noted and discussed at length on this blog that ר֫וּחַ – ruach, the Hebrew word for ‘breath’ is translated as ‘spirit’ in Christian scripture, and that it also corresponds with the concept of a Heavenly Mother since it is always referred to in feminine form even when used with the definite article to mean Holy Spirit (הקודש ר֫וּחַ – ruach ha-kodesh), a vital member of the Godhead. When the Group God – Elohim (literally powers, or deities) creates Adam they then put into him the “breath of life.” He is now, as we would say, a living, breathing soul. The Dual Soul grouping of ‘Adam & Eve’ should be read in a semi-semitic mind set, from right to left to communicate the idea of Living Man.

Once we put these two names side by side the plan and purpose of our existence begins to reveal its self more fully to us. In a post on ldswomenofgod.com there is a brief but beautiful breakdown of the significance of each of the Hebrew letters in the names of Adam and Eve. But it lacks the maturity of a Kabbalistic expounding. So, not surprisingly Heavenly Mother is again missing in action. Since Adam & Eve’s offspring (aka Living Man) comes from the Father through the Mother of All Living, both man and woman share great responsibility. We will have to get a little more detailed than ldswomenofgod with this literal letter by letter analysis. The first letter in the name Adam is Aleph א. Aleph signifies the Father from whose presence we have left. Then comes Dalet ד, representing broken mankind, or a poor man. Dalet can also signify an open door flap on a tent and is the doorway through which we pass from immortality into physicality. Finally Mem ם, represents water. These last two letters in Adam’s name form the Hebrew word for blood, signifying the fact that, cut off from the Father, man becomes mortal. Reading in the Hebrew fashion from right to left then, Adam means: leaving the presence of God and all of mankind coming down to the earth to live as mortal beings. 2 Nephi 2:25 tells us that:

“Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.”

To “have joy” or to “delight in” when used intransitively in many of the Romance Languages, like Spanish, Portuguese, and French, means to orgasm. Eden עדן is a Hebrew word that means “pleasure, bliss, ecstasy.” To be in Eden is to be in ecstasy. All those nerves, all those ganglia of the 3 nervous systems unite in the sexual organs, and when the man and woman unite, all those nervous systems are ignited. If we include the penile duct we have a total of 4 rivers with many tributaries through which, not only the waters or bodily fluids symbolized by Mem may flow, but also surges of electric, ecstatic, Edenic energy while the Garden of God flourishes. This is in keeping with Genesis 2:10 which states that:

“a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads.”

Expulsion from the Father’s presence should not be premature. Neither must it be necessarily viewed as a negative thing. This after all comprises only the beginning part of the work of the Father. First spiritual energy is built up within the Father. Next that spiritual energy is released in physical form via carrier liquids and conductive channels. Following the sacred formula set forth in D&C 29:32, the Group God – Elohim creates:

“First spiritual, secondly temporal,”

God designates this as the beginning of His work. And here the baton gets passed to His “better half” where the work of the Mother commences. Her work is on the receptive end, and hence will be a symmetrical reflection of the Work of the Father. Verse 32 continues:

“and again, first temporal, and secondly spiritual, which is the last of my work—”

Another type of Eden welcomes and makes a home for the traveling soul who is on his or her way to the Lone & Dreary World of external experience. This Garden is more dimensionally dense than the last, more watery, but it is very comfortable. It will remain reasonably so up until – like the soul’s bout of sudden excitement at the outbreak of the War in Heaven – pressure builds and the pattern repeats, sending the heroic wayfarer on to the next leg of the journey. A mirror image starts to emerge as the Divine Plan progresses by the wisdom, and willingness of Eve.

Her Hebrew name, Havah חוה, picks up where Adam left off. The letter Chet ח, is packed with symbolism, much of which is missed in the brief post from ldswomenofgod.com. The author at that blog says that Chet represents a sacred or holy enclosure. She of course associates that with the idea of the Holy of Holies of The Temple, but only as seen within a Church context. In addition to her summation, I would like to offer some insight that addresses the role of Heavenly Mother and highlights the value of women. In the most reverent manner possible, may I boldly suggest that LDS women of God humbly recognize their own divinity, and remember that the body is the Temple of the Lord. In the classical Hebrew script Chet is constructed of the preceding two letters in the Hebrew alphabet, Vav and Zayin, joined at the top with a connecting line that resembles a yoke. Young LDS men and women have been repeatedly told by Church clergy to find a partner with whom they can be “equally yoked”. Yokes can be tools for combining efforts, and when used properly they can assist us in keeping those combined efforts open and clear of any secret combination. A yoke is a connection between two things so that they move and work together. Since the gematrical sum of the letters Vav and Zayin equals the same value as the Hebrew word for love (), we can see that the essential nature of this “moving and working together” is that of loving, even physical love making.

But all too many LDS marriages, although the wedding ceremony was performed in a beautiful building, are not taken on by both parties as an egalitarian yoke, but rather as a disjointed and cruel joke where one person shoulders all the burden. Most often the man supposes that by virtue of holding down a steady Babylonian job, he is entitled to shirk the emotional work required in family life – this, despite “The Brethren’s Proclamation” which suggests that sacred responsibilities be shared. Elohim’s commandments to Adam & Eve (Man & Woman) are even more explicitly against the division of labor, for therein lies the beginning stages of the division of the family. Nevertheless the unrighteous LDS man “holds the priesthood” over his wife’s head, and excuses all kinds of abuse on his part, while expecting her to be the more spiritually attuned one in the relationship. After all, it has been said on numerous occasions from LDS pulpits world-wide that women are naturally more spiritual than men. This is a patronizing cop-out that causes the hearts of many of the “fair daughters of this people” to die “pierced with deep wounds” as Jacob laments in Jacob, chapter 2.

Vav and Zayin equally yoked in Chet form a gateway. Since the letter Vav represents the yashar (light that descends from God the Father) and Zayin represents the chozer (light that ascends or returns to God the Father), some of the Jewish mystics consider Chet to be the doorway of light from heaven. And it should be apparent to anyone who is a parent that the light is reflected back out of the woman in the form of children who are “an heritage unto the Lord, and the fruit of the womb is his reward” as it says in Psalm 127:3. In our examination of the symbolic name/nature of Eve, we are honoring Chet as a symbol of the physical gateway through which all souls must pass to enter the Holy of Holies and eventually move into clay tabernacles of their own, for Eve is the Mother of All Living. The physical attributes of the woman are to be revered as sacred, not shrouded in secrecy; lest we let the Devil slip in between Adam & Eve and slyly shame them into a Secret Combination.

The second letter in Havah’s blessed name is Vav ו . Vav comes from a pictogram representing a stake or nail, and everywhere it shows up in Hebrew scripture it plays the role of connector. The first place we find it is in Genesis 1:1 where it connects the words “heaven” and “earth” in the story of creation. This placement is very appropriate since as our “equally yoked” Heavenly Parents told us in D&C 29:32 their co-creative and procreative work goes back and forth from spiritual to physical, then physical to spiritual in one eternal round. When we tap into this back n’ forth vibration we feel a sense of timelessness. And it is out of that infinite moment that we extract the souls of newborn children. Those souls get inserted by the Fat-Her into the Mother where they grow in her belly to over thousands of times the size of their initial gamete vehicles, and even hundreds of times the size of the zygote body. The word zygote actually comes from the Greek ζυγωτός zygōtos “joined” or “yoked”. Another notable and oversized Vav marks the center of the entire Torah (Leviticus 11:42). This spot in the text is known as the Belly of the Torah, not only because it is at the center point of the whole body of scripture, but also because it happens to occur in the word gachon, meaning “belly.” The oversized Vav at the Belly of the Torah makes a strong symbolic connection to the oversized belly of a pregnant priestess.

As pregnancy progresses through the three trimesters, so the three letter name of Eva חוה progresses to the final character – Hei ה . Hei is pronounced exactly like the English interjection “Hey!” and used by itself it has a similar meaning of “look” or “behold!”
According to early Jewish prophets Hei represents the divine breath, referring to the sound of the letter Hei – the outbreathing of Spirit. A prefixive Hei (or we might say the pre-existential Hei) functions as the definite article in Hebrew appointing the Children of The Most High to specific situations, whereas a suffixive Hei at the end of a noun “feminizes” it or allows it to be “fruitful” and reproductive. Remember how I said that Dalet represented a broken and poor man, but also the open door flap of a tent? Well, Hei ה is formed from Dalet ד and Yod י which looks like a comma suspended in midair and symbolizes an open hand. An angular open flap with an open hand should be a familiar grouping of imagery for Mormons who have been initiated and endowed in an LDS Temple. While the author of the post at ldswomenofgod.com claims that Vav stands for the veil of the temple, when in fact Vav only has the connotation of a connector and never that of a divider, still, the analogy works; perhaps better than she might imagine. For, approaching the spiritual side of the name of Mother Eva, we have come full circle in the First-Last/Last-First equation of FL/FLment in God’s Eternal Plan. It is said that the lines of the letter Hei paint a picture of returning to God by means of the transforming power of the Spirit.

The order of events in the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price sheds much light on man’s beginnings, both in terms of a historical timeline for mankind’s giant leaps, and the smaller steps of a human being’s biological beginnings and individual lifeline. It is however important to realize that the Fall of Man involves a fall in frequency and does not begin at the point of their expulsion from the Garden of Eden, but long before, in higher, heavenly dimensions. A stationary observer would see great geological changes to the face of the earth over time, but these of course stem from forces set in motion behind the scenes as it were. The temporal advancement of the ages alone can not account for the disappearance of Eden any more than Darwin’s theory of Evolution can fully account for the emergence of humans. Adam, whether spoken of in his pre-mortal role as Michael the Archangel who bravely cast Satan down from the heavenly realms, or in his role as the First Man created from the dust of the earth, he is the same essential being. Truth is unchanging in that what is true for God’s children prior to mortality is true for God’s sons and daughters in every succeeding stage of existence. The half-way point for sojourning consciousness between heavenly and earthly stations is its playful time in the Garden of Eden. The womb is also technically part of that stay in the Kinder-Garden for all children of God where they rest and literally gather themselves, reviewing their divine mission callings before leaving the presence of the Holy One and fully entering the forgetful world of form.

Once gathered closely in one pre-existential heavenly huddle of spirituous forms, they felt sure, suspended in time, and undisturbed until a sudden war began to divide them and launch each individual headlong into the coming reality. What can seem a gradual paradisiacal process of condescension and gestation from one perspective, does at some point reach an abrupt transition. The mixing of eternal and earthly elements is full of fleeting sensations and can be somewhat confusing. What has the developing baby in the womb done to deserve being thrust from such weightlessness and convenience into a pressing sense of uncertainty? What parties have come together to decide the child’s fate, and where was he when this grand council was held? It is the same two Titans who clashed when, as a divine spark, he rode alongside millions of his brave brethren and sisters, spirt siblings – the hosts of heaven upon an armada of spermatozoa pushing out from Netzach in Victory through Hod – the final sphere of the “purely spiritual” realms which symbolizes Splendor, a spilling of light.

Biblical Adam is usually styled as Ha-Rishon “the first”. But in Kabbalah, Adam Ha-Kadmoni “the original” is indeed the first of the comprehensive Five spiritual Worlds in creation. Adam’s pre-mortal function above is distinguished from biblical Adam below in the flesh, where he included within himself all future human souls before partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. The divine attributes of Adam’s former glory are never left behind; he carries the specific divine will and divine plan for subsequent creation within his pouch. He is like a character in the old movies that packs his most prized possessions into a sack tied to the end of a stick and sets out from home to embark on the adventure of a lifetime. Adam Kadmon (Original Man) is divine light without vessels, including all subsequent creation only in potential. This exalted anthropomorphism denotes that man is both the theocentric purpose of future creation, and the anthropocentric embodiment of the divine manifestations on high. These are some of the plain and precious truths which were had among the ancient Jews but were occulted long before Yeshua’s arrival and further muddied after his departure when he charged his apostles with delivering those plain and precious truths to the gentiles. I know of no plainer way to explain these “precious jewels” than to refer one to the ancient Biblical origins of sacred oaths and their association in ancient Semitic culture with the “precious jewels” of a man’s testes. From “testes” comes our word, “testify”. But who can testify truthfully of the Original Man, the Ancient of Days, without First Being acquainted with Him?

SURGICALLY SEVERING THE BONDS OF SATAN’S SHAMILY

If we want to sever our bonds with the Shamily of Satan we must first look at Satan’s genealogy. You will remember how the author at ldswomenofgod.com postulated that the Hebrew letter Vav stood for the Veil of the Temple. Of course this Line of Reasoning in the Temple of Reason is understandable. What else but a veil would a corralled Mormon mind correlate with this mid-way point between the physical and the spiritual steps which bring about the Last phase of Gods’ Work and Glory? But, as we have seen, Vav is the sign of “a nail”, and it serves us as a connector or not at all. 3909_VA_250What needs to be connected in order for The Family of God to continue? The glorious and glaringly obvious answer to this question lies in spiritual DNA. We have already delved into the “spiritual sex education” teachings of our First Parents, and it is vital knowledge to understand the wisdom of “spiritual sex” since by no other means, and in no other place than those temples pre-ordained by God can spiritual DNA (our divine heritage) be passed along through all generations of time. It may help to think of the Vav not merely as a nail but as a spiritually charged conductor for the purposes of creating a complete circuit between two points, two energy vectors. In even more tangible terms, Vav is a Valve. When God first created the “gene-rations” of the heavens and the earth, the word toldot (תולדות) is used (Gen. 2:4). This refers to created order before the sin and fall of Adam. After the fall of Adam, however, the word is spelled differently in the Hebrew text, with a missing letter Vav, like so – תלדות. Thereafter, each time the phrase, “these are the generations of” occurs in the Scriptures (a formulaic way of enumerating the gene-rations of the heads of families) the word is spelled defectively, with the Vav (ו) missing. The connection was “lost.”  However, when we come to Ruth 4:18 the phrase: “These are the generations of Perez” is spelled with the missing Vav restored!

In all of Jewish scripture, the only two places where we see the restored spelling is in Genesis 2:4 and Ruth 4:18, which leads our minds to ask what connection there might be between the creation of the heavens and the earth, the fall of mankind, and the creation of the family line of Perez? As a prefix Vav is used to function the same as the English word ‘and’. AND reversed spells DNA. In modern Hebrew the word ‘and’ would be rendered as a straight line. It was through this line (ו) of Perez that Jesus was born, as many may know. Jesus is important, but Christ is crucial. Christ has the central role in Gods’ plan, and Christ is a concept that transcends, or breaks through. What is truly important is to acknowledge that the name Perez (פרץ) means “breach” (from paratz, meaning “to break through”).  What does God need to “break through” in order to redeem his children? God is literally breaking through, and breaking up the families of fallen mankind so that he may restore the Divine Family here on Earth. Jesus Christ himself made it clear that he came to break up the imposter families into which we were all born.

“Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.” – Luke 12:51-52

Of course the exact ratio of “three against two, and two against three” is referring to a five dimensional “household” of existence and being. We cling to and are tied to these three familiar dimensions and set ourselves at odds with the two higher dimensions of Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. But the enmity which exists between the 3rd dimension and the next two above us is not the only level of meaning which we should extract from this 3/5ths ratio. It has very real physical effects that trickle down like acid rain into this earthly existence. You will recall that not too long ago in the history of this wicked world it was decided by the American congress that people of African ancestry were only 3/5ths of a human being. We would be foolish not to pay attention to the more literal levels of Jesus’ teachings here along with the deeper symbolism. In Matt. 10:35-37 he declares:

“For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.

He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.”

How can someone’s enemy be of his own household, and yet he love his biological connections more than God? We can not afford to discount the importance of Jesus’ “hard sayings” as so many do with their pick-and-choose approach. If we do, we pay a high price indeed, for ignoring the Pearl of Great Price. Returning to the book of scripture by that same title, we read about the period immediately following the time known as the Fall when sin entered the world. Moses 5:3 tells us:

And from that time forth, the sons and daughters of Adam began to divide two and two in the land, and to till the land, and to tend flocks, and they also begat sons and daughters.

Then later on in Moses 5:13 we read:

And they loved Satan more than God. And men began from that time forth to be carnal, sensual, and devilish.

If we can not love our own flesh and blood more than God and still be counted worthy, then obviously loving Satan more than God would bring about disastrous results for our souls. At the same time we are commanded to love all men, even to love our enemies. Could it be that The Enemy (singular) goes about undetected among our households while we deem this or that group of fellow beings as enemies (plural)? Surely, as the scripture says, “an enemy hath done this” (Matt. 13:28) – but how? Ezra Taft Benson seems to place all the blame with certain communist “insiders”. But religious and political affiliation with any one particular lineage or set of cultural comrades to the exclusion of those with doctrinal differences creates a rift which more accurately places the power for evil with “outsiders”. Scripture never attributes power to any enemy without, only the enemy within the gates. When Jesus unequivocally asserts that a man’s familial fetters are those with which the enemy binds him, is he saying that we ought not to love those to whom we are linked by physical DNA chains? No, he says they are our enemies, and in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus made the bold rally cry to “Love your enemies!” Enemies are, after all, only fellow slaves who are scared of revolution. The Enemy which God warns us of in scripture is non-human. But it is clear that we never should, nor could we in truth ever really love our fellow beings with a love greater than that which we have been able to muster for God and God’s Family.

The First Family does not reside in the White House. The real Royal Family is not to be found walking the halls of Buckingham Palace. The First Family is the Heavenly Family which was made during the first stage of creation related in Genesis 1. This was an immaterial, spiritual creation. Then in Genesis 2 we find the account of the second stage of creation which was accomplished temporally. Most have supposed the latter to be a redundant, only somewhat more detailed version of the same events reported in the previous chapter. But this is not the case. For clarity on this matter let us review the Group God – Elohim’s creative formula revealed in D&C 29:31-33.

“For by the power of my Spirit created I them; yea, all things both spiritual and temporal—First spiritual, secondly temporal, and again, first temporal, and secondly spiritual, which is the last of my work—”

See, in Genesis chapter 1 we read about how Elohim first “made” all things, and in Gensis chapter 2 we are told how Elohim later “formed” all things. Hebrew word #6213 in Strong’s Concordance is עָשָׂה `asah – to do, accomplish, make. Hebrew word #3335 is יָצַר yatsar –to form, fashion, frame. During the whole first chapter the earth was “tohu bohu” – “without form, and void” (Genesis 1:2). But in dimensions beyond what we now typically experience in our daily routine, all plants, then all animals, and finally all men and women (not just Adam and Eve) were created in spirit. It says, “Let us make man,” and this was done in the “image of God” on the 6th Day. But then in Genesis 2:5 after God has rested from their labors it says that “there was not a man to till the ground” until verse 7 when God forms Adam out of clay, or dust of the earth that had been moistened by mist. From there the sequence forms a mirror image of the first half of creation starting with plants, then animals, and finally God’s crowning creation – woman.

The corrupt fruits of the Shamily Tree of Satan start to make themselves visibly manifest with those sons and daughters of Adam & Eve who, following the monogamous model, “began to divide two and two in the land” (Moses 5:3). They divided themselves according to the monogamous model and proceeded to “till the land, and to tend flocks, and they also begat sons and daughters.” All things were made known unto them by their First Parents who heard the voice of the Lord speaking to them “from the direction of Eden” (Moses 5:4) although they could no longer see the Lord. The Only Begotten was preached unto all their spirits directly via the Holy Spirit. But Satan, being the Lord of External Reality, “came among them” (Moses 5:13). He told them that seeing was believing, that to be-living one must acquire, consume, and horde a certain amount of physical stuff. A man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth (Luke 12:15). All mankind had been created as immaterial spirits in Heaven first and foremost, but for most this temporal reality became so tantalizing that they soon forgot themselves in a game of gluttony.

In order to play this game a lot of food would be necessary. To produce mass amounts of foodstuffs huge areas of land would need to be tilled. Tilling land is what fallen man does best. Even the sacred geometrical spirit structures of pure light that are commonly referred to as auras today, once mankind had fallen they took on a shape that resembled something like a tuber with a long tap root which creates ruts, “tilling” the energetic layers in the aura of the earth as fallen man moves to and fro. This shape may be what the blind man, after having been touched for the first time by Jesus beheld when he saw “men as trees, walking” (Mark 8:24). Such a spiritual attachment to our auras is probably also akin to the Chains of Hell which confine mankind to a similar fate as Cain through Satan. But as he filled up on starches the connection between early man’s spirit and physical body suffered greatly making him weaker and progressively more limited in his powers. It would take increasingly larger labor forces to upkeep an agricultural attempt at subduing man’s environment which seemed to have turned so hostile since the Fall. Stubborn and unwilling to repent just yet, civilizations concocted ever more elaborate methods of coping, each of them relying heavily on the arm of flesh, and leaning to their own understanding with a goal to create surplus goods.

Those who had made special and specific covenants with Satan formed an elite intelligentsia. Everyone else willingly aligned themselves behind these ancient men of renown to play the dependent role of subjects and slaves. Each side inducted the other into a Secret Combination. The only way out of this Secret Combination is to refuse to take sides and rather de-side one’s own fate. But man’s willful rebellion led him to invent an imaginary scenario in which he could convince himself that he were forced to decide between the lesser of two evils. This is in the greater reality nothing but spiritual sloth, for to de-cide between bad and worse is to commit deicide (the act of killing God). Being well aware of the divine flame within temporal mankind due to that aspect of their beings which had been created all together in the same day during the first half of creation, but vowing to keep it a secret from the masses of earth elements known as carnal man – one third of creation (the physical portion) was made to submit to the tyranny of one third of the Hosts of Heaven (spiritual creation) who had rebelled against the other two thirds, that is, against the God from whom they were made, both the God of Heaven and Earth.

From scriptural stories of the War in Heaven we learn that Lucifer led one third of the Hosts of Heaven after him. People have supposed this to be a case of one individual lying to others and using flattery or trickery to convert them to his scheme. But since every individual that has existed, does now, or ever will exist upon this planet was spiritually created at the same exact moment, we each knew everything that anyone else knew, and there was no way anyone could employ trickery against another. Lucifer does not represent an individual so much as the concept of individualism, but not a true individualism, rather a gross misunderstanding of it. If Luciferianism is misused individualism, then Satanism is misinterpreted collectivism. Lucifer says: “Surely I will do it!” (Moses 4:1) and the conglomerate of souls known as Satan cry out with one voice: “All hail the King!” This chant is a morphed echo which has come down to us through a mischievous game of Telestial Telephone from the Meridian of Time when it was originally shouted thusly: “All nail the King! Crucify him, crucify him!” (Luke 23:18-21). The two groups (the leaders and the led) are both blind and together form one Secret Combination of liars and legions. It allows God’s spirit children to keep a comfortable distance while still extracting work and certain benefits from their physical bodily counterparts. It allows for limited liability on the part of the mob. The lustful rush of power remains carefully reserved in the hands of the self-endangering crowd to be released (like Barabbas) only in murderous moments (like the day of the carnivorous and cannibalistic feast in Luke 23:17-19). No, not one soul will be lost, but many. Both parties in this conspiracy are guilty of working iniquity/inequality.

We all were, and still are, Divine Consciousness, divided into diverse bodies only for the purposes of growth and learning. As children of the Most High we are faced with the difficult decision of sacrifice of self versus sacrifice of others. But this is a tricky illusion because, being made from the self-same substance of Holy Spirit meant that, should we choose the seemingly safe route of sending another to sacrifice Himself for the rest of us, we will eventually be exposed and expelled as hypocrites for denying the Holy Spirit out of which we and Him were and are made essentially one. The Devil uses the appeal of a one-man sacrificial lamb system to give our minds the sense that security, and ultimately salvation can be bought if the Price is Right. Regardless of if the Prince is Righteous or not, he will always have his whipping boy, or so the thinking goes. False deities and their devotees in ancient times called this the doctrine of the scapegoat. Latter-day false gods call themselves corporate entities, and refer to this practice as “externalization”. From sheep to sheeple the progression of work has gotten progressively worse. Human history is the glorified gore of human sacrifice. Even though the word corporation comes from corpus, meaning body, corporate entities are not corporeal. These are entities which were afraid to take upon themselves the “far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory” (D&C 132:16) of a physical body, but who nevertheless are composed of strong natural desires towards the fulfillment that only comes through a union of spirit and flesh. The blood, sweat, and tears required for an individual’s redemption are therefore always cast by these entities upon somebody who actually has a body of flesh and blood. Adam & Eve chose to go through the pains and suffering and eventually rejoiced in their redemption, but many of their children rejected that path. Their spirits chose to remain aloof from their bodies as much as it were in their control – a deadly misuse of free will.

Those of us who truly take on physical bodies, take upon us the role of sacrificial lamb and savior. We take upon us the Name of Christ. That third part of the Hosts of Heaven which knows not the mind of God devised a plan which allowed them to bury their portion of spirit in earthen bodies, never to be used or risked. Their reasoning was that by keeping their t-a-l-e-n-t l-a-t-e-n-t not a single soul would be lost. What we really mean when we tell ourselves this lie is that we will not let go of our sense of singleness, that no “single” soul will be shared in this world, except under tightly controlled circumstances (man-made marriage). So the plan of exclusivity and externalization ensures that all are lost, becoming Sons of Perdition. The thing about Sons of Perdition is that they refuse to admit that they are lost. Deep inside the truth is known, and this is why the subject of Sons of Perdition is such a secret obsession among Elders in the Church of Jesus Christ of Lattter-Day Saints. Under the law the Holy Spirit in man is down-played and denied. If followed to its law-gical end we will be deposited into outer-darkness. Holy Spirit is that which connects individual and collective in an Open Combination that reduces the veil of unbelief to little more than a blurry line of scintillating electromagnetic energy which invites us to love and know one another, to know one’s self, know One Self, know Christ, know God.

Now that we have examined the genealogy of Satan’s Shamily we have before us a recent shamily portrait. It is not a pretty picture, though it poses as such. When you see the cheesy smiles, bear in mind that the photographer is Lucifer, the Light Bearer who coaxes them to say “cheese” so that they may keep up the appearance of happiness as he blinds them with flashes of false illumination. All the while he is assuring their ego with interjections of: “Beautiful…what a beautiful family!” This “perfect family” is propped before us all as the model which we must strive to emulate. Satan whispers in our ears as he proposes marriage that is most likely to serve his perverse purposes. We are told that, if we take part in the right rituals, in the right place, with the right person, we “shall be as the Gods”. It is not a family but a famiLIE, having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof through parameters placed by Church & State. Satan’s most current Shamily portrait shows a spiritually dysfunctional group that is nuclear in its physics structure and self-destructive in its nature like a nuclear bomb. It is preferably Christ-Shun in its programming. Each unit is issued license numbers and is a Government-approved, Church-sanctioned, monogamous machine. The machine’s function is to act as a franchised secret combination. In reality it is the inner most sanctum for all sects/sex of the Grand Secret Combination, but it does not know this. In each Husband & Wife’s mind their highest calling is to be Dud & Mum to deactivate & silence the Power of God before it can enter into this world by way of free will.

It is not that there is anything essentially wrong with the union of one man and one woman. Nor is there anything inherently evil about the agrarian lifestyle. The devastating effects arise from the manner in which these things are executed. Man-made marriage, whether in its modern monogamous form, or Paleolithic polygynous pairings, stems from the concept of ownership. Did the idea of owning land lead to the idea of owning people? People were fashioned by Elohim out of the dust of the earth/land, so I don’t think we can make a valid distinction between those two types of ownership. Moses 5:3, as well as famed anthropologist Jared Diamond’s scathing indictment of the agricultural revolution, seem to indicate that the evil and alien devils of ownership over people and place invaded the humanity and its habitat simultaneously. As soon as Satan was cursed to “eat dust” all of his days (ie. to eat away at all earthly creation including human bodies which are composed of the dust of the earth), that devil dug deep into Mother Earth with tenacious talons to obtain gold and silver with which to tempt Her children (For more detail see Moses 4:20, Genesis 3:14, LDS Temple Endowment – The Garden Scene, or read The Devil in the Dust). The “tenacious talons” he used for mining were our early ancestors themselves as they clutched tightly the talents they had received as inheritance from their Lord. The devilish doctrine of “MINE” made for millions of “MINERS” desperately seeking outside of themselves for that which is precious above all else – the Love of God. With a SCARCITY mind-set they set about building one SCARED-CITY full of SCARED-SILLY slaves to the devil and his angels. All it would require to break the spell and put a stop to Satan’s Army would be to shed selfishness and let our inner light so shine before men that work-a-day worldly worriers change into warriors of truth and light. When we see the Army for what it really is, understanding that they Are-Me then the War in Heaven ends and the domino effect will cause the by now long line of tyrants to fall till Christ Consciousness reigns on Earth.

RELATIONSHIPS vs. RELATION-CHIPS

Man-made marriage and agricultural techniques which are not based on a deep respect for nature are a perverted and corrupted compLIEance with the original commandment to multiply and replenish the earth. What is the original sin and what are the resulting transgressions which identify its commission? They are possession and ownership constructs stemming from fear of loss or lack, which itself is a direct result of lack in only one category – lack of faith. The Forbidden Fruit is a Fore-Bitten Fruit. Partaking of it triggers a downward shift in consciousness that dissects and transforms the same outward actions in which we had previously taken part – those which gave us joy and gave God pleasure – into taboos to be avoided at all co$t.

Wendell Berry, whose integrity as an American novelist, poet, environmental activist, and farmer certainly qualifies him even by worldly standards to be a cultural critic of our corrupt customs, says that:

“Marriage, in what is evidently its most popular version, is now on the one hand an intimate ‘relationship’ involving (ideally) two successful careerists in the same bed, and on the other hand a sort of private political system in which rights and interests must be constantly asserted and defended. Marriage, in other words, has now taken the form of divorce: a prolonged and impassioned negotiation, as to how things shall be divided. During their understandably temporary association, the ‘married’ couple will typically consume a large quantity of merchandise and a large portion of each other. The modern household is the place where the consumptive couple do their consuming. Nothing productive is done there. Such work as is done there is done at the expense of the resident couple or family, and to the profit of suppliers of energy and household technology. For entertainment, the inmates consume television or purchase other consumable diversion elsewhere”

This concise expose on the consumptive (lustful) nature of the most modern and up-to-date version of the man-made institution of marriage reminds me of a scripture in the New Testament which addresses the same issues.

“But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.”

– Galatians 5:15

engageIt seems we are actually chipping away at each other and furthering the fragmentation of society with all these relation-chips in which we are “engaged” instead of being “engaged” in the good cause of Zion as we are invited to do in D&C . Cheesy “engagement” photos are added to Lucifer’s portfolio after being circulated among pleased “family and friends” with invitations to a very exclusive and elitist event which supposedly marks the fulfillment of all righteousness for two young LDS people. Indeed ye may say we ignore the admonition of Paul to:

“Love thy neighbour as thyself”

Paul even goes so far as to say that:

“For all the law is fulfilled in this”

Christ’s apostle warns us against biting, devouring, and consuming one another. Today’s apostate apostles give add-vice more in line with the policy behind the Devil’s sneaky introduction of state marriage licenses. The intent behind any l-i-c-e-n-s-e really is to try to s-i-l-e-n-c-e the still small voice speaking in our hearts. All marriages which are not marriages of the heart are not of God. The heart chakra is seen as a spinning ball of emerald light. Without getting this “green light” marriages do not have the Lord’s approval. Marital links are bound to u-n-t-i-e in as much as they fail to u-n-i-t-e the intellectual with the instinctual in the common ground of the heart chakra, because they have not been sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise. Not many know or care that the marriage license was introduced in the U.S. to prohibit and prevent the reunification of the races, to circumvent the literal gathering of the Tribes of Israel, and thereby encourage racism and spiritual inbreeding. But Satan and all those who are members of his Shamily do care very much if you attempt to make such an important decision such as with whom to join yourself in holy matrimony listening only to your heart. The Lord’s voice as heard by Adam & Eve coming from the direction of Eden, that green garden located in the heartland is supposedly not enough to base such life decisions on it. Mother Eve’s shock and dismay is felt and shared by all those who personally know God. The “Brethren” have come to persuade us to disobey Father and to do the Devil’s bidding in keeping the 12 Tribes separated, scattered, and weak. It is important to Latter-Day Rome to uphold Romantic ideas about marriage. Exactly one month after Valentine’s Day in 1977, apostate apostle Void K. Packer gave a talk entitled Follow the Rule to an audience of marrying age young adults at BYU. Referring back to an earlier quote from the then President, Spencer Kimball, he spoke these words:

“It’s been the policy of the Church—and it’s been spoken on many occasions—that as the gathering of Israel is in Mexico for the Mexicans, in Tonga for the Tongans, in China for the Chinese, and so on, so has been our counsel as it relates to marriage.

We’ve always counseled in the Church for our Mexican members to marry Mexicans, our Japanese members to marry Japanese, our Caucasians to marry Caucasians, our Polynesian members to marry Polynesians. The counsel has been wise. You may say again, “Well, I know of exceptions.” I do, too, and they’ve been very successful marriages. I know some of them. You might even say, “I can show you local Church leaders or perhaps even general leaders who have married out of their race.” I say, “Yes—exceptions.” Then I would remind you of that Relief Society woman’s near-scriptural statement, “We’d like to follow the rule first, and then we’ll take care of the exceptions.”

Geopolitical statements like that rarely, if ever, get recognized by LDS for what they are. There is a growing number of LDS whose banter about “threatened liberties” and “One World Global Government” and “Secret Combinations” and such has grown considerably more fervent in recent years. But even these do err because they are taught by the precepts of men in suits in their places of worship. Their membership in the Secret Combination is a secret to themselves. These patronizing patriots would never question the false traditions of their founding fathers, especially not those dealing with “The Family”. Although the literal gathering of the 12 Tribes is one of their 13 articles of faith, they support a “don’t come to us, we’ll come to you” anti-gathering policy when it comes to their franchised McDonald’s farmed-family plot version of Zion. This is because they are willfully ignorant of and uninterested in the spiritual gathering which requires personal effort on their part to know the Holy One of Israel. It is much more comfortable to snuggle up to their spouses and sleep the deep sleep of the Ten Foolish Virgins. I used to think it harsh when I would read at the end of that parable where the Wise say to the foolish and fuel-less half of the wedding invitees, “Go to them that sell.” But now it makes perfect sense to me. The Foolish Virgins miss the real Wedding Feast of the Bridegroom precisely because they invest their faith in mammon-arranged marriages. In Zion is milk and honey without price, but their faith funds are fully invested in the world of finances and fiancés. They have locked the Seed of Abraham away in a savings vault with the World (Seed) Bank and now they are asking the Wise Virgins for a loan? Just as I can not expect another to magically endow my body with muscle and strength enough to enable me to perform great feats, I can not rely on anyone else but my Lord to light my way in these last days. For he is “the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world” (D&C 93:2)

When I say “my Lord” I mean that portion of the Light of Christ that is my own spirit body. The scriptures are surprisingly clear when distinguishing between “The Lord YOUR God” and the One Source which is referred to as “Your God AND My God”. The literal gathering of Israel can not occur without the spiritual gathering and the two coincide with the reconciliation and reunification of both your spirit and physical bodies. This may seem a very foreign concept to many, but that fact in of itself is only evidence of the reality of fallen man’s predicament. It seems foreign because we are strangers still to ourselves. If we make an earnest study of the scriptures we will learn much and see the truth clearly.

“This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.”

– Galatians 5:16-18

Walking in Spirit should not be a hard concept to accept. After all, in the 21st Century we accept all kinds of invisible forces. We accept radio waves, microwaves, cell-phone transmissions, TV waves, X-rays, ultrasound, and cosmic, and infared radiation without question. Nobody has ever seen or touched any of these things, but they are an article of total faith for everyone, just because science says so. But men and women are stubborn and prefer to remain divided in their psyches, in their houses, in their neighborhoods and as a family. If walking in spirit is so simple in concept, how about in practice? What’s the trick to it? The trick is that there is no trick. Notice that Paul says that if we are led by the Spirit, we are not under the law. What does he mean we are not under the law? Is not spirit bound by the same laws of the universe as we have observed them to be through telescopes and microscopes? I was trained in SS (Sunday School) to think that God reigns Supreme because of his knowledge of and perfect adherence to the laws of nature. How then can anyone be above the law? Here are some quotes from two very different people, both sometimes referred to by the title “Lion in Zion”.

Brigham Young once said:

“If I had forty wives in the United States, they did not know it, and could not substantiate it; neither did I ask any lawyer, judge, or magistrate for them. I live above the law, and so do this people.”

– Journal of Discourses, v. 1, p. 361

He is also quoted as having said:

“I want to live perfectly above the law, and make it my servant instead of my master.”

It is informingly ironic that Brigham should say that if he had forty wives, they did not know it, and could not substantiate it. Marriage after the manner of men, including Mormon marriage is of “no effect” outside of this world. Thus saith the Lord in section 132 of the D&C, so proponents of Mormon marriage should know better than anyone. And, as Brighams unwitting victims of his lawless and loveless marriage contracts can attest, man-made marriages, even whilst in this world, can often be so meaningless that the participants can not substantiate it. It is good that Brigham Young did not ask any lawyer, judge, or magistrate for the women he married, for they never were state property. But if Brigham thought that they belonged to him for “time and all eternity,” then he was no doubt greatly disappointed in the next life where all such vain imaginings fade and all relationships revert back to their natural and eternal state of spiritual sovereignty. In earlier posts I have addressed Brother Brigham in all his iconic yet ironic bravery as well as his bigotry. He was a man. As men all any of us can strive for is balance between the extremes (Heavenly Mother & Father) that combine to make us what and who we are. Is one extreme good while the other is evil? Essentially and literally it is us who determine. The very “constitution” of our beings is “endowed” by our Creator with the “unalienable” Right to Choose. To “Choose the Right” does not mean we never “Choose the Left,” for to place such ridiculous restrictions on children of a Supreme Being would have us going in circles. But the Devil is an alien force that seeks to alienate spirit and flesh from one another. We aid by engaging ourselves in worldly marriage contracts in which two children of God combine and swear and oath to serve Satan as gate keepers between the Heavenly and Earthly realms. They swear to only use the Power of the Creator amongst themselves, never outside of their Secret Combination, and never in any significant quantity or quality.

During an interview in 1973, when asked by the Pharisees, “what do you think about all this crime and violence going on?” Bob Marley said:

“Is laws cause crime and violence. Earth a come, earth a forward to how creation was an how earth fi rest. Is a mind ting. Now all the laws that we abide by and blaah-blaah-boom-boom-boom, what cause wi fi suffer. As any man can know that.”

Which being translated from the Jamaican Patois into Standard English reads thusly:

“It is laws that cause crime and violence. Heaven and Earth (as separate things) shall pass away in the end. Earth is coming back around to how creation was at first and how Earth is prophesied to finally rest. It is something to ponder out in our minds. Now all the laws that we abide by and so on, and so forth – that is the cause of man’s suffering. Any man can know this by the witness of the Holy Spirit.”

When the cunning Pharisites asked him if he was speaking of any laws in particular, so as to ensnare him, Bob answered them, saying:

“Every law! The only law which is law is the law of life.”

He went on to explain:

“Now dig dis. A man build him city and him seh him want these people fi run it, and him want these people to live yah soh. Now me don’t waan get involved talking like me is a politician. Mi jus’ waan talk ’bout righteousness. Like seh well then, Jah a earth rightful ruler and him noh run no wire fence.”

Or in other words:

“Now listen to this parable. A man builds himself a city and says that he wants certain people to run it. And the man wants everyone in the city to live just so. Now I don’t want to get involved like as if I were a politician. I just want to talk about righteousness. So, we know that the Lord God is the rightful ruler of this whole earth and He does not make borders.”

God does not make borders, and this is what places him above the law. Those who make borders can only take orders. Compare the words of these two men and judge for yourself, who better personifies the “Lion in Zion”. Young wanted to live “perfectly” so as to place himself above the law and make it a servant. Marley was clear in his testimony that God is the Law and there is no man who can superimpose laws upon God. Marley seems to be describing the Mormon (per)version of the Lion in Zion in his parable. Brigham built cities and commanded his fellow man living in those cities to live in a certain way. He imagined that he was paving the way for a theocracy which would eventually reign supreme with Jesus as King. But Jesus Christ rejects such false zions and turns downs such temptations as he did with the adversary in the wilderness. Jesus, like Bob does not want to get involved as if he were a politician. He told the devil plainly shortly before his ministry, and he told the governor plainly shortly before his execution that His Kingdom was not of this world. Love and commitment between men and women is indeed crucial to the building of Zion. But check out Rita’s undying love and respect for Bob despite what the world chooses to see as infidelity and philandering on his part. Now compare that with Ann Eliza’s grievances of neglect, cruel treatment, and physical plus spiritual oppression. A proper understanding of the principle of marriage is necessary to establish Zion on earth. And this proper understanding must penetrate the traditional ideas of marriage throughout the ages which are all based on the fruits of the flesh and accumulation of these. Traditional marriage transfigures the precious Gifts of God from infinite abundance into enumerated items. Whoever dies with the most recognitions, the most toys, the most wives and children, wins!

Having observed in Brigham and Bob two very different types of “outlaws” let us now scrutinize ourselves. Do we abet the Enemy or do we abide the Law? Do we simply have many loved ones or do we have much love? Some may use section 132 of the D&C to justify multiple lustful lovers; many more will use the basic premises and some of the terminology in that section to justify their wasteful monogamous marriage and add some air of celestial holiness to it. Extravagance/Sextravagance, it is all sin in the eyes of the Lord. But In verse 5 we are told that:

“For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.”

To abide means to remain in a place, to dwell or sojourn in it. But how can we abide in heavenly law while also dwelling in a tabernacle of flesh? How do we stop committing the sin of lust – flesh against Spirit, and Spirit against flesh? The answer is not in total abandon to the flesh any more than it is in a total subjugation of the flesh to some supposedly high ideals which are really only high and mighty idols of pride. Tyranny of one kind can not cancel out tyranny of another. Only through love will all be set in order. The faulty relation-chip which most men have with their bodies is illustrated very well in the story of Judah and Tamar in Genesis 38. Judah was supposed to give his daughter-in-law Tamar seed, but he would not. He kept avoiding her and passing her off onto his sons who likewise denied her their seed. Finally, while Judah is away traveling, Tamar veils herself and pretends to be a harlot in a public place. With her face concealed behind a veil and wearing clothing customary of a harlot Judah does not know that it is Tamar, and he solicits sex with her. She requires his staff, his signet, and his bracelets as collateral. After they lay together Tamar disappears and is nowhere to be found. She had conceived and later when others accuse her of having “played the harlot” Judah says “Bring her forth, and let her be burnt.” Then Tamar produces proof that she was pregnant with Judah’s child when she shows him his staff, signet, and bracelets. Judah acknowledged them, and said, “She hath been more righteous than I.”

tamar

We would condemn the life of a woman like her who used clever trickery to accomplish her ends. And were it not for her prominent role in the moral stories of the Bible, we would likely pronounce judgment on Tamar herself for “playing the harlot” and thereby “playing” the self-righteous Judah for a fool. How dare she! But ask yourself what kind of outwardly misleading cost-u-me do you wear and how much does it cost-u-&-me in our relationships and dealings one with another? Who is the real harlot? Women like her get ignored because of a silent judgment against her looks. What could women possibly offer the world beyond physical beauty? It is through Tamar that the aforementioned line of Perez and Jesus Christ himself come. Jesus apparently inherited Tamar’s “disguise” since it was written of him that he came to us “with no apparent beauty that man should him desire”. If divinity disguises itself in such a manner, what might the good looking people we meet, or see celebrated on tell-lie-vision look like inwardly, underneath the physical mask? The repairing of the broken physical DNA of fallen man through Christ is symbolized by the breach of Perez. The union of Judah and Tamar symbolized the re-linking (religion) of the severed spiritual DNA of the Family of God. But the symbolism is lost on most because we refuse to see how our inner self could share any blame in our fallen state. For the vast majority of mankind throughout most of our history, we as independent spirits created by the Most High and endowed with free-will, have been unwilling to “come in unto” our physical bodies except under a strictly “payment for pleasure” basis. The attitude of Our Higher Selves towards our tabernacles of clay had been dismissive and degrading at best and despotic at worst. Only once Tamar, bearing the Son of Man, despised and scorned, finally spoke up were we redeemed. Christ, with the staff of his spine laid straight against the grain of the cruel cross, the wounds in his wrists as they were braced upon the crossbeam, he produced the sure signet bearing indisputable proof of legitimacy.

If we remain conscious of the fact that we are first spirit beings and secondly beings of flesh then we may at least acknowledge that like parents and children, neither are perfect, both the spirit and the physical body are learning, however there is a certain order which will allow both to progress and experience maximum joy. For our part as physical creatures we may be tempted to say: “Gifts of the Spirit are all very fine and well. But how is any real work of the Lord to get done without at least some attention to temporal matters?” The Lord’s answer is clear. First, the Lord has already commanded the spirit of man to care for and attend to all the needs of his physical body. Secondly, due to the psychological and physiological schisms that separate a man from his Lord’s presence, Jesus understandingly entreated us to take it day by day and not to worry so much about tomorrow. This task is easier said than done for a race that has grown so accustomed to working exclusively with action-faith as opposed to power-faith. These two modes of faith are meant to function perfectly together. You can learn more about action-faith and power-faith in this video.

We only find it so difficult to exercise power-faith because it is a function of the spirit body which typically restricts interaction with the flesh to transactions of a worldly nature to conduct business as usual in Babylon. This circumstance is partly due to the lofty-mindedness of the Spirit Self and partly due to the stubbornness of the developing physical body, which upon receiving a portion of spirit feels ready and determined to set out on its own. It is natural for us to desire independence and for the physical aspect of man to become aquatinted with grief and sorrows is good to certain extent. When we try to avoid suffering at all costs then we end up paying the utmost price at the point when all of those divinely ordained and perfectly purposed painful aspects of existence pile up and demand our attention. This is something that the philosophies of men do not take into account. Most philosophies, whether of Western or Eastern men, tend to make the physical body the “bad guy” in every instance. If anything the opposite is true when it comes to true scripture unmingled with abstinent and ascetic philosophies. The teachers of religion love to disseminate half truths that castigate one half of creation while excusing disembodied beings of light as if they could do no wrong. But God Almighty takes issue with his rebellious spirit children for not loving and lifting his material grand children, raising the sons of men in the same way that he has raised spiritual mankind. Remember that Paul told the Galatians (and the same applies to all earthlings) that when,

“….the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh….ye cannot do the things that ye would.”

This accurately explains the abusive relation-chip that holds us back. This is the awful situation that we must rise above if we are ever to defeat the Secret Combinations. In this awful situation one cannot do the things that one would, or should. You can not stop thinking about all the “sufficient evil” you have on your to-do list tomorrow. You can not obey God’s word to your heart when the beggar puts his petition to you, because like him you must deal with harsh realities of a fallen world. You can not spend time with your children, let alone set a good example for them to see what powerful miracles the Lord is able to do. You can not exercise your faith right now because today is the only chance you will have to exercise your physical muscle at the gym where you paid for a year’s membership. You can not afford to take a sick-day unless you use your vacation time. You can not heal yourself when you are sick. You can not heal others. You can not free yourself from captivity to your enemies. You can not see the angels that stand ready to help you. You can not worship God according to the dictates of your own conscience. You cannot even buy, sell, or trade without taking the mark of the beast. It is illegal. But,

“If ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.”

Then you could learn another language, or several, or hundreds. You could speak with the tongue of angels. You could have the body you always wanted. You could expand your family’s horizons in countless ways. You could fly to visit Grandpa and Grandma without the use of a plane. You could see your dead loved ones again. You could know what the weather is going to be like tomorrow without having to rely on the weatherman’s best guess. You could change the world for the better. You could conquer corruption and alleviate suffering. You could proclaim and feel peace. You could praise the Lord morning, noon, and night. You could live a zen-like life where your praise and blessings flow without ceasing. You could see the face of God! You could do so many things if you were led of the Spirit.

Some people think that such stuff is nonsense and terribly impractical. I think it is terribly impractical not to be able to fly as the eagle can, or to regenerate limbs as the lizard can. If God loves and looks after small creatures like the sparrow, then why do we doubt his love and attention towards us? I think it is terribly impractical to spend the majority of your waking hours working at a job to pay the bills. It is terribly impractical for the Lord’s purposes and His grand design in giving us the golden opportunity to be a part of a golden age, contributing to something as wonderful as Zion during the millennium. But it is terribly convenient for the Devil and all the underlings who, as low as they are, still manage to rule over us. So when people try to insinuate that we Mormon mystics, or LDS anarchists “get real” just remember that to insinuate means: to suggest or hint (something bad or reprehensible) in an indirect and unpleasant way. Religionists in general and religious Statists especially have insinuation down to a science. They will intrinsically act similarly to the Gaddianton Robbers who were cowardly and had to secrete themselves in cavernous hiding places while making sneaky, indirect and unpleasant raids on others. Are you going to let them get away with it?

“The Children of God must always be mocked by the children of the world, whether in the church or out of it – children with sharp ears and eyes, but dull hearts,”

says George McDonald in Unspoken Sermons.

“Those that hold love the only good in the world understand and smile at the world’s children, and can do very well without anything they have got to tell them. In the higher state to which their love is leading them, they will speedily out-strip the men of science (state, religion), for they have that which is at the root of science (state, religion), that for the revealing of which God’s science (self-governance, religious experiences) exists.”

Insinuation also refers to a tactic that involves maneuvering oneself into (a position of favor or office) by subtle manipulation. This particular definition matches the tactics of the children of the world even more exactly in the regular activities of their Secret Combination. The reason I am reading so much into this word – insinuate – is so that I might prepare our minds to do among the haughty experts of today’s world as Jesus did among the ancient Jewish leaders. We can not feel ashamed of the testimony of Christ. We must expose the intentions in the hearts of the children of the matrix which are the inward cause of their insinuating apostasy, impropriety, or blasphemy on our part. The way I see it, to in-sinew-ate is very backwards, because it is not sinews that we are supposed to weave into a strong-arm of flesh with which to affect change. We are expected to infuse spiritual strength into the loins and sinews.

Whether you are a religionist who insinuates that non-religious people are the problem, or a non-religious Statist who insinuates that religious folks are the problem….If you are a patriot who insinuates that anarchists are not practical in our desires for liberty and justice for all….if you are an anarchist or a libertarian who insinuates that mystics are not practical in our approach….if you are a religionist who insinuates that everyone else is evil…..it says nothing of us, only of you. It says that IN-SIN-U-ATE, and in sin you continue eating, glutting yourself in your personal position secured and secreted within a Secret Combination so secret that its own members do not know of it.

To call the skeptics non-believers would be unfair, for they most certainly believe in the current system that has prevailed since the beguiling of our First Parents, spreading death, despair and decadence time and space, and it dictates the use of their action-faith. All Doubting Thomases, as they are sometimes called, are precise in the direction of their doubt. They have the utmost confidence in the rules and laws of this miserable, unjust existence, they only doubt things like miracles and freely offered forgiveness. To those who put their trust in the arm of flesh, and think the Gospel of Christ terribly impractical – to those who talk as though they are ready to take matters into their own hands – those who think in terms of food storage, guns, and ammo – I would like to say stand still and see the salvation of the Lord! But the truth is that most of you will still put your trust in these things to some extent, and what’s more dangerous, you will lean unto your own understanding. So by way of invitation I say let each man exercise his will, whether it be unto salvation or condemnation, but let him do it with more energy of soul. If you are a fund raiser then get out there and raise more funds than ever before. If you are a “prepper” make sure you horde plenty of food and plenty bullets to ward off all the starving hordes that come from neighboring areas in search of food. If you think that Zion can or will be established by means of political reform then by all means campaign and vote. If you believe the Church with which you are affiliated does valid work in saving, or even helping souls, then what are you waiting for? Shout it from the rooftops. Do what you are going to do, but make sure you give it your all!

UNTIL YOU MEET YOUR SOULMATE THE BODY CONSISTS OF CELLMATES

To my brothers and sisters who have grown weary of this world, and who through various life circumstances have arrived at a place of humility instead of hubris: let us look a little deeper into the truth of the matter, the truth of the spirit, and the truth that will be once spirit and matter are made one. There has been much speculation as to what Zion will look like, and how to approach it, achieve it, live it. I offer this study in the only way it can be offered, freely. I beseech you to not let my freedom in expression offend your sensibilities, and I hope in faith that you will not dismiss what I write because of its novelty, or its subtlety. If there is confusion at first upon consideration of the scriptures I share here, and the seemingly strange light in which I share them with you – please, reserve judgment, ponder and pray for new eyes and ears with which to understand and discern. AdamKadmon2I do not desire to impress you with my intellect, or brag about my righteousness. I do not even see these things as “mine” but divine qualities which are available to and through all from the One True and Living God. To even speak of will as mine at this point makes little sense. I am not trying to build the blog following here or anywhere else online. I do not represent any official organization or formal movement. I am not selling any books like the old General Authorities or Denver Snuffer. Many scriptures have already been written and are available to even the poorest among us. I would like to examine some scripture which is appropriate to the majority of my audience and to which I have already referred earlier – D&C 93.

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord: It shall come to pass that every soul who forsaketh his sins and cometh unto me, and calleth on my name, and obeyeth my voice, and keepeth my commandments, shall see my face and know that I am;

Recently Denver Snuffer has received much attention, positive and negative, for making the supposedly apostate claim that anyone can see the Lord’s face. Was that the real reason, or was he excommunicated because he was selling so many books and his teachings had become quite popular with the people. Whether it was Denver’s conscious intention or not he was in competition with the Church leadership. Nephi tells us that: “priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion” (2 Nephi 26:29). Remember we discussed how it is a spiritual pitfall, not to mention a physiological impossibility for the 10 Wise Virgins in Jesus’ parable to impart of their oil to the 10 Foolish Virgins. To set one’s self up for a light unto the world is vanity and is completely unnecessary since, as we previously read in D&C 93:2, the Lord is:

“…the true light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world;”

Now I want to call attention to the Lord’s wording here. He does not say he is a light unto the world, but that he literally lights every man that comes into it. Let’s face it, Jesus was not hugely popular among the Church leadership, and neither was he readily recognized as divine by the average man on the street. He most certainly let his light shine before men, but with the intention of inspiring them to turn on their personal glory switch which would in turn glorify their Father in Heaven. This cyclical give-and-take glorification is like a divine electrical circuit. If we think that the current of the Holy Spirit is merely one-way then we fail to feel that divine electric spark and our action is similar to a kinked wire. It is up to us to affirm that divine connection. Verse 3 reminds us that in order to be like Jesus we must feel and know that:

“I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one—”

What exactly are we saying here? Jesus couldn’t possibly expect others to understand him when emphatically repeating this mystifying phrase, much less to adopt it themselves as a personal mantra. That is probably the reason for his performance of miracles in the flesh, isn’t it? We think that only by actions can we prove anything or demonstrate truth. But when it comes down to it, the idea that “seeing is believing” is backwards, and comes to us from the principles introduced by Lucifer. The Light Bearer wants us to be totally reliant upon him. Light is necessary for sight in this world of his. But what truly is light? Do we cling to the burning Æther like the inflammatory personality of Lucifer as he fell through the Abyss, and by the fury of his flight kindled the air? The Æther was already there before it became visible by its burning to carnal eyes through their lenses, rods, and cones, was it not? In the fittingly titled book of Æther, in the 12th chapter, 6th verse, appears a clearly defined outline of faith and its workings. Moroni comments:

“I would show unto the world that faith is things which are hoped for and not seen; wherefore, dispute not because ye see not, for ye receive no witness until after the trial of your faith.”

Did Jesus purposefully tone it down, or dim his light before men to accommodate the world? No he was and is the Sun of God, shining in the morning, shining at noonday, at evening, and all through the night. The only differences are in our varying perceptions of his glory from distinct angles as the world turns. Jesus said: “blessed are ye if ye shall believe in me and be baptized, after that ye have seen me and know that I am” (3 Nephi 12:1). But in verse 2 he follows up with this:

“And again, more blessed are they who shall believe in your words because that ye shall testify that ye have seen me, and that ye know that I am. Yea, blessed are they who shall believe in your words, and come down into the depths of humility and be baptized, for they shall be visited with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and shall receive a remission of their sins.”

Will this fire of which Christ speaks be immediately visible to our physical eyes upon its visitation to the believing individual? Not necessarily. For Jesus tells us in 3 Nephi 9:20 that the Lamanites at the time of their conversion were baptized with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and they knew it not. If the individuals coming to the Lord with broken hearts and contrite spirits do not always see magnificent displays of heavenly light at the moment of their baptism, which is a personal witness to God and inwardly very private, then it is much less probable that onlookers to the more public performances of that ritual should see anything in the way of rays of light reaching their ocular organs. Do we expect to see plasmic discharges within the visible light spectrum of our carnal eyes before we practice feeling or otherwise sensing energetic bursts of spirit? Just because we do not perceive the angel that visits us with the sense of sight does not mean he was not sent by the Lord with an extremely important message for us? The stubborn ass of the prophet Balaam could see the Lord’s messenger and were it not for that faithful animal; the prophet’s stubborn ass would have entirely missed the angelic visitation. Sure, God could make the sign by which we gauge truth to be the sign of a dove, cloven tongues of fire, or any other visual sign, but seeing beings of light, or new stars in the heavens does not engender belief within the hard hearts of the wicked, and such light is typically only revealed to them for the purposes of protecting believers from harm, or death at the hands of those who insist on being shown signs. The Holy Spirit is not some magic wand and a True God does not use it to bedazzle mortals or to entertain non-believers.

LDSA has pointed out, and I agree with him, that the phrase “and they knew it not” (spoken to survivors of mass destruction on the American continent anciently by the voice of Christ from above a thick body of mists of darkness), can be interpreted as being specifically in reference to the group of roughly 300 composed of Lamanites and Nephite dissenters who had captured, imprisoned, and now came to kill the believing prophets, Lehi and Nephi (Helaman 5). Footnotes in the original printing of the Book of Mormon seemed to indicate this, but of course Jesus does not specify. Looking at this group of roughly 300 souls who were converted at that time, we see that the impressive pyrotechnics surrounding this event and the people involved do indeed follow the general rule of administering unto believers who have exercised faith in the crucial hour of their deliverance. Whereas LDSA thinks that Jesus is saying that these souls “knew it not” due to ignorance in theological matters, this can not be what the Savior meant because when one sees one’s self encircled in a blazing plasma pillar as each of theses individuals were able to behold, it does not take a religious expert to deduct that what is happening is a total immersion in flame without being physically burned, or consumed. Basically put, personal experiences of this nature are not something of which one is completely unaware.

But, remember that apart from the heat felt by fire, the only other key feature of fire (or plasmic discharges described in those terms), would be light. Physical sight is dependent on light, but light itself as a manifestation of the spectrum of glory is not necessarily dependent upon the short-sightedness of man’s physical eyes. It exists as it is independently from man’s ability or inability to perceive it on every level. This populous mob of prophet-killers had not merited the manifestation through scripture study, and it was not even the words of Aminidab (one of the Nephite born dissenters among them) which “illuminated” their darkened minds. It was their faith in the unseen which granted a lifting of the thick cloud of darkness that hung over all of them. They found themselves in the same benighted condition that the mix of Nephite and Lamanite survivors at the time of Christ’s visitation found themselves years later. The reason that those 300 saw pillars of flame around Nephi and Lehi, was because they were taken by surprise, ambushed as it were by the flash of extreme belief generated by those two men in the Lord their God. Their own soul’s immediate reaction was to shake violently from the sudden and unexpected penetration of their collective perspective. Never having known the Lord as a personal God was what automatically thrust them all into a sudden state of shock brought on by such an abrupt awareness of something beyond the black veil which they were accustomed to believing was an impenetrable border marking the edge of all there was to see. Confronted with the light of truth, their souls immediately retreated, but the veil of darkness was now all they could see, since their awareness had been pulled to that edge. Lost in that thick curtain, the crowd panicked, stumbled, and faltered till a still small voice spoke to them from above the darkness. (This voice sounded from above somewhere overhead and could possibly be related with the Dreaming Emissary as described by Carlos Castaneda and other lucid dreamers. The voice above their heads tells them things that they should have already known as evidenced by Aminidab’s later reference to the prior instruction of Alma, Amulek, and Zeezrom. This is of particular note because Castaneda was told by his spiritual teacher, Don Juan, that the voice of the Dreaming Emissary can only remind one of what they ought to already know.) The voice pierced their souls and caused their frames to continue gyrating violently while the walls of the prison remained firm and unaffected. At this point though, they were already encompassed by pillars of fire. The darkness in which they were collectively enveloped was the real, and plain reason that they “knew it not”.

As soon as they exercised faith in Christ, who had been taught unto them by Alma, and Amulek, and Zeezrom, the darkness dispersed. (obviously this refers to Nephite dissenters specifically unless there is a missing record of Alma, Amulek, and Zeezrom preaching to the natural-born Lamanites) The darkness had not so much seized them, but they were simply passing through it, similar to Joseph Smith immediately following his glorious First Vision. The darkness dispersed because of their faith in what they had seen flashed before their eyes and the voice they now heard. They, like the Brother of Jared, could no longer be kept without the veil (Ether 12:21). When the darkness dispersed, that is when they knew that they were each surrounded by a personal plasma pillar, baptizing them in fire. The phenomena evolved to an inner baptism of the Holy Ghost which filled them as with fire. Now in that state they were able to view ministering angels descending out of a heavenly opening. After this miraculous event they were commanded to go forth and share what they had seen and heard, and to not marvel or doubt. This commandment to marvel not, nor doubt was important because it was not likely that their walk of faith would be graced with many more experiences of the same magnitude of that day in the same prison where Ammon and his brethren were cast by the servants of Limhi.

But just as the baptism(s) of fire had been for those 300 a simultaneously individual and collective phenomenon, and just as it had begun regardless of their collective or individual level of awareness (triggered by the faith of those two prisoners), so the truthfulness of the wonders they all encountered were to remain bright in their memory and held sacred in their hearts, even through times of darkness ahead, and in spite of the lack of visual confirmation as they progressed in faith. The resulting spiritual conversion was not limited to these 300 souls, but swept across the land, where it took great hold at least among the Lamanites who were so purified by their respective baptisms of fire that they conceded the lands of the Nephites which they had formerly taken by force. They made and kept a promise to the Lord to “seek no more to destroy [his] servants whom [he] sent….to declare good tidings.” These things happened around the time of Jesus’ birth on the other side of the world in Jerusalem. Then around the time of Jesus’ crucifixion, another throng of Nephites and Lamanites once again were enveloped in a cloud of darkness, and told by a voice on high to offer up no more the shedding of blood, but instead to offer up the sacrifice of a broken heart and a contrite spirit. They were told that if they would do this, they would be baptized with fire and the Holy Ghost like the Lamanites were at the time of their conversion while they were in the dark and, “knew it not.” (3 Nephi 9:19-20)

The element of fire is used by God as a purifying flame which is always accompanied by a certain heat that can be felt to warm and comfort the bosoms of men in a sensation that is instantly spiritual and physical. The wild-fire patterns of popularity and success for Denver Snuffer’s timely book series are very different from the spreading fires of conversion among the Lamanites. This fire is not taking as strong a hold and is spread mostly due to wild-winds which are stirring up the hearts of many these days. Unfortunately the majority of the hard-hearted LDS are not stirred up unto repentance by these winds. The Brethren and a host of bloggers in the LDS community blow hard. But this only produces light breezes that softly caress the many souls who were growing restless in their hearts, and whispers a lonely lullaby that lulls them back to sleep. Reverend Snuffer was very careful not to step on the feet of those who belong to the leadership half of our cabal, but it is impossible to toe that line between leaders and the led without disturbing the precarious imbalance of a Secret Combination like ours. The Holy Ghost is a Comforter, not an appeaser. Sooner or later we all have to wake up.

And, upon awakening, what shall we see? I am reminded of the Christmas carol – Do You See What I See? Is it necessary that everyone see what I see in the same way I see it? Does everyone have to “see things” the way Smith, Packer, or Snuffer does? Perhaps what makes Joseph’s First Vision so special is the fact that, much to the satisfaction of his critics, Joseph did not go around sharing this deeply intimate experience with anyone and everyone right away. And they find fault with the fact that years later when he actually recorded it, he was still trying to grasp the magnitude of meaning conveyed in it. If it is not God’s formula to reveal himself to everyone then is the Church leadership right to defend their God’s privacy by means of shunning Snuffer? If they are mistaken, and it is God’s formula is to reveal himself to everyone in precisely the same manner, which manner is that exactly? If there are indeed similarities in the divine encounters experienced by various people ranging from Adam to Mohonri Moriancumer, from Moses, to Mohammed, and from John the Revelator to Joseph Smith, then what necessitates the publishing of Reverend Snuffer’s works, or the circulation of Packer’s inferences – especially when they provide less details than most scriptural accounts of direct dealings between man and his maker? What is so special about these “special witnesses” and why should Reverend Snuffer be so reluctant and vague about his encounters with the divine, yet so profuse in detailing procedures for the saints to know the Lord?

Another author who is immensely popular among the LDS people is C.S. Lewis. In a book which bears a title reminiscent of D&C 132’s reference to a “far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory” C.S. Lewis spoke of our innate homesickness for Heaven and the longing we feel for the portion of spirit which inhabits these temporal bodies to finally see our long lost friends again. Nothing is real till Israel reunites her scattered and lost tribes. Our physical beings must meet their spiritual counterparts and return to live in love supreme. It is the Secret Combination of the two which keeps us shut out from the presence of the Lord and unable to move from being inmates to being intimate in our connection to each other and to God. Lewis described it this way:

“In speaking of this desire for our own faroff country, which we find in ourselves even now, I feel a certain shyness. I am almost committing an indecency. I am trying to rip open the inconsolable secret in each one of you—the secret which hurts so much that you take your revenge on it by calling it names like Nostalgia and Romanticism and Adolescence; the secret also which pierces with such sweetness that when, in very intimate conversation, the mention of it becomes imminent, we grow awkward and affect to laugh at ourselves; the secret we cannot hide and cannot tell, though we desire to do both. We cannot tell it because it is a desire for something that has never actually appeared in our experience. We cannot hide it because our experience is constantly suggesting it, and we betray ourselves like lovers at the mention of a name.

Our commonest expedient is to call it beauty and behave as if that had settled the matter. Wordsworth’s expedient was to identify it with certain moments in his own past. But all this is a cheat. If Wordsworth had gone back to those moments in the past, he would not have found the thing itself, but only the reminder of it; what he remembered would turn out to be itself a remembering. The books or the music in which we thought the beauty was located will betray us if we trust to them; it was not in them, it only came through them, and what came through them was longing. These things—the beauty, the memory of our own past—are good images of what we really desire; but if they are mistaken for the thing itself they turn into dumb idols, breaking the hearts of their worshippers. For they are not the thing itself; they are only the scent of a flower we have not found, the echo of a tune we have not heard, news from a country we have never yet visited.”

― C.S. Lewis, The Weight of Glory

Speaking on the popularity of such books that promise success in this life, books like the best-seller The Secret, and the follow-up to it called The Power, a virtuous young woman I met in the Caribbean once told me:

“The Secret is that we have Holy Spirits. Those spirits need to be nourished and they can only be nurtured by one thing. That’s why after all the music, all the drugs, all the food, all the money, life seems to fall short. And when everything falls short and we sit there hopeless, broken, or even just bored…we turn to the most powerful force on the face of this planet in an attempt to fix ourselves.”

I asked her what she felt was the only thing that could nourish our spirits, and she said:

“Love…true love ignites our souls and awakens the dead parts inside of all of us. Almost like magic. The Most High IS Divine Love. LOVE IS The Most High.”

There are also self-help books that claim to be food for our spirit. The bright minds that write them and market them focus us on a promise of not only success in this life, but also in the next. How intriguing! How exciting! How enlightening! How much does this book cost? LDSA candidly and realistically depicts these book vendors in a satirical interview with an imaginary character named Harold P. Kraft, who just so happens to perfectly fit the bill of many popular LDS authors.

Interviewer: Now, the second book, and for our listeners, that book was called, The Secret Knowledge that No One Knows Except Me and Jesus, But I’ll Tell You Anyway!, that book I couldn’t put it down.

Kraft: No one could.  I had people jokingly tell me I ought to run for prophet.  They kept saying to me, “It’s like the Savior is back!  You’ve brought the Savior back!”  Of course, that’s just silly.  I am just a lowly mortal.  I did nothing.  The Lord did everything through me and my nothingness.

Interviewer: What’s amazing is that the second book cost more than the first, yet sold better.  How do you explain that?

Kraft: I realized that the people hungered for more than what they were getting at church and I realized that they wanted what I could offer them.  So I offered them more, more pages, more words.  The book was almost twice the size of the first one, at 789 pages, so I had to make the price commensurate.  I think it sold for $39.97 or something like that, so although the book was double in size, its price was not.  I was giving them a better deal, something really for nothing.

As LDSA’s satire highlights the fact that there are many among us who succumb to the natural man’s tendency to be prideful. We sometimes say that such a person is “full of his/herself” but in reality that person is very empty and seeks to fill the void with things which it sees outside his/herself. Jesus broke it down very succinctly. Confused Rabbis were once again attempting to ensnare Jesus in his words and trip him up by asking about the many laws of man. As they did centuries later with Bob Marley, they hoped Jesus would single out one of their many laws as higher and thereby set aside other laws which they could accuse him of disregarding. He answered them that there was no great commandment in the law, but rather a Great Law of Love which flows through all situational regulation, and it was that Law only with which the Master Teacher concerns himself.

“Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

This is the first and great commandment.

And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

– Matt. 22:37-40

Jesus says to love the Lord thy God with all your being. He then says to love your neighbor as your own being. If there are three distinct beings mentioned here, namely:

1. Your God

2. Your Neighbor

3. Yourself

…and if it is implied that we love all three with all energy of soul then why does Jesus say there are only 2 commandments upon which all the laws and the prophets rest? The First and Great commandment to love the Lord your God with all your being is straightforward. And the second like unto it. So, Jesus did not miscount. He did not make a distinction between loving yourself and loving your God. This is one action done with all the heart, all the soul, and with the entire mind. Anyone who differentiates between God and Self is demarcating a boundary that makes enemies of the two, and though he feign devotion to a higher power, he is not wholly devoted to holiness, only dead-I-cated to the devilish doctrine of division which will make it impossible to refrain from discrimination among his neighbors. Remember I said that the scriptures establish a specification with the usage of two terms – “the Lord YOUR God” and “your God AND my God”. To clarify for those parts of our minds that need to see some sort of delineation, the scriptures are extremely precise. It is our minds that are dull with corrosion and unready to receive, or fully acknowledge truth. In the following verses of Matt. 22 we see that Jesus puts an end to all the Pharisees questions with a question of his own for them.

Jesus asked them, “What think ye of Christ? Whose son is he?” They say unto him, “The Son of David.”

Jesus responded, “How is it then that David, speaking under the inspiration of the Spirit, calls the Messiah ‘my Lord’? For David said:

The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?”

And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.

Even though Jesus simply points out David’s deferral of ‘my Lord’ to ‘The Lord’ a Pharisee can only see heresy. A Pharisee clings tooth and nail to hearsay and labels as heresy anything within the realm of intimate, first-hand knowledge. But the Bible makes it “Christ-All Clear” that real knowledge is always an intimate affair. Anything or anyone worth knowing is worthy of an intimate encounter, and to establish a “hitherto shalt thou come, but no further” relationship between man and his maker is to promote ignorance and set up Satan’s Secret Combination. We say that Cain was the founder of the original Secret Combination, and this rejection of intimacy was exactly Cain’s response when he said: “Who is the Lord that I should know him?” With that attitude setting the tone, is it at all surprising to later hear Cain deny knowing of Abel’s whereabouts, asking the callous and infamous question: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” The word “know” is consistent in Moses 5 as it is throughout the rest of scripture with its meaning connoting an intimate act, not necessarily sexual in a carnal sense, but nonetheless intimate. We have all heard it said that sharing is caring, but we often fail to realize that sharing is knowing. Jesus shared the parable of the Good Samaritan showing that he recognized the seamless link between Love of God and love for one’s fellow man. His shameless sharing left the confused Rabbis even more confounded. He exposed religion as a sham and shamed those religious teachers and leaders in their conniving. The things Jesus shared showed that Jesus knew and understood the subtle yet eternally vast difference between the Secret Combinations of the Devil and the Open Combination of God in all things. At that point in his mortal ministry when Jesus plainly exposed the truth and shocked and silenced all the Pharisees for the last time in terms of trying to pick doctrinal debates, we see Jesus share a paradoxically private, inside moment of triumph with a brother who spots the subtlety in Jesus’ out-in-the-open yet multi-layered truth sharing style. The man exclaims:

“thou hast said the truth: for there is One God; and there is none other but he,”

to which he adds:

“And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.” (Mark 12:32,33)

When the man says, “to love his neighbor as himself” the word ‘his’ can only be referencing one person since his previous statement declares that there is no one else other than God. Self-ignorant scribes would later translate the text without a capital ‘H’. But there is a reason why the Scribe addressing Jesus used the word ‘his’ and not ‘thy’ or ‘one’s’. This reveals the true nature of possession and reveals as hypocrites and liars those who claim to serve a God who is sovereign above all, yet divide loyalties among other things hither and thither into categorical hierarchies. Was this man mistaken in his reasoning? Did he mistake Jesus’ sayings, or do we? Well, the scripture says that Jesus answered him discretely and told the scribe:

“Thou art not far from the kingdom of God.” (Mark 12:34)

The individual is the connection between God and neighbor. Now we should be able to make more sense of Christ’s explanation of the two-in-one concept of “I-in-Father-Father-in-Me” which continues the study in D&C 93 verse 4.

The Father because he gave me of his fulness, and the Son because I was in the world and made flesh my tabernacle, and dwelt among the sons of men.

The everlasting Open Combination which is most desirable between God and mortals is often referred to with the title of the Holy Priesthood after the Order of the Son of God. In all ancient languages and many still in use today, the words ‘son’ or ‘sons’ carry the meaning of ‘child’ or ‘children’ – sons and daughters. This is why there is a distinction between the “sons of men” and the “Son of Man”. For a people such as the LDS who appear to be the most family focused group on the face of things, if not the face of the earth, in these latter days, we should not find it difficult to conceptualize of our mortal cellves as God’s Grandchildren. If God is Mormon, certainly he would have numerous concourses of grandkids. What we really need to understand is how to “grow up unto the Lord” by recognizing our true selves as God’s immortal children who have received such a glorious inheritance only to squander it instead of caring for our own flesh and blood. We have not done right by our own flesh and blood. We have not been “raising” our “children” in “incorruption.” Our neighbors who we are commanded to love as ourselves are sometimes viewed with pity, or even disdain on our parts, if those neighbors come from “broken families” where the “good old fashioned” grandparents are forced to shoulder the burden of raising babies because the parents neglect or reject their divine calling. But we are vain and ignorant. The neighbors down the block may be poor underachieving druggies and deadbeats, but our white picket fences encase white sepulchers full of dead men’s bones. Our worldly achievements are our addictions, and our vanity is our poverty of soul.

It is key to note that acceptance of the Fullness of the Father is what made Jesus into the Father, and that taking that fullness into the world via the vehicle of a temporal tabernacle is what made him the Son. I say “made” because, though not in the way of the world, in accordance with the conditions instituted from before the foundation of the world, Jesus was a “made man”. We might even say he was “the” made man or the first man to complete the process of being made perfect in spirit and flesh. He showed us how it is done. Now it is our turn. But how can we possibly hope to receive the Fullness of the Father? The answer is painfully obvious – through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The question we ought to put to ourselves is what has kept us from even thinking of asking and accepting that fullness in the first place? It may seem obvious, however it is worth pointing out that a spirit that not only bears the title but truly  is a father in that he has spiritually begotten at least one spirit child does not cease to exist by passing on his fullness. Rather, a spiritual father emits energy and perfectly duplicates himself. Now here is the trick, in order to be truly perfect the duplicate must also have free-will to execute work independently. Worldly fathers often try to live vicariously through their sons. But such attempts are never successful. In fact they are always disastrous in one sense or another, because they begin with the bypassing of that intensely spiritual process of depositing one’s self fully, passing one’s fullness into another.

“We must be willing and able to go beyond ego to reach out to something more, to experience the parts of ourselves that have nothing to do with the agendas of our personalities. At the same time, we must also be willing to experience the limitation and pain that our ego’s habits are causing us.

In the last analysis, learning how to transcend the ego involves nothing less than learning how to be open to love. Only love has the power to save us from ourselves. Until we learn to truly love ourselves and others—and to accept the love of others—there can be no hope of lasting happiness or peace or redemption.” (Don Richard Riso and Russ Hudson – Personality Types, 460-61)

GOING FROM BEING INMATES TO BEING INTIMATE

To be a servant in our Father’s house is not necessarily synonymous with being a Son of the Father. For a real father & son relationship to occur there needs to be a going out, and a coming in of pure spirit. Most of us have done the first part. Like the prodigal son we have opted to take our inheritance and go out into the world. But now that we are here we have made the mistake of squandering that portion of spirit that the Father gave us when we left his presence. What is worse, we commit the sin of pride and we do not call home to ask for more. Thinking that we can do it on our own, leads to thinking we must do it on our own. Our own stubbornness and selfishness turn to forgetfulness and get falsely attributed to God. And how would we know any different so long as we refuse to accept God’s attributes for incorporation into our bodies? Fariduddin ‘Attar, the mystic Sufi saint of Iran wrote:

It is those who cannot see straight who fall into error: This is the sightedness of the man who denies God attributes. Ah, the pity! Nobody possesses the power: Eyes blind and the world filled with sunlight!

Walking in darkness at noonday as the scripture says (D&C 95:6) we stumble around as self-made victims when we could be enjoying a continuous flow of power from on high. A little work is required, but it is not the same strenuous, frivolous and futile labor of the flesh. Jesus told us that his yoke was easy and his burden light. To receive the Fullness of the Father means essentially to yoke, or sync up the Power Faith by which our immortal spirit body operates with the Action Faith which our mortal body uses to assert its self in this existence. An infusion of spirit and flesh is necessary in order for Power Faith from on high to bleed effortlessly into Action Faith as exhibited here below. Jesus expounds upon this process in verse 5 of D&C section 93.

I was in the world and received of my Father, and the works of him were plainly manifest.

So first we have to be in the world. Great! Here we are! Then we have to receive of our Father. Great! We have already done that, and we dip into that supply everyday! All that we lack is to keep doing this and perfect the process. Not even Jesus received the fullness at first. Verse 12 says that he received “grace for grace” and continued from “grace to grace” until he received the fullness. The moment when Jesus received the fullness appears to have taken place at his baptism. Section 93 now quotes from John and tells us:

14 And thus he was called the Son of God, because he received not of the fulness at the first.

15 And I, John, bear record, and lo, the heavens were opened, and the Holy Ghost descended upon him in the form of a dove, and sat upon him, and there came a voice out of heaven saying: This is my beloved Son.

The confused masses of Christ-Shuns go to the doctors of the Church for prescriptions (doctrines). Some of these doctrines are of men and others are of devils. None of them can cure us. One of the most popular drugs on the market today is a sin-thetic perversion of the doctrine of divine sonship. It is advertised as something that was instantaneously inherited by Jesus at his birth and something to be kept out of the reach of the children. But such poison pills are not of God. If you will read the ingredients listed in the per-scriptures you will see that Jesus (the physical man) did not become a Son of God until he accepted Christ into himself. He was born Jesus and reborn as Jesus Christ – Son of God.

Jackson Browne – Doctor My Eyes

Doctor, my eyes have seen the years
And the slow parade of fears without crying
Now I want to understand

I have done all that I could
To see the evil and the good without hiding
You must help me if you can

Doctor, my eyes
Tell me what is wrong

Was I unwise to leave them open for so long

‘Cause I have wandered through this world
And as each moment has unfurled
I’ve been waiting to awaken from these dreams
People go just where they will
I never noticed them until I got this feeling
That it’s later than it seems

Doctor, my eyes
Tell me what you see

I hear their cries
Just say if it’s too late for me

Doctor, my eyes
Cannot see the sky
Is this the PRICE for having learned how not to cry

.

Divine Lawgic – The Cycle

Jesus suffered the children
He knew the way they felt

Children suffer like Jesus
’Cause every day they’re dealt

Punishments that they didn’t deserve
Feel the centripetal force as we swerve
Through the curve
Of The Cycle

If we are to become again like little children then we most certainly need to relearn how to cry. To more fully receive of the fullness when undergoing a baptism of water we need to be WILLING TO GET WET, not just physically but emotionally. In John 11: 35 it tells us that “Jesus wept.” Although this is the shortest verses in all scripture, and seemingly very non-descript, I believe that this time in Jesus life was another baptism of water or at least another level of it for him. A wave of emotion starts to come over Jesus at this point. He weeps, he groans in the spirit and in himself (John 11:33,38), Jesus even vacillates and shows signs of nervousness. He says in John 12:27….

“Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.”

Nephi pointed out that the Lamb of God was baptized in water to fulfill all righteousness. But then Nephi asks us a question: In what way did the Lamb of God fulfill all righteousness by being baptized in water? Nephi asks us this question because he does not want us committing the common error of supposing that the answer is in the physical ritual alone. We can talk all we want about the importance of gospel ordinances but without recognizing the pre-ordination to which the actions are meant to link, we are talking about a gospel gadget which is of no good with no power source. Alternately if we address the issue of the Pre-Stood Power as if it were the socket into which we must plug, then we have missed the point again – mistaking the outlet for the energy itself or accepting it as the ultimate source. And just as Nephi, my heart too delights in plainness. So, just in case we are tempted to take the analogy of electrical current as used by modern man, and apply it directly to the availability of the Pre-Stood Power of GOD, let us be perfectly clear:

TITHING FUNDS PAY THE BILL FOR LIGHTS & ELECTRICITY IN THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS.

THE PRE-STOOD POWER OF GOD IS AVAILABLE AND GIVEN TO ALL MEN LIBERALLY AS IT IS ACCEPTED LIBERALLY BY THEM IN THE BODY OF CHRIST – FREE OF CHARGE (MONETARILY SPEAKING) FULL OF CHARGE, AND FULL OF LIGHT (SPIRITUALLY SPEAKING).

Nephi says that through the baptism of water Jesus received light, glory, and power accorded to his flesh. In order for this to happen his body of flesh had to humbly accept the role of Holy Lamb of God.

For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift. (D&C 88:33)

Nephi also asks us rhetorically whether or not we know that the Lamb of God was Holy. He asks us this so that we might make the mental connection between a baptism of water later in life and one’s own birth coming straightway out of the waters of the womb. He wants us to understand the plan of redemption and recognize innocence when we see it. Little children are every bit as holy as was Jesus. In fact Moroni states that they are “alive in Christ, even from the foundation of the world” (Moroni 8:12). If we will skip ahead in our reading of D&C section 93 we find that:

38 Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning; and God having redeemed man from the fall, men became again, in their infant state, innocent before God.

We will return to this scriptural elucidation of our innocence before God later. But for now let us resume our investigation of baptisms of water and fire, and how exactly it is that they can bring about the fulfillment of all righteousness. Fulfillment of all righteousness is a quality of eternity. As seen filtered through the lens of time it is an ongoing or cyclical process. As Nephi points out, simply because one enters into time through the strait and narrow gate of the birth canal, does not mean he has completed all the works that the Father would have him do. This is where Action Faith comes into play and fulfills its crucial part in the divine plan. Re-baptism, or re-birth, resets us in that course we found ourselves in as infants, but it does not negate the need to keep moving either. Jesus, for example had only just begun his 3 year ministry when he was baptized by his cousin John. We can not say that the baptism of fire wherein the Holy Ghost descended upon him in the form of a dove was the completion of his works. Only a fulfilling of all righteousness, or a filling up of all three levels of God’s righteous creation – Intelligence, Spirit, and finally Flesh. This was like a stop at a spiritual filling station before Jesus set out through the gate and on the path to another baptism of fire. He brings up this next baptism of fire and the burning desire he had to accomplish it in Luke 12.

49 I am come to set fire to the earth, and I only wish it were already ablaze!

50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!

You will recall that Nephi also uses the word strait to depict the path one enters after the baptism of water. When Jesus says he is “straitened,” this can also be translated as being “pressed” or “pent up” until the baptism has reached its completion. Jesus had grown in wisdom and stature as a young man and now, since receiving the Fullness of the Father, he was literally outgrowing this level of reality known as the 3rd dimension. It’s been theorized that the whole realm of human experience which we inhabit can be closely calculated to exist within a base rate wavelength of 7.23 cm. This measurement corresponds to the average length of space between a human being’s eyes from the center of one pupil to the other. It is the average distance from the tip of the chin to the tip of the nose. It also matches the span of the palms of many humans’ hands. And it is the approximate distance between the chakras in our spirit bodies. This 7.23 cm motif can be found repeated in various ways throughout our bodies because we are submerged within this particular universe and it is embedded within us. But if you think 7.23 cm is narrow, try to imagine the 4th and subsequently higher dimensions. As you go up the wavelength gets shorter and shorter, with higher and higher energy. As you go down in dimensional levels, the wavelength gets longer and longer, with lower and lower energy. This is why Jesus told us:

“Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” (Matt. 7:13-14)

LDSA has stated these truths as plainly as he can in the following statement:

“You are either immersed in plasma or you are not. You are either in an intensity phase or in a rest phase of the cycle. There is no such thing as non-cyclic gradualness. If you think you are growing spiritually for the past ten years without any intense spiritual experiences, you are kidding yourself. It means that you have been in a spiritual rest phase of the cycle during this time. No one can remain at spiritual rest for any extended period of time before spirituality begins to decay. It is an impossibility. So, the LDS concept of a gradual, life-long, imperceptible baptism of fire is patently false and leads to spiritual death.”

From heights which afford a god-eye or more eternal vantage point there is of course a perceivable gradual build in the process of perfection. God rested on the 7th day. But remember that the Father is not alone in this work. When he rests from his labors then the Mother’s labor has only just begun. LDSA is right. There is no such thing as non-cyclic gradualness. But he does not say there is no such thing as gradualness. What can be called a rest phase of the cycle on one end is on the other side of the cycle moving into intensity phase. This is the meaning behind the Yin-Yang symbol, and constitutes the basic tenet of Feng Shui as it follows the cyclical flow of Ch’i energies – that as the nature of anything moves toward the extreme, so it gives birth to its opposite.  Continuing from “grace to grace” as Christ did certainly describes some sort of graduation. But then, as I mentioned earlier, there come periods of transition and completion that are intense and experienced in time as moments when we feel a burst of eternity. From this side it may seem as if nothing is happening but if we are receptive then we will know that the Father is doing his work, and will be ready to meet the movement as it cycles around to us. He does his work for all of us. It will always come to each of us. But it will not flow through those who resist it. How can one resist something so powerful as the work of the Holy Father? They who resist never survive unharmed, simply because positive effects can never be forced upon anyone. If we would receive grace upon grace, then it is essential for us to understand what is happening during our rest cycles.

cyclical progression
You will notice that the above conceptual mapping of the flow of eternity matches the patterns formed by the spiraling of our DNA. We are to be still and submit, letting the active energies flow into and through our bodies. These cycles will most definitely be felt as intense moments, and LDSA is right to offer us the wisdom of a ten year gauge. If you have not felt any such intense movement of the spirit within a ten year span then you are definitely dying. You will want to do something immediately to remedy that situation. Or rather, you must stop doing whatever you have been doing which you erroneously considered so important to your spiritual progression. Stop it now, and hold off from doing those things for as long as you can, for as long as it takes, till you feel the burn in the faith muscles of your sorely under-worked spirit body. The burn is literal, not the same burning of physically pumped muscle, but similar. Though not in the manner or role typically accepted and taught at Church, the physical body does play a vital role in our spiritual progression. It is challenging for most Church-goers to understand because that role is passive. In Feng Shui, Ti Ch’i (not to be confused with Ta’i Chi which we will discuss later) means Earth Spirit, and is sometimes called “host ch’i” because earth elements, like those which constitute our physical bodies, are made to host the heavenly elements. Or, as it is stated in the D&C – Truth hosts Light. Ti Ch’i – the Spirit of Truth bears witness of the Father & the Son.

Your physical body, composed of earth elements, was made to bear witness to the Father & the Son. Dr. Bradley Nelson, author of The Emotion Code and a member of the LDS Church demonstrates how the body can communicate answers from God with subtle sensations that may be used to engage in clear conversation and direct dialogue with spirit. Most have not or will not consider what Justin and others on this blog have discussed since the posting of an excerpt from NCCG.ORG by LDSA. The average Mormon or Christian will say that the Holy Ghost can not be feminine in any other sense than the linguistically generative sense of the Hebrew words for Spirit and Holy Spirit. Christians will hold doggedly to their Homoerotic Model of the Holy Trinity and will say that the mere idea of a Holy Mother beyond Catholic Virgin Worship is utterly pagan and therefore of the devil. Many protestant groups will even vilify the Catholic view of a Holy Mother. And The LDS will forever play the fence, condemning Catholic practice as a distraction while reveling in rumors of a Heavenly Mother who, in keeping with her Puritan, Victorian, and LDS ways, never will reveal too much about herself. Even fewer people will allow themselves to come to a comprehension of Her as physical earth element. Earth elements to them are dirty, and the Heavenly Mother in their minds must be after their vain narcissistic reflection – pristine and prissy – an evil snow queen who thinks she knows what she is doing.

Even those who are not as prideful in their thinking, but more genuine in their curiosity, will be confused because of the doctrinal idea that the Holy Ghost does not have a body. They will not allow themselves to see that the third member of the Godhead has no individual body of flesh and blood because She is the Mother of All Living, out of whom are composed endless individual life-forms. She spreads Herself far and wide and forgoes a form unique to herself so that She can, through physical creation, witness that there is a God. Nowhere does She express Herself and Her mission as fully as in Womb-man. So I tend to agree with LDSA and Justin – The Holy Ghost is a Woman. Dallon J. recently made a comment that brought up the idea that the Father will forgive anything except the reviling against and flat-out denial of the Holy Ghost. Does that include denying women the priesthood? Remember that one of the key features of the Secret Combinations since their early establishment in the history of this planet is that “It was among the sons of men. And among the daughters of men these things were not spoken” (Moses 5:52-53) Many Mormons in Utah and other parts recently peacefully demonstrated their disapproval of Church policy at the Priesthood Session of General Conference. In the end, being granted permission to enter closed meetings, or entrance into a leadership group traditionally limited to a “boys only” club will do nothing. But on the other hand priesthoodlums with all their pretending can do nothing to stop a woman from receiving the Father, witnessing to the Truth, and wielding the real priesthood in great power. There are opportunities for the restoration to move forward, and for real power to pour into our bodies at regular intervals. If the beneficial blessings of God come into our lives but are not let into our bodies then we are taking unrighteous advantage and we have yet to actually know God.

These cycles of spiritual activity come around regularly, but can only be detected and properly, more fully processed when the physical body is at rest, or ease. No amount of activity in the Church can compensate for activity in the Spirit, and in fact our over-doing it will hinder us because it inevitably leads to over-looking the spirit. This is The Damnation of Inactivity that I addressed in one of my earliest posts. The intense cycles of Yang energy from the Father which come to us when we are in a rest phase are called “quickenings” for the flesh. To quicken means to come to life, to give life to. It also connotes of course that something is made faster. They are called quickenings because of how, through time, they are perceived to be much more abrupt and quick than the normal everyday flow. Really they are only landmark points of unity gained as spirit and flesh tie in together to become one. (See the graphic above which illustrates the DNA-like progression of eternity) In D&C 88 we read:

29 Ye who are quickened by a portion of the celestial glory shall then receive of the same, even a fulness.

30 And they who are quickened by a portion of the terrestrial glory shall then receive of the same, even a fulness.

31 And also they who are quickened by a portion of the telestial glory shall then receive of the same, even a fulness.

32 And they who remain shall also be quickened; nevertheless, they shall return again to their own place, to enjoy that which they are willing to receive, because they were not willing to enjoy that which they might have received.

These quickenings are of extreme importance, however, they do not represent any one individual’s strength to create change of or by his self. Creation did not start with the Big Bang. There was a slow and steady movement which from this side of things was completely imperceptible, but which nevertheless built up to that explosive moment where time began. In the mid 60s to the late 70s, Arno A. Penzias and Robert W. Wilson, while working for Bell Labs, discovered what they called cosmic microwave background radiation, a nearly uniform glow that fills the Universe in the microwave band of the radio spectrum. They were experimenting with a supersensitive, 6 meter (20 ft) horn antenna. Upon reduction of their data they found a low, steady, mysterious noise that persisted in their receiver. This residual noise was 100 times more intense than they had expected, was evenly spread over the sky, and was present day and night. They were certain that the radiation they detected on a wavelength of 7.35 cm did not come from the Earth, the Sun, or even our galaxy.

Notice how remarkably close they were to that base rate wavelength of 7.23 cm which is the basic band for the 3 dimensional reality which we inhabit. After thoroughly checking their equipment, removing some pigeons nesting in the antenna and cleaning out the accumulated droppings, the noise remained. Both concluded that this noise was coming from outside our own galaxy—although they were not aware of any radio source that would account for it. Penzias and Wilson were awarded a Nobel Prize in 1978 because their discovery bolstered the assertion that the Universe had its beginning with a Big Bang. Big Bang theory gained prevalence in the scientific and academic community from then on. It was to the secularists a huge victory. The Big Bang came to be heralded as a blinding Bearer of Light who blocked or barred any further investigation into the mysteries of God. Lucifer had people convinced that it all started with him – that he in fact had triggered the creation and put the plan into motion. Since the days discussed in Moses 5 till now, the sons of men have become increasingly more convinced that things are done through demon-strations of sheer masculine energy. Nothing could be further from the truth, but no one is willing to give up the spot light and admit they are all riding on a dark wave of feminine energy with the force of trillions of megatons behind them.

Just as the Big bang seems so important to the scientific community, the At-One-ment is said to be the pivotal moment for the plan from a Christian outlook. I wonder if many of us pause to realize the Crux of Creation continued before us on the Cross of Calvary. Many eyes are being opened these days to the prison planet that this world has become. Jesus made a prison break from this prison planet. He did not only sneak off leaving us with high hopes but low chances of escaping ourselves, but he actually cast out the warden. If we will stop being our own prison guard, torturer, and warden, then we will realize what a great thing Jesus has done for us. But simply praising him in name only, while continuing to kowtow to systems of control, is hypocritical and pathetic. Jesus’ sure hope was in expressed in John 12:31-32 when he said:

“Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.”

The Jesus-led prison break is completely comparable with the Fall of Adam (Father let this cup pass from me. Nevertheless thy will be done”/“I see that this must be. I will partake that man may be.”). The At-One-ment is also congruent and synonymous with Michael’s victory over the Dragon in the pre-mortal realm. And like the Big Bang, Christ’s atonement actually resulted in the furtherance of the creation of the Kingdom.  Remember he also said: “I go to prepare a place for you.” (“It is good.”/“It is finished.”) BANG! a space was opened to us in further di-mansions of his Father’s House. But in order to enjoy any of this we must first convert our cell mates into soul mates. We must enter and escape through the bridal chamber. The marriage of the bride-groom is the only true marriage upon which any other form of marriage must be based if it is to survive – the marriage of one’s Nefesh (animal-self) with the Ruach (spirit-self). John 2:25 says that Jesus….

“….needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.”

GETTING FREEAQUAINTED WITH THE ONE TRUE & LIVING GOD

The ancients knew all these things. The ancient Chinese tradition of Feng Shui has retained perfect clarity on the difference between the way of life and the way of death. This, despite the practice having passed through joint persecutions and purposeful perversion perpetrated upon it by the (secretly) combined efforts of three major religions and their colluded state governments. (And that’s not even including the crazy Christianity of the European missionaries with their state agendas for colonization or the extremely oppressive communist regime in China’s recent history.) Feng Shui defines Yang Ch’i as Bright Spirit. This comes from the Father and is simply called ‘Light’ in the Doctrine & Covenants. Yin Ch’i is classified as Decayed or Torpid Spirit. It comes from the Mother and serves a very important purpose. From it we get all matter and hence our precious physical bodies. In the Doctrine & Covenants this energy is designated simply as ‘Truth’. There is a third classification of Ch’i, or type of energy which can affect us, and it is most often referred to in Feng Shui scripture as Sha Ch’i – meaning “cutting ch’i” or “killing breath.” In D&C 93, and elsewhere in LDS/Christian scripture we find this type of spirit mentioned as ‘The Evil One’. The whole point of the gospel of Feng Shui is to encourage Light Ch’i, block or deflect the Evil Ch’i, and disperse or spread Truth Ch’i. In the D&C, section 93, we can identify certain Feng Shui principles that will help us to live in alignment with Light and Truth.

28 He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth (physical elemental energy) and light (non-physical elemental energy), until he is glorified in truth (in the flesh) and knoweth (has an intimate relationship with) all things.

29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth (Yin & Yang in its unconsciously, or secretly combined state, also known in Feng Shui as The Great Absolute), was not created or made, neither indeed can be.

30 All truth (physical element) is independent in that sphere in which God (The Father – Yang – Light) has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also (intelligence becomes conscious of itself as light and then gets placed in truth); otherwise there is no existence.

31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning (namely the Great Absolute) is plainly manifest unto them (The Secret Combination of unawareness is laid bare before them in Open Combination), and they receive not the light (they receive not the Father).

1-miscellaneous-digital-art-water-vs-fire-wallpaperThe Great Absolute rendered in Chinese is Ta’i Chi. Yes, this is the same word used to denote those strange and wondrous movements you see the old Asian man doing in a park during the early morning hours. The Chinese word Chi, meaning absolute or ultimate, is not be confused with Ch’i, which means spirit or breath. The Great Absolute has been completely and utterly misunderstood by modern man, and ironically the current-day Chinese have been some of the most extreme. Though the term Great has been tagged onto the title of many an “Absolute Monarch”, and though the word “Absolute” has been used by many learned men of our day from Calvin to Marx, the founding fathers of our latter-day societies only managed to mingle and mangle the Great Absolute into a Secret Combination of Communistic-Capitalism. This combination has led to much bloodshed on earth, as I try to illustrate in The Spiritual Side of Genocide Pts. 1 & 2. In part 2 especially I wrote about the secretiveness that perverts a perfect plan and prevents the absolute union of opposites from flowering in the hearts of men and in our world. They have turned the unspeakable beauty of life into a raging Armageddon of the sexes that threatens to destroy all creation.

An equally scientific and spiritual understanding of the Great Absolute is the only thing that can absolve the horrendous effects of that damnable Secret Combination of energy against energy, which is contrary to both Heaven and Earth making them into a Hell.

Ab=Father

Solute=Son

Solvent=Mother

Absolve = Integration into the Son of qualities from both Father and Mother.

This is done either in Secret Combination leading to condemnation and loss or Perdition of Sons, or it is done through Open Combination of the Mother and Father through the agency of man to the exaltation of Sons of God. D&C 93 is a rather interesting section for these Father & Son principles to find expression. In more arcane mathematical systems the numeral 9 represents the Son and 3 represents the Father. 6 represents the Mother or our physical bodies that are made to receive the 3 & the 9. Electrical engineer and futurist, Nikolai Tesla said: “If you only knew the magnificence of the 3, 6 and 9, then you would have a key to the universe.”  The FATH3R and the MOTH6R energies oscillate back and forth continuously.

3+3=6

6+6=12 (1+2=3)

12+12=24 (2+4=6)

24+24=48 (4+8=12[1+2=3])

The T’ai Chi symbol (more commonly known in the West as the Yin-Yang symbol) is not dualistic but threefold. Everything is based on thirds – The Holy Trinity. We think that the universe is based on dualities because we see only the effects not the cause. It is impossible for there to be a father or mother without a child being. The child is the cause. The Child is the 9. I have spoken of the pre-existent quality of Christ, the Son and his pre-seeding relationship to both the Mother as well as the Father in my post, Introduction to the Thermodynamics and Eternodynamics of Desire. Here I want to simply display how this is so in numerical terms. Christ’s esoteric number has always been 9. This is the only number all multiples of which are equal to its self.

9×1=9

9×2=18 (1+8=9)

9×3=27 (2+7=9)

This is because 9 is an all inclusive energy emanating in a straight line from the center of mass out of the nucleus of every atom, and from out of the singularity of a black hole represented by the 369Zer0. “It is complete!” as Jesus is said to have exclaimed on the cross. It is The One revealing perfection on through the Ennead. It is the Son and Sum of all the single digit integers which combine to form all other numbers. When we realize what Jesus realized, and confess the divinity of the S9N, then that rebellious third of the Hosts of Heaven that was the cause of this war will turn their causal power to the freeing of the captives, and the reign of righteousness on Earth. Section 93 continues:

32 And every man whose spirit (Christ) receiveth not the light (Father) is under condemnation.

33 For man is spirit (Christ). The elements (Light & Truth) are eternal, and spirit (Christ) and element (Father & Mother), inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;

34 And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.

35 The elements (Energy vibrating into Form) are the tabernacle of God; yea, man is the tabernacle of God, even temples (Bodies); and whatsoever temple is defiled, God shall destroy that temple.

36 The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth (True Marriage).

37 Light and truth forsake that evil one.

38 Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning; and God having redeemed man from the fall, men became again, in their infant state, innocent before God.

39 And that wicked one cometh and taketh away light and truth (True Marriage), through disobedience, from the children of men (Human Beings), and because of the tradition of their fathers (False Marriage).

40 But I have commanded you to bring up your children (Bodies) in light and truth (True Marriage).

This blog has hosted a considerable amount of discussion on the question of if the baptism of Christ Jesus fulfilled all righteousness, and whether then that fulfillment included performance of a marriage ordinance. In a desire to clear away some of our worldly thinking so as to better see the truth of the matter as well as the truth of the spirit and how the two fit together in perfect unity, I mentioned the man-made institution of marriage. I was sorely misunderstood. The writing of this post has been in part to rectify that misunderstanding. It is quite simple really. When I speak of the man-made institution of marriage I am speaking of the man-made institution of marriage. If I speak of the heavenly principle of union then I will use other terms such as, ‘pre-ordained,’ ‘eternal,’ ‘divine’, or ‘spiritual,’ etc. Anyone can falsely accuse me, or misconstrue the words I employ to convey a deeper meaning. But that deeper meaning can not be misconstrued, or misused. It is untouchable from within the realm of temporal traditions, languages of limitation, and other physical controls. These transitory things are all institutions created for the express purpose of exposing something greater than their selves. If an institution, like the institution of marriage, in alignment with the divine truth of union, serves to point to that which it symbolizes, then it is of value and will upheld and maintained by the Creator’s creative power. If however the institution of marriages made by men starts to act as a law unto itself (not an extension of the Only True and Living Marriage throughout the Infinite Universe of Space and Time between the Heavenly Father and the Heavenly Mother – The Eternal Family of Amen) well then that marriage is only a mirage and will fade away.

As followers of Christ we ought to be most interested in fulfilling all righteousness. This can only be done by receiving of a fullness grace by grace. Fulfilling relationships start with a person’s relationship with his or herself. If one doesn’t have a well balanced relationship like between Yin and Yang within one’s self then they will seek fulfillment with someone else. But without a fulfilling relationship with yourself then you can not have one with anyone else. There is no faking it. It is like any relationship – perhaps even more expressly so – a daily thing requiring love and attention. When self knowledge and love abound inside one, then and only then, yes,  it overflows into another. These two become balanced partners aiding each other by receiving and returning that love which overflows from the real basis of truly fulfilling relationships in the first place. When the two are made one, they/we become a new person with expanded goals and capabilities. The frontier expands from there since if something is truly full-filling…it means that it is satisfied in its fullness, yet still FILLING in its timeless, eternal scope. Such intrapersonal intelligence results in overflow which will naturally and appropriately grow the group and multiply the connections of love. But this only can happen in direct proportion to the fulfillment at its roots and through its trunk, branches and bows. Eventually the whole hue-man family will realize that our roots are already well entwined in lovemaking us essentially one orga-ni-sm. With the feeling of fulfillment supplied endlessly from that infinite well deep within, people will see each other differently than they do now. They will not see one another as property or even as business partners. We will see one another accurately for what we are – SELF. This is a Self-Fulfilling prophecy, echoed down through the gene-rations of time by all prophets, even the false prophets.

In The Worldly Memo on the Family, the First Presidency proclaimed:

“We warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.”

Then in an appeal to the world for help they said:

“We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”

But the real Family is the royal Family of God. All of mankind was together with GOD as one in spirit. Following that state of existence spiritual mankind was married by the power and authority of GOD with our physical helpmates. The different stages of the plan rolled forward with perfect linkage until our rebellion against GOD. Matt. 19:6 warns:

“What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

This sham marriage promotes separation of goods, of people, or spirit and flesh. It pinpoints the actual beginning of “the break-down of the family” which is used as a rhetorical tool in the fear mongering of many world leaders when addressing the solemn faces of their assembled followers today. Super-Tradition is Superstition and as Stevie Wonder sings: “Superstition Aint The Way” YahWeh is The-WaYaW-ehTo reunite the Divine Family. And the Son of God is the means by which divine masculine and feminine extend out in complimentary opposite directions from their common seed ‘Y’ – Yod, gatHERing togetHER again where ‘X’ marks the spot in a spiritually chromosomal Criss+Cross. This is the only true and living church:

Christ
Humanity
Universally
Reconnecting
Christ
Humanity

What is standing so defiantly betwixt CH and CH as the true and living church attempts to lurch forward like a CHu-CHu train to Zion, preventing the reconnection of Christ and Humanity? U-R! (You-Are). You are the only thing that stands between Christ and Humanity. Ask yourself, R-U ready for C.H.U.R.C.H? Are you ready for real marriage?
We sojourn here below with only one thing standing between the mortal frame and its maker. That one thing is our individual portion of Holy Spirit taught in Sunday School as the Spirit Body being composed of the Light of Christ in all men and women. It is given freely but even so, it is up to us to accept, maintain, and cherish a joining of the spirit and flesh as the Gift of the Holy Ghost. Connect the “monk” of your mind and “beast” of your body and you will see that one is not pure and the other debase; but both are equal, both are sacred and of God.

“Only connect! That was the whole of her sermon. Only connect the prose and the passion, and both will be exalted, and human love will be seen at its height. Live in fragments no longer. Only connect, and the beast and the monk, robbed of the isolation that is life to either, will die. Connect….connect without bitterness until all men are brothers.”

– From Howard’s End by E. M. Forrester

TRUE MARRIAGE WILL ABOLISH SECRET SOCIETIES AND ESTABLISH ZION

I realize that not everyone who participates in this forum is or even considers themselves to be anarchists. Likely there are some who do not even consider themselves LDS. But I am going to assume that everyone reading and or contributing here is at least passively interested in the spirit of freedom. That is, freedom of conscience freedom of body. My remaining remarks may be taken and applied politically, although they are actually apolitical. They can be interpreted materialistically, but that is only half of the intent behind them. They can be relegated to mental realms and theorized over with false displays of passion, or they may be foolhardily flung into zealous action with no thought to pragmatism. I offer them in soberness and in love.

The concept that our spirit bodies and our physical bodies could actually be strangers in need of sealing themselves as one before any real and enduring connection be made and maintained with others may seem very foreign. But this does not meant that it has not been as close at hand as our own spirit selves, staring us in the face every time we pour over the Holy Scriptures. The language of D&C 93 elucidates the Lord’s will.

19 I give unto you these sayings that you may understand and know how to worship, and know what you worship, that you may come unto the Father in my name, and in due time receive of his fulness.

20 For if you keep my commandments you shall receive of his fulness, and be glorified in me as I am in the Father; therefore, I say unto you, you shall receive grace for grace.

21 And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn;

22 And all those who are begotten through me are partakers of the glory of the same, and are the church of the Firstborn.

Christ is inviting us to be a part of something amazing. He is proposing an act so intimate that it is beyond our comprehension, and a relationship that is so unconventional that our minds can not grasp its implications. Love is liberating, and we say God is love. We claim to worship God. To worship something is to live for it. If we live for love, and if love has the power to liberate, then why are we not free? Could it be that we do not know what love is – that we don’t know God. In D&C 93 the Lord says he is trying to help us understand and know how to worship, and know what we worship. One of the 13 Articles of Faith in the Mormon religion states that: “we claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.” Notice how the word ‘who’ is never used in conjunction with the word ‘worship’ as the object of that verb (neither in the scripture verse nor the article of faith). What indeed to we worship? And how can we claim to worship “Almighty God” until we have first embodied the lessons of the Lord that he gave to the LDS people in D&C 93, thereby coming to know what we worship?

Contrary to common belief, Christianity is not the dominant religion in the United States. That distinction belongs to statism. And LDS do not worship within the context of restored Christianity as they suppose. They worship within the framework of the state. The global community at first glance appears to be divided along many religious lines. But the truth is that all religions are tentacles of the one world religion. What do the vast majority of humans on planet earth worship? They worship the state. The modern world, from Salt Lake to Shanghai, is predominately Statanic as far as dutiful worship is concerned. We the people uphold tyranny and one of the most efficient ways we do this is through doggedly and fearfully holding to the practice of monogamy. I am not suggesting that rearranging ourselves into non-monogamous set ups would change anything in this game of chess where we are all pawns. No. But a change of heart would result in more than simple rearranging of pieces on the board. IT WILL CHANGE THE ENTIRE GAME.

In Spanish there is a saying that goes: “Secretos de Dos No Son de Dios.” Secrets between two are not of God. Of course, we may say that marriage is a sacred relationship between three, not two. It is cliché by now in this Christian culture which is not Christ-like, to hear marriage described this way as a triune between man, woman and God. But if the first two partners universally recognized as the responsible parties involved in a marriage contract are not half as intimately acquainted with this mysterious third party as they are with each other, then what does it mean to say that marriage is a relationship between one man, one woman, and one God?  If a man marries a woman in a temple, or church, or synagogue in this world, yet he knows not the God by whose authority and power the marriage deal is supposedly sealed, then that couple are living in sin. And no amount of approval from men, no recommendation, or written agreement, not even prayers and scripture study on the part of the couple and their family can compensate for the internal work of remembering, honoring, and returning to our Heavenly Home.

Now chances are you, like myself, and probably everyone you know, come from a long line of married people. I am not accusing any one of us of having evil hearts. Quite the contrary, I only desire for us to remove the veil of unbelief, the pride from over our hearts and eyes that keeps us from seeing how enforced monogamy is a franchised secret combination. All forms of traditional marriage never have been anything more or less than that. Study its roots and you will come to the rise of evil empires on this earth. Be aware that traditional marriage more than any other institution has controlled the people, destroyed the family, riveted the sacred connection between the hearts of the fathers and the hearts of the children, and maintained Babylon throughout all of its temporary runs. Babylon will fall. It always does. Will you fall with it? A lot of people talk a lot these days about fighting the Secret Combinations or the “Illuminati” but they don’t ever affect any real change. When Joseph Smith spoke about fighting the Secret Combination he said:

“It is an imperative duty that we owe to God, to angels, with whom we shall be brought to stand, and also to ourselves, to our wives and children, who have been made to bow down with grief, sorrow, and care, under the most damning hand of murder, tyranny, and oppression, supported and urged on and upheld by the influence of that spirit which hath so strongly riveted the creeds of the fathers, who have inherited lies, upon the hearts of the children, and filled the world with confusion, and has been growing stronger and stronger, and is now the very mainspring of all corruption, and the whole earth groans under the weight of its iniquity.”

– D&C 123:7

We don’t like to admit it, but we have been that hand of tyranny and we have been that spirit that has so strongly riveted whatever lies we have inherited right onto the next generation. And thus the vicious cycle continues. Traditional marriage and the traditional families that splinter off from its destructive exploits are false gods and idols.

In the spiritual terms that are causal, eternal, and therefore matter more than physical matter when it comes to getting free from false gods, with their falsehoods, false flags, and false families, we need to know that we can never be blood of Abraham unless we do the works of Abraham. We must also remember what Jesus says; that God is able to make stones into Sons of Abraham, but if we want to be Sons of God then that means we accept God alone as our Father. Few realize how completely we must reject the idea that God is only to be found through this or that lineage, this or that tradition, practice, or place. The temples must tumble, the vain and repetitious prayers must cease, the ideas of “our fathers” must die! The state is made in the image of the fallen father. For the state of things in the world to change for the better the fallen father must elevate himself. Not through the societal structure which he has set up to make one man appear higher than the next, but through a spiritual elevation that brings down all societal structures that do not serve the soul of man, which is the same as God.

According to ancient Jewish and Islamic legend, one day Abraham was shown his father, Terah’s shop which was full of many idols. Young Abraham, thinking that perhaps he could discover intimacy with them, made some desirable delicacies and placed them before the idols. When nothing happened, he realized that these idols were nothing more than clay — they could do nothing for him or anyone else for that matter. So he proceeded to destroy all the idols, except for one. When Terah received word of this, he went to Abraham and said, “Son, what did you do to my idols?!” “I brought them delicacies,” Abraham replied, “and then the biggest idol became envious of the others, and destroyed them all.” Terah, furious with Abraham, said, “You’re lying to me! How can idols made by my own hands do such things?” “You’re right father.” Replied Abraham, “Now tell me, then, why do we worship idols that can not eat, drink or even move?” This kind of idol worship may sound far removed from us, but we too, have our idols. They may not be made of clay but they are very real! The love of money, possessions, success, leisure, food, sensuality, security and outward beauty — the love of tradition and even our friends and family — the pursuit of our selfish goals and dreams are among some just off the top of my head. Most of these are not bad things in and of themselves, don’t get me wrong. But if we are not careful, they can all easily become idols in our lives! What is the object of our affections today? What takes up the majority of our time, effort, and resources? These are our idols. Anything that we allow to run our life becomes our god.

When Abraham smashed his father’s idols, it was a type of emotional, mental, physical, or basically stated, a full spiritual patricide. This patricide was performed in the right and true order, and because Abraham was willing to follow through all the way, he was made an inheritor of the right and true order of the priesthood. Later we find stories of filicide in the life and times of Abraham. From his own biological father’s attempts to sacrifice him to idol/idle gods who can do nothing of or for themselves, to Abraham’s strange struggle with child sacrifice of his only son, Isaac, man learns what works and what does not work in the right and true order. Matricide will also be required of the true follower of righteousness who shares Abraham’s desires for good, and who would share in the abundance of blessings given to and through the noble patriarch. The inheritance of priesthood power is thankfully not left to mere dissemination of literal seed. Even if it were, that seed would still be practically as numerous as the sands of the seashore. But remember the grains of sand were only one half of the whole picture painted by God for his servant Abraham when the promises of the Abrahamic covenant were extended. The stars of the sky are the first and more numerous host that despite their staggering numbers and greatness in terms of glory, are still only able to compose half of the bargain, relying on the earthly grains of sand and other earthly elements, in order to complete the circuit.

The pre-stood power is not passed along man to man via the laying on of hands like some kind of worldly coronation or knighting. Whether benighted, or bedazzled, overtaken by darkness or blinded by the light, man finds himself swaying to and fro like a drunken man between these two supposedly separate states of being. He is told that he must choose one over the other and once neatly divided into opposing sides he goes from intimacy to infighting. As an answer to the alcoholic-like tendencies of man’s lust for control while not upsetting his classical victim-view of himself, man was taught not to leave his “Mother & Father” and cleave unto his divinely appointed help-meat of the physical body till becoming one purified, translated, resurrected, and perfected flesh, but rather to have and hold to another human being as a means of faking salvation and exaltation. If we look at the etymological roots of the terms “to have” and “to hold” we see that their literal meanings lay more along the same lines as “to plot” and “to sheme.”

scheme (n.)

1550s, “figure of speech,” from Medieval Latin schema “shape, figure, form, figure of speech,” from Greek skhema (genitive skhematos) “figure, appearance, the nature of a thing,” related to skhein “to get,” and ekhein “to have,” from PIE root *segh- “to hold, to hold in one’s power, to have” (cf. Sanskrit sahate “he masters,” sahah “power, victory;” Avestan hazah “power, victory;” Greek ekhein “to have, hold;” Gothic sigis, Old High German sigu, Old Norse sigr, Old English sige “victory”). The sense “program of action” first is attested 1640s. Unfavorable overtones (selfish, devious) began to creep in early 18c.

The feeling of jealousy lead to the devil-up-ment of the concept of ownership. That gave rise to the tradition of marriage, which in turn triggered the division of the Holy Family of God and the rise of secret combinations upon the earth. To repeat, Moses 5:3 says that the sons and daughters of Adam began to divide two and two in the land, and to till the land, and to tend flocks, and they also begat sons and daughters. And from that time forth, we have loved Satan more than God. We have been literally intrigued with one another, men and women, entangled in a web of intrigue that endeavors to split and to pit creation against creator and visa versa. Those spirits which insist on a “safe distance” between spirit bodies and physical bodies are idol/idle gods preferring to be served by others who they deem sub-creatures. They want very much to combine efforts in order to further their personal agendas, but no one of them is willing to take upon them tabernacles of clay and do their own work. Therefore, their idea of owning things and people is in vain. For only through love and the removal of boundaries can things or people be held together for time and all eternity.

As the Divine Plan rolls forward, two scrolls, those of Earth and Heaven are being rolled into One. All true lovers of liberty (or we could say liberated lovers) will come to the point where we must improve upon Patrick Henry’s exclamation of “Give me liberty or give me death!” We have had to overcome the level of hypocrisy that allowed a man to speak such brave sounding words in the presence of God, angels, and his fellow man yet justify such a cowardice contempt for God, angels, and his fellow man through the tradition of slavery. (Yes Patrick Henry, the man who said: “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!” like many of the Founding Fathers, was a slave holder.) We will now need to claim our birthright as sovereign souls and make a declaration of independence from the many false gods, those of our brethren who choose to linger, or hide in their castles in the sky while their temples below remain un-filled and thus de-filed. Those who want to remain two-gether rather than coming together to-gather in Zion will be allowed to do so, but they will have to return to their own place, they may no longer live like vampires off of the labors and spiritual energy of others.

If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

–          1 Corinthians 3:17

And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? for you are the temple of the living God; as God has said, “I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.”

–          2 Corinthians 6:16

It is essential that the LDS people wake up to the conspiracy which keeps Zion at bay. The idea of the Holy Temples of the Lord has been defiled and corrupted within their psyches to represent a caste-system of castles in the sky casting the burden of building projects, entirely onto earthlings who are made to labor for a false zion, mixing a mortal mortar made of the gritty blood of martyrs who mar and sell their selves and their skilldren in the marketplace of Mammon that is the temple yard. LDS see “the temple” as the characters in sci-fi thriller Oblivion saw the Tet – a towering mission control station floating in space above them. Unbeknownst to them, they are being controlled by a non-human entity that rules from an off-planet safe-hold, using its brainwashed subjects to fight against Zion in husband and wife teams. The evil in high places has a great fear of the flourishing of Zion on the face of the earth, so it has hi-jacked certain humans memories. These poor souls are convinced that they were specially chosen for a great mission to save earth, when in reality their bodies have been commandeered and their minds co-opted into a scheme to suppress it. Constantly throughout the film, the duped couples stationed in their state of the art, futuristically furnished houses are asked in transmissions whether they feel they are “still an efficient team?” That is almost all that matters from their point of view because that is all that matters to their devilish liar of a leader.

While many these days prefer to ignore section 132 of the Doctrine & Covenants entirely given its awkward mention of plural marriage and other things not in keeping with the trends of the times, still the Nu-Mormons along with the old-school saints with more of a fundamentalist bent, all believe firmly in the sanctity of marriage. The sanctity afforded to the LDS fashioned perversion of matri-money is one that must be upheld through purely temporal means. This means that men stand guard at the gate to enforce sanctions against those who do not pay ten percent of their finances to the institution which currently controls the temples. And they literally swear that there is something special, and even eternal about their particular brand of ™pull marriage. Shareholders in this scheme are not getting what they were promised, for they neither share in temporal things nor hold anything in eternity. In many ways Section 132 reveals the fine print of the contract they enter into.

16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.

17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever.

LDS men and women are instructed in their temples in the true order of prayer. They link hands man to woman and woman to man in a symbolic circle. They pretend to an order that most will never attain. They blaspheme GOD when hearing from the prophet in their midst that “only the best of feelings should exist in the circle” they yet insist that the “best feelings” be reserved for only one other person, not even the person immediately to their left with whom they are told to take each other’s hand. Failing to link past with present, they have cut short their futures. They do not even consider past lives with past marriages a possibility, so future lives and future marriages are also out of the question for them. This is why Jesus calls us as well as those in Israel during his mortal ministry an adulterous generation. Reading on in D&C 132 we find the following contractual language:

22 For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.

23 But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also.

24 This is eternal lives—to know the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law.

25 Broad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the deaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they receive me not, neither do they abide in my law.

Vanity has many a Mormon thinking that they will be ministered to in the afterlife by angels while they inherit their own planets to be populated solely by them and their significant other. Only the wise will realize that the planet inherited by the truly righteous is the earth. Mormon theology states plainly that this earth will regain its lost paradisiacal glory, and not only that, but it will continue to cycle around till it comes fully into its celestial glory. With so many Mormons clamoring to gain entrance into the Celestial Kingdom by way of some Golden Ticket available exclusively at participating retailers, for those who adorn their bodies in specially marked packages, it is easily forgotten that the Celestial Kingdom is this very planet we now inhabit in her future state. As we enter the Millennial reign of Christ it is the just who are resurrected. Just beings to not practice marriage after the manner of men as per the worldly traditions, they have all things in common among them. The just resurrected beings walking the earth as she ascends to the celestial glory are the gods to whom the souls of monogamists, polygamists, cheaters, wife-beaters, jealous lovers, and they who choose other various types of vanity, will be permitted to persist only as separately and singly appointed servant-spirits. These are the “angels in heaven” referenced by Jesus Christ, who neither marry nor are given in marriage in the resurrection.

Notice they are “in heaven” after having passed away. Remember that Jesus came to tell us that Heaven and Earth would both pass away. The two are to be folded together as a scroll at the last day. Those who do not wish to participate in the ultimate act of intimacy are allowed to fall back, and enjoy a certain degree of glory but they can not enjoy that which they were not willing to abide while in the world. They will be disembodied angels in heaven who are obliged to minister unto the gods. The gods are those souls who were worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory. They are those who married spirit with flesh. Love is the bonding agent that keeps us together individually and collectively. Anything less than love has no power to bind beyond this lone and dreary world.

“Two tattoos – one read: “No Apology,” the other said “Love is cursed by monogamy.” That’s somethin’ that the pastor don’t preach. That’s somethin’ that a teacher can’t teach. When we die, the money we can’t keep but we’ll probably spend it all, ‘cause the pain aint cheap. Preach!”

No Church In The Wild – Kanye West

The song of this world is a sad one. Fortunately mutual oppression in all its forms of matri-money have a beginning middle and end. They can not even extend over to telestial transaction but will be utterly dissolved in the end. You can’t take IT with you. I.T. is the “I-They” mentality that lies at the core of our luciferian world view. “Love has been in perpetual strife with monogamy” says Ellen Key, a Swedish writer. “A great poet has seldom sung of lawfully wedded happiness, but often of free and secret love; and in this respect, too, the time is coming when there will no longer be one standard of morality for poetry, and another for life.” The only reason that free and secret seem to go together when describing true love in this world is because the world is based on a secret combination and it hunts down any and all who will not comply to the rigid controls of the prince of this world, who Jesus said was Lucifer himself. Recently there appeared on Zomarah’s blog a post describing the newly revamped video presentation portion of the endowment ceremony performed in LDS owned and operated ™pulls world-wide. Zomarah recounts the tempting and seduction of Eve by the Lucifer character in the video:

“Next we saw Eve sitting down, her naughty lady bits covered in the latest “modest is hottest” woven baskets. Lucifer approached her from a distance. Slowly he snaked his way closer, tempting her. Then he knelt before her with his head bowed, offering the fruit to her as the only way to become like God. She paused and contemplated. She stood and looked towards the tree. You could see on her face that this was a difficult decision. Then, almost tearfully, she took the dried-ornamental-pepper-strawberry-tomato fruit and took a bite.”

Is it ironic, or telling that Lucifer should be seen to kneel down on one knee before Eve as if proposing marriage? As this War in Heaven continues to spread further and further into Earth Life, affecting everything and everyone in its path for the worse, the truth becomes clearer and clearer for those who are willing to see it. Of course what we see in the temple video is nothing more than acting, but then again that is what most of modern living, including institutionalized marriage is – acting. And Lucifer is the playwright. The famous Irish anarchist Oscar Wilde said that marriage was the triumph of imagination over intelligence. I would put it into Mormon theological terms and say that marriage is the temporal and temporary triumph of vain imagination over infinite intelligence. But humankind is even now awakening from the deep sleep and placing their faith in Christ as the way to redemption from the fall. Now, in the words of the great spiritual poet Rumi: “Don’t go back to sleep.”

The foolish virgins in the parable of the 10 Virgins not only let their oil run out, leaving them without light, but they also fall asleep. The indwelling of the spirit is the oil our lamps need to light the dark night. If and as one succeeds in achieving the first marriage between body and soul, then one has already conquered much of the fear standing between the individual life and the gathering of Zion on a large scale. Fears are overcome and the truly married man or woman stand ready to move forward when the late-night call goes out to come in unto the marriage feast. The “guest” ch’i and “host” ch’i have to be in constant communication for this to happen. The invitations go out internally not like an intra-office memo that workers of the world will receive. The invitation goes out energetically, but not electronically like an email to which one may RSVP. When you get it you know and are known. If you do not get it then that explains why the Bridegroom says: “Most certainly I tell you, I don’t know you.” Does the Lord send invitations to those who he does not know? Well I suppose that many are called, but few are chosen. I know that many have felt the call. Proponents and opponents alike of what is commonly called “plural marriage” both exhibit a lot of fear of it. One group tends to make up a lot of rules and regulations as to how it must look, who can do what, and exactly when, where, or how it may be done. In fear they hedge up the way for themselves and for others. Those who are opposed to the very idea of “plural marriages” forget that all marriage in this world, by very definition is “plural”. Their fear does not come from the idea of grouping two things into the same general space, they are fearful of what may happen when two things become one.

If the doorway to heaven suddenly appeared in front of you, what would you do? Would you be afraid of leaving something behind? Even knowing that you could have anything you desired in paradise, would you feel anxious about stepping through the door? I remember that as a very young boy my family visited the Christus statue at Temple Square in Salt Lake City. While we were ascending the spiral ramp that leads into the room where the statue is showcased, I was told that we were going to see Jesus. I noticed that the walls were covered in images of outer space. My child-like mind imagined that we were really ascending a sort of staircase to heaven and I grew very uneasy. I told my parents that I did not want to go to heaven yet, I wasn’t finished enjoying my life here. Jesus recognized and pointed out constantly that the Kingdom of Heaven is available in every moment, yet for most of us the intellect has the first say in the choice to step through that door, and it is full of irrational requirements. Who has planted these irrational thoughts in our heads? Jesus understands our hesitance when it comes to entering a new reality. What he does not tolerate however is the enemy stance that is taken by the teachers of religion who not only decide for themselves not to enter the Kingdom of Heaven just yet, but have the nerve to deny access to others.

For many it is the tyranny of those gatekeepers who present themselves as master teachers but are in fact master teasers which keeps us living in fear. The open combination of Heaven and Earth prophesied since ancient times has always plowed a long and lonely furrow through the secret combination which fills our world with blood and horror. A lot of fear surrounds the issue of non-monogamous relationships because we are afraid of tyranny. Ironically it is not that we really feel tyranny will rear its ugly head if we all loved each other more or allowed our hearts to do what they were created to do. No it’s that we are every second aware of the tyranny that hangs over us already, watching our every move. I have a friend who spends much of his time preaching against the Secret Combinations. He has seen, heard, and felt much. He tries to communicate with others and share his testimony everywhere he goes. He feels held back the restriction of freedoms in the U.S. and considers himself a true patriot and one who is awake to the tyranny in his homeland. He mistakenly thinks that he needs to convert others, and endlessly bemoans the fact that he has not found a group of believers with whom to live out the many righteous desires of his heart. He does not see that his patriotism comes from and comes out in the form of patronizing. The “knowledge” he dispenses to others is purely informational stuff gained from reading material and online videos. There is of course the personal experience which is uniquely his as he walks with Christ, but he can not seem to share this because he mistakenly assumes that everyone’s walk with their savior must resemble his own for anything to make sense. The further he goes down the “rabbit hole” as he says, the more afraid he is to break from tradition. The more he attracts able-bodied, and heartily committed friends to him, the more excuses he must place to maintain his meticulously studied sense of self. Even though he is in constant search of a real home, he assumes that he knows how a home should be structured. In a conversation with friends he said:

“Creating a persons life in all ways starts at home. That’s why emphasis is placed on the sanctity of marriage in almost all religions. In order for us all to climb Jacobs ladder to God we need to pull together first as families.”

I offered some correction in hopes that my brother would see brotherhood more clearly for what it is, and what it isn’t. I told him we all need to pull together first as FAMILY not families – plural, divided. “That will only get you more and more of what you have had – serial monogamy ending and starting again with divorce after divorce,” I said.  “You say that creating a person’s life in all ways starts at home. What begins at home is certainly sacred life, but it is meant to overthrow the Church & State, not to be the way things currently are where Church & State set the precedence for the home to keep the love and power of God from ever getting out of these little square-box-house-cages and spreading across the land.” I looked deeply into my friend’s hear through his eyes and said: “The world’s religions do not sanctify marriage, they monopolize it and desecrate it, making it into a mockery, and an affront to the God of Israel.” My brother still wants to talk about the Secret Combinations, more than ever before – about the Illuminati, gun rights, the Founding Fathers, off-gridding, strategic-location, sacred geometry, and deep doctrine….but my brother doesn’t want to talk with me as much anymore, at least not for now. Filibustering about the freedom of speech can put up a front of bravery. Even taking action can become a distraction. Where fear is, faith dwindles.

Fela Kuti was a famous activist and saxophonist who learned a lot in his lifetime about the link between false marriage traditions and the extreme corruption and oppression that his people put up with in his home country of Nigeria. “My people are scared of the air around them,” he sang. “They always have an excuse not to fight for freedom.” Many if not most of the biggest excuses people have to not fight for freedom surround the issue of ‘family’. Fela once said:

“The human spirit is stronger than any government or institution.”

And he proved it by example. His life parallels that of Joseph Smith in many ways. Both were men who were severely persecuted and accused of promiscuity. Fela was almost beaten to death while his 77-year-old mother was thrown out of an upstairs window. She died soon after. But this didn’t break Fela. After recovering from his injuries, he married 27 women in a single ceremony. The women were left jobless after government actions that resulted in the destruction and desertion of his compound, Kalakuta, similar to the withdrawal of the early saints from Kirtland. Fela himself would take care of his wives. But, the mass wedding was followed by a mass divorce 10 years later. He went on to establish a political party, continued to lambaste the authorities and suffered beatings and imprisonment. In 1979 he ran for presidency, but the military torpedoed his candidacy. Fela’s marital arrangements and sexual behavior continue to draw criticism to this day. And the same corrupt officials who oppressed the Nigerian people then are still in power today.

Why do we accuse others who live/love differently or more freely than ourselves, of having bad hearts? Psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich studied the Holy Spirit from a scientific angle and called it Orgone. He said:

“It is necessary to raise a strong protest when those who determine their social behavior on the basis of inner laws instead of external compulsive codes are labeled immoral. A man and a woman are husband and wife not because they have received the sacrament, but because they feel themselves to be husband and wife. The inner and not the external law is the yardstick of genuine freedom.”

To say someone is distracted if they are in fact listening to their heart (the only place God will speak to you) is to declare more love for Satan than for God. When we make such allegations against our brothers and sisters, who are in fact seeking Zion, we are submitting to the tyrant. We are being adulterous by not sticking with God’s Son who said: “Freely thou hast been given, freely shalt thou give.” We say GOD is LOVE but we don’t believe in LOVE. We are not afraid that we might be disloyal by acting in righteousness on god-given desires. We are simply afraid to admit that we are being disloyal to God and have been for GENE-RATION after adulterous GENE-RATION. Our spirits are not under the same limitations that our bodies are. Our spirits are the grown-ups in this situation, and it is about time that they started to act like adults in terms of maturity. We should be exercising our spirit bodies in faith to exercise from our souls every trace of fear and selfishness. We can no longer put the blame upon the body of flesh. These physical bodies we have been blessed with are our children, and must be treated as such, or there will literally be hell to pay for our souls. Joseph Smith told us that:

“All things whatsoever God in his infinite wisdom has seen fit and proper to reveal to us, while we are dwelling in mortality, in regard to our mortal bodies, are revealed to us in the abstract, and independent of affinity of this mortal tabernacle, but are revealed to our spirits precisely as though we had no bodies at all.”

It is time to raise our children in light and truth. It is time to receive of the fullness, and experience true marriage. Now is the time to lay aside false traditions and realign ourselves with the Family of God, or else remain as the natural man – an enemy to God. I pray that it become clear to all my brothers and sisters that we must defeat the Secret Combination by reverting it to the original and beautiful open combination that was presented to us as the Eternal Plan of Happiness in the beginning. God will show us each how to achieve Zion within and without. We need only be brave enough to act on the promptings of the Holy Spirit instead of giving into the false traditions of our fathers.

Marriage Equality


This post is published at Wheat & Tares — but I wanted to post it here for my own records.  So — if you want to comment on it, please do so over there.

Interviewer: But did [Oscar] Wilde identify himself as gay?

Stephen Fry: No, I don’t think he did. He talked about his nature — he was aware of what people’s natures were, to have sex with their own kind. He wasn’t an idiot — he was fully aware there was such a sexual orientation, but the noun “homosexual” did not yet exist in the English language.

I think Wilde had that advantage that he lived in a time when people were not nouns. You didn’t ascribe labels to them. While he was aware of his nature and never apologized for it, he didn’t shout it from the rooftops in the manner of a modern actor with a Larry Kramer sort of gay sensibility.

And I think those who try to read that into Oscar won’t find it there. You might as well wonder why Oscar didn’t have a Web site. He was more mature than our age is. I mean, he had very little interest in sins of the flesh, or he realized that it isn’t very important whether you call them sins of the flesh or not. The only things that matter are sins of the spirit. In that sense Oscar was quite religious.

That’s what so ironic — the religious complain about sins of the flesh, but sins of the flesh are not the kind of thing that Christ would object to. What you do with your penis or your bottom or anything else is so supremely irrelevant in a moral sense. It’s what we do with our personalities and other people that matters.

I still haven’t heard a convincing argument on how allowing gay marriage would affect my marriage in a negative manner.  It bothers me that we’re so focused on the hot button issue of “gay marriage” that the real issues affecting marriage [like spousal abuse, poverty, emotional fulfillment, etc.] end-up being ignored.

I think [despite what evangelical Americans will suggest] that the scriptures are largely silent on the issue homosexual relationships.  The scriptures that do condemn “men lying with men as with a woman”, etc. refer more to the practice of either:

  • sex-rituals [as in, not among married couples]
  • using anal sex to show “domination” or “subjugation” over a conquered group
  • the physical lust for the pleasure of the sex-act

So it’s possible that those scriptures are condemning those behaviors — not “homosexuality” as such.  As Stephen Fry is explaining in the quote above, homosexuality as a sexual orientation and same-gender relationships based on marriage covenants of fidelity between same-gender couples simply did not exist until relatively recently.

Marriage is not about religion because atheists marry.  Marriage is not about procreation because the infertile marry.  I’d like to say that marriage is just about “love” between two people who desire to get married – however, the problem is we have allowed the State to license marriage and ascribe civil benefits to obtaining that license.  Cohabitation, shared beliefs, procreation, love, etc. – do not require legal permission from the government.  Civil rights and IRS benefits, however, do.

Marriage is basically the formation of a “corporation” between individuals.  This “corporation” gets legal benefits from the State [like any other corporation].  I don’t get upset every time a business incorporates — so why should I get upset when people want to incorporate a relationship?  The prohibition against same-gender marriage isn’t an issue because they’re not allowed to live together and love each other.  It’s an issue because the government’s involvement in marriage means that same-gender couples are not allowed to enjoy civil privileges:  receiving insurance through the spouse’s coverage, visitation rights in a hospital, adopting a child, filing jointly for income tax, taking family leave when the spouse is sick, making arrangements after death, etc. because their status is not legally recognized by a State-issue license.

Obviously, the solution to many of these problems is ejecting the State out of our home, family, romantic, and sex lives.  We have such a problem because with the power of civil benefits, the State is seen as legitimizing what relationships matter and which ones don’t.  The church should be at the forefront of getting the State and Marriage divorced because we [with all other Abrahamic religions] believe that humans were gathered into families prior to the establishment of civil governments.  Whether a couple is considered married “in the eyes of God” or not can have nothing to do with a State-issued license.  Thus, a good first step in this direction would be to no longer require a marriage license to perform religious services like for-time marriages and eternal family sealings.

But even if we want to be secular about it – the historical basis of the “family” was multihusband-multiwife tribes that shared food, labor, childcare, and sexual partners — not our present narrative of the two-parent nuclear family with a college-educated urban employment and a suburban house, with the 3 or 4 kids and a dog.  The church adopted itself into that institution [which is politically-termed “Pro-Family”], and re-framed our “Eternal Families” narrative to garner wider recruitment in the wake of the 1890 Manifesto and renunciation of polygyny.

The church, as presently organized, is a gerontocracy — so leadership today represents a 1950′s era American-style Mormonism from a Utah-centric, cis-, hetero-, anglo-, middle-class privileged lifestyle point-of-view.  And so, with the power concentrated in the hands of these few, we get a gospel presented in those terms only — with nothing for people whose narratives differ either slightly or greatly from that.  I think that with legalized gay marriage in the US being standing a good chance in the near future, the church could be at the forefront of presenting a family doctrine of fidelitous sexual ethics for both straight and gay members.

However, doing so would necessitate a re-evaluation of the stated positions on:

  • what the fundamental purpose of marriage covenants really is
  • what God’s design for getting adults together into families is really all about
  • and what is He wanting us to do/foster in human society by organizing ourselves this way

Because presently the regurgitated, stock-responses are not internally-consistent with themselves:

  • We parrot traditional American Christianity by saying that marriage is about One-man-and-One-woman, but we’ll all allow marriages after a spouse’s death and after a divorce [which would be serial monogamy — not a true mono-].
  • Then, as LDS, we take it further by sealing polygynous and polyandrous eternal families through our policy of sealing any deceased person to all spouses they had while living [which is, again, not one man and one woman].
  • And we’ll also use the natural law argument along with the other Christians to attempt to tie the purpose of marriage families together with reproduction — when many couples are infertile, or marry after reproductive age, and many couples are not economically-sound enough to provide for the maintenance of large families [especially when we keep them separate with sanctions against plural husbands and wives], and there are plenty of already-born children who aren’t cared for well-enough and could be adopted instead.

I think LDS are unique in the position of being able to associate marriage covenants with fidelity, cooperation, commitment, service, intimacy, fellowship, emotional fulfillment, and companionship — without needing them to be hetero- and monogamous.  And I think we can associate “the family” with greater purposes than reproducing children to fill-up the earth.  And while I think that marriage has a God-given “purpose” — I think it needs to be better associated with people having happy, loving, consensual, and faithful cooperative-unions.  If anything’s an “abomination”, it’s not homosexuality — it’s unions where people are taken advantage of, abused, lied to, cheated on, etc.  That should be illegal.  That should be a sin.

The problem is we get more interested in the outwardly-observable behaviors of the flesh — when the only things that really matter are state of the spirit or the heart.  The religious complain about sins of the flesh, but sins of the flesh are not the kind of thing that Christ would object to.  What you do with your penis or your orifices or anything else is absolutely irrelevant in a moral sense — especially when compared to our personalities and how we relate to and treat other people.

Next Article by Justin:  What, on Earth, are you Doing, for Heaven’s sake?

Previous Article by Justin: Using the Word of God as your Tribal Law

FASC-SIN-AIDING FEMENAZIS AND FUN-DUMB-MENTALISTS


There’s a certain type of woman. Really, she’s a kind of woman. She is kind of a woman meaning she is not completely a ‘woman’ nor is she truly ‘kind’. I am speaking of the so-called women like Sheri L. Dew et al. Far less of a woman than Mother Theresa or even Salma Hayek et al., women who are incomplete are not women at all. And all women, yes, ALL women, are endowed with biological plus spirilogical genes from an earthly set of parents as well as a Heavenly Mother AND Father. To be a woman in all ways, entails and incorporates divine masculine qualities that no one can deny or mess with, without suffering dire consequences leading to spiritual and then physical death. That’s exactly what happened to our first parent(s) who ceased to be one and sinned against Father in the Garden of Eden. I say that they are NOT women, who deny the Eternal Father through refusing to properly exercise their Internal Father – those who would feign helplessness for the purposes of depending upon the arm of flesh and “inducing labor” on the part of men for funding the vanities of Babylon that Great Whore. So while there is a “kinda woman” who promotes worldly fashion for fascists, a mockery of Mother Eve, the Eva Braun type who provides the real brawn for evil, and although this class of prophet preventing jezabel is found to be increasingly common in latter-day gentile marriages – it is not this wicked and wimpy woman who interests me. To be a whole woman, is to be a holy woman, and it is this beautiful jewel of a woman, fertile and versatile, blessed among all women, who, in the immortal words of Billy Joel, is – “Always a Woman to Me.”

feminazis and fundamentalists

What is the role of real women in this world which is passing away, and in the bringing forth of Zion out of the Earth which doth travail like a woman in labor? The real role of women can not be ascertained except by the Holy Spirit. One thing is for sure, the role assigned to the woman by the Creator is nothing like the traditions of the various nations and cultures who have interpreted the gospel over the last few thousand years. If it were, Zion would have long ago been delivered upon the face of the Earth. This coy creature is not a creation of God but of man, who, in cooperation with the devil, has passive-aggressively developed a genetically modified gender that is reluctant to take a stand or speak out against corruption, especially when doing so would cause inconveniences for the manic man who presides over the whole operation.

Micah 4:13
Arise, and thresh, Rise up and crush the nations, O daughter of Zion, for I will give you horns of iron; I will give you hoofs of bronze and you will break to pieces many nations. You will devote their ill-gotten gains to the LORD, their wealth to the Lord of all the earth.

I’m sure you’ve heard of Iron Man. When we think of iron we think of strength and we may be accustomed to directing any thoughts of strength in action to the male. But iron is, in fact, a chemical element designated by the symbol ( Fe ) and wise men/women know that the Fe-male is actually stronger in that she has a naturally higher threshold for pain. Adam can certainly be praised for his carefulness but Eve is the brave one. Wisdom itself is personified as female. The divine wisdom, known to Sophists, Sufis and all truly Spiritually Sophisticated souls as Sophia, represents the Heavenly Mother who contributes half of our spiritual genes. The mere man will always be impressed when he beholds the strength of the womb-man, leading him to proclaim “Whoah man!” If the secret of advanced power to effect change on the physical plane is in the combination of Fe and Male transforming ‘man’ into Ironman (a superhero deriving powers from and literally propelled by his heart) then it may be worthwhile to examine the element of iron more closely.

Iron is the most common element (by mass) forming the planet Earth asironwoman a whole, forming much of Earth’s out-her and in-her core, so it is heavily associated with our Mother Earth. Iron oxidizes in normal air to give hydrated iron oxides, commonly known as rust. Unlike many other metals which form passivating oxide layers, iron oxides occupy more volume than the iron metal itself, and thus iron oxides flake off and expose fresh surfaces for corrosion. This process is closely mirrored within the Fe-male’s body where iron forms complexes with molecular oxygen in hemoglobin and myoglobin; these two compounds are common oxygen transport proteins which accumulate and are shed in monthly cycles.
Isis Madonna Horns of Iron

Now the scripture says horns of iron. Why? Fresh iron surfaces appear lustrous silvery-gray. Lustrous silvery-gray horns sound like a crescent moon to me. The moon’s phases and the crescent moon specifically has been a symbolic representation of Fe-males and the powers of the Yonic Priesthood since before time began to be recorded. You may think of it as a purely pagan symbol, but in virtually every catholic depiction of the Holy Mother you will see a crescent moon. The temple tradition of Sunstones survives today’s ruined religious landscape in the form of a journal showcasing modern Mormonism or at least left-brained thought as to what it should/could be. But we must not forget the silently stoic Moonstones. Is the feminine face of the majestically veiled mystery of Mormon cosmology to be buried in cosmetics of a man-made synthetic stratum? If the Lord gives you horns of iron what will you do with them? He has not given them to women as a hair accessory. Horns are used to impale to gore. They are indeed a glorious adornment but only upon the head of a woman who will defend her children unto death. Why then do so many sell their children into slavery and inherit upon them a contract with death and hell?

Are we waiting for this, the eternal word of God, to be fulfilled? God’s word IS eternal and eternal things never begin any more than they end. We are living in a temporal nightmare. In the dark night of the new moon we offer up prayers and fasts before the God of Israel; waiting for a sliver of silver to appear in the black sky. When it at last does smile upon us we fail to recognize it as the sign of fulfillment of prophesy and only go on waiting and watching. Telling ourselves we are in need of more light to guide us on the path, when we should have filled our personal lamps with oil and gone out to meet the bridegroom when the call went out at the darkest hour. Even for us foolish virgins who miss the sign of the iron horns overhead, Mother’s patience waxes full and bright, yet we sleep and slumber all. Our beloved wives consider it their curse and begin to file those God-granted horns back to a waning crescent. This course indeed becomes a curse allowing the vicious cycle of blood shed to continue. Men-strew-all-blood upon the earth, fighting wicked wars as women remain silent, or worse, encourage their sons to enlist as soldiers (sold-yours) in the Babylonian guard, by praising their twisted human sacrifice. Boys, born to be free men, end up in-morgue when damned cells dress in distress and require slaves to fight for their slave-masters in a false reality like Morgan Freeman. What a misguided and gory perversion of glory!

Bronze was used more widely before iron. It is an alloy consisting primarily of copper, usually with tin as the main additive. So we have, alchemically speaking, Venus – The Divine Mother mixed with a touch of Jupiter – The Great Father. If the secret to supernatural strength for men is to learn from and exercise the divine qualities which they have inherited from their Heavenly Mother, then it would stand to reason that women must develop the spiritual genes from their paternal side in order to restore balance. Unlike steel, bronze struck against a hard surface will not generate sparks, so it is used to make hammers, and mallets. Perhaps this is why the Lord wants to bless his daughters with “hoofs of bronze” to stomp out the corrupt nations of the earth without the destructive inflammation of the tyrant’s iron fist. Conducive to electrical current but resilient against seawater corrosion, bronze is also commonly used in musical instruments especially bells. If freedom is to be carried from continent to continent and truly ring from coast to coast, women will need to refine the lower aspects of their natures to embody the qualities of bronze.

I pray for the day that this scripture is fulfilled and the ill-gotten gains of corrupt Kings and Queens are given over to the Lord of all the earth, to the Lord of All – The Earth. Men were made to serve women and women made to serve men – Not as slaves but by showing each other our divine potential to rise as Kings and Queens each and every one.

There is a certain ilk of man who is uncertain in his mission and indeed insecure in his manhood. Such a man seeks insecure women to surround himself with so as not to threaten his left-brained certainty, which is in reality uncertainty. The fundamentalist (fun dumb mentalist) amuses himself with intellectual imaginings. His engagement with the heart is a lengthy engagement which is sadly never consummate. His harem of yes-women are little more than Stepford Wives. Attracted by impressionable girls, distracted by immaturity, he possesses not the patience to obtain the sweetest fruit. Ironically, his utilitarian view blinds the fun-dumb-mentalist from learning how to get the most out of his priestess oracle. Like a young and inexperienced lover, he does not realize that to interpret is to interrupt. So, the secrets remain closed to him.

For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction

For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction

I am not just speaking to the Warren Jeff types, nor am I targeting those LDS opportunist men who fantasize about that day when, compelled by calamity, there will be 7 women to one man, begging him to marry. I’m not singling out any one group. Every man and woman is capable of falling into the pitfalls of fundamentalism. What I say to one, I say to all, and I will include myself so as to be perfectly clear. In temple ritual I am instructed to consider myself as if I were Adam. In LDSA’s latest post he stated that Adam, “was like unto the left-brain-mind of man and Eve was like unto the right-brain-heart of man….They were the personification of our two brain hemispheres.” So as I sit in an LDS Endowment ceremony, I am to consider myself a personification of the left brain hemisphere. Confused patrons may point to the fact that the men are seated on the right side and not the left, during the Endowment ceremony. But they forget that the Celestial glory is not someplace ahead of us on our journey so much as something Jesus says we are to bring out from inside us. Locating my true self in the place of the officiator at the altar will mentally make sense of things. From this proper perspective, I can clearly see the brothers on my left and the sisters to my right with the witness couple joining hands in the middle at the pineal pillow upon which Jacob rested his head when he saw God and lived. Seeing things any other way is death.

Double-mindedness is Devil-mindedness. On the one hand it would seem that Adam knew what he was doing when he said “I see that this must be,” but he sees only that which is directly in front of his eyes at any given moment. He appears to be the epitome of obedience when he declares his intentions to keep all the commandments of the Father. So, if he is such a damn obedient adam why didn’t he wait till the gods returned with further instructions? I used to think that Adam was being placed as a law giver to his wife. But the left brain functions are limited to outward projection. A man can speak words, but if those words are not of God, the heart knows it and she will not back the man’s words with the power necessary for them to be of any type of real, let alone everlasting effect out there. In this lone and dreary man’s world, things are not what they seem. Jack and Jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water. Jack fell down and broke his crown and Jill came tumbling after. So it is actually Adam who is being placed in check. Notice Eve can be trusted to intuit whether Adam is acting on the Holy Spirit or not, and she is under no obligation to submit to him if he is wrong. And boy, let me tell you, he is very wrong in his thinking that Eve is under some kind of punishment or even probation for being the first to partake. How can there be probation for the right brain which operates in timelessness?

In The Root and Divine Pattern of the Damsel in Distress, LDSA describes Adam and Eve respectively and thusly: “The one is firm, fixed and adamant (unyielding), the other vacillating.” He then immediately draws parallels between our first parents and the two vital hemispheres of our brain. Here he references his earlier work, which I have promoted before and which I can not recommend highly enough to others who are seeking wisdom. In what was for me a paradigm shifting post – The Split Brain Model of the Gospel – LDSA lists some contrasting characteristics of the Left and Right brain hemispheres.

The left-brain is successive.
The right-brain is simultaneous.
The left-brain is sequential.
The right-brain is multiple.
The left-brain is analytic.
The right-brain is holistic.

How is something which perceives the multiple layers in the truth of all things, something which simultaneously, believes all things and keeps the commandments in a natural and holistic way; how is such a marvelous center of consciousness as the heart which God has placed in each of his children likened unto a vacillating woman? Isn’t the only vacillating going on here a result of our divided and fallen houses (brains)? That a woman may vacillate, and to a frustrating degree is true, however, this is not a condition that is peculiar to womanhood. The 1963 book, Fascinating Womanhood, could be alternatively and aptly titled Vacillating Womanhood. Anyone who promotes those philosophies of men, mingled with the teachings of Christ, while purporting to have an interest in the true Zion of God on Earth, has a very split brain indeed.

It reminds me of a dream I had. I was visiting southern California to see my friend, Brian. When I found Brian he was all suited up as a Roman gladiator and ready to enter the Coliseum. I watched as he fought bravely, but to my horror, saw his towering goliath of an opponent sever his body clean in half! There were pompous men in robes cheering from the stands. I felt paralyzed, stunned from the sight I had just beheld, but somehow I managed to rush out into the arena and pull all I could find (the top half) of my friend that remained. I didn’t know what to do. Brian was dying and his case seemed hopeless, but I felt led to strap upper half of my friend to my back. I hopped on one of those low-rider bicycles like the Chicanos are famous for, and proceeded to bring him across a bridge and up a hill to a home where he could hopefully recover somehow. I heard barely a sound from him the whole way as I crossed the bridge and made my way uphill with tremendous effort on that low-rider bike in the intense So-Cal sunshine. Upon finally reaching the safe-house, I removed Brian’s limp upper-body from my back. As I tried to prop him up as best as I could, I heard him wheeze. I didn’t know if that was a good sign as he still appeared to be in such dire and hopeless condition. I told him that my mind was not inspired with any further action that I might take to help him. To my surprise he said “That’s alright. I should be okay.” He thanked me for the rescue. I turned to leave the scene and woke up.

I remember that dream vividly as it was a shocking vision. But until now I had not considered some of the deeper symbolism in the details. The dream, of course consisted of impactful imagery accompanied by clear audio. But as I write the contents out, I become aware of the linguistic clues to meaning. After having that dream I considered the significance of the lost lower half as symbolic of principles of action on the part of my friend (no pun intended). But now I discover additional layers of meaning.

The not so holy Roman setting was definitely pre Catholic Empire days but the men in robes nonetheless call the Church to my mind. They were shouting fiendishly as I ran out to recover my brother’s body from the Coliseum center. They were of course shouting in Latin and in Latin the words for ‘body’ (Corpus) and the Coliseum are an obvious reference to the corpus callosum (Latin: tough body) , also known as the colossal commissure (huge meeting place) is a big bundle of neural fibers that connects the left and right cerebral hemispheres and facilitates interhemispheric communication. My buddy’s body, opponent and the

Coliseum - Great and Spacious Building

Coliseum – Great and Spacious Building

setting for his gruesome struggle all have reference to this anatomical structure as does the bridge we would later cross. The neurological nature of the symbols reminds me of the infamous emperor Nero, whos larger-than-life likeness stood alongside the Coliseum. I now know a broader meaning behind the bloody halving of my friend that occurred in the dream. Without divulging too much personal information I can share this, and hope that it will serve us, the severed individuals reading and writing, contributing and commenting on this blog, to re-member (put the members back together) our divine purpose. We have all been subject to the effects of the Fall of Man and must reassemble our fragmented psyches. The bloody image of a split Brian in my dream signifies the devastating results of a split-brain.

“If ye are not one ye are not mine.”
– Jesus Christ (D&C 38:27)

When I said earlier that it is actually Adam who is being placed in check, I did not mean to infer that males are any more or less under condemnation in this fallen state than females of the human species. I meant that there is something much bigger and simultaneously much more personal going on here during our sojourn on Earth. In general and introspective terms, all of God’s sons and daughters are here to test out those salvific traits that we have inherited specifically from/through the Divine Masculine part of ourselves. It is a coming of age thing that starts with but transcends tribe. By no means limited to physical manhood, this life is a personal quest to develop the perfect potential of that which is bestowed via the celestial patriarchal line. For more information on how this faith quest of our mortal existence focuses primarily on our relationship to the Father, I would suggest you read Justin’s well written post, Masculinity Femininity and Gender, from which I will quote only a few choice lines (with small annotations added by myself) to, hopefully, further illustrate some of the concepts we are talking about here.

Outer darkness is, in every facet, the right-brain-heart of God – it is the Mother or Goddess – the waning or sleep state.
[Alpha State Brainwaves]

The created universe is, in every facet, the left-brain-mind of God – it is the Father or God – the waxing or active state.”
[Beta State Brainwaves]

I can see how one might take my words as favoring the female and putting man and woman on unequal levels, but that is the pitfall of believing in only the literal level of the Adam and Eve story. All sorts of contradictions and limitations arise from a strictly literal reading. If someone subjects themselves to that type of bondage, they deny themselves the vista which does not dispose of the literal but goes further to unfold a fractal and eternal landscape of truth. One of those limiting contradictions that readers of this blog may find themselves faced with by clinging to the most literal interpretations of this story as it has come to us through tradition, would be that; if the Bible story refers only to two individuals named Adam and Eve, and not to two groups of humans (as the original Hebrew indicates), then Elohim must not be a proponent of polygny or polyandry. And any type of multiple marriages model as a divine principle must be supposed to be incorrect.

There is another stumbling block one may encounter when lingering at the literal level and refusing to focus on the more complete version where each and every aspect of the story, without exception, must be equally applied to the reader his or her self, since both male and female are created in the image of and by the power of the Heavenly Mother and Father. The conundrum of the damsel in distress can be horribly misinterpreted through misogynistic tenets embedded deeply in our subconscious by this point in mankind’s apostasy from The Way of Truth. If we are to understand that it is somehow a part of a woman’s divine nature to be totally and desperately reliant on a husband for salvation, and if we do not recognize the same to be true for men in relation to their wives, then not only must we admit that Eve’s appeals to Adam were divinely appointed and not beguiling or Satan-inspired in the slightest, but we also must admit to constructing false hierarchies that do not exist in eternal realms of reality. Since the Divine Order of the Universe and Multiverse is anarchical, then any leaning to our own misunderstanding will have an eventual end and it may very well come so abruptly as to cause us to feel as if the carpet had been yanked out from underneath our feet.

To avoid these pitfalls is simple. Simply don’t dig a pit and you won’t fall. To dig a pit for anyone, male or female, religious or non religious, others or yourself means to imagine that something one does or does not do places one person on higher ground than another. Such pride is folly. Perhaps pride is the reason why Adam in particular is being tested in this life. Maybe that’s why Jack fell and Jill followed. Could that be why Mother Earth’s calling and election are already made sure and man’s collective fate is yet to be decided? Does this have anything to do with God the Father’s Strange Work, His Strange Act and strange reasoning, whereby He makes the first last, and the last first? Then again, maybe it is just a part of the vast conspiracy to awaken women to their free will, that scientists would refer to waking state with (B)eta and sleep state as (A)lpha.

Alpha-males are opening a can of soul-killing hallucinations when they insist on a self important/ self righteous role that fails to grasp true oneness with their feminine counterpart. I would be more concerned with the conspiracy to emasculate the Lion of Judah and declaw H.I.M. (His Imperial Majesty) postponing his righteous reign in Heaven and on Earth. As reggae artist Vaughn Benjamin sings so solemnly and somberly:

“Who frightened off the lion, holding up the lamb that was slain as a permanent? What is their mission? Who frightened off the lion holding up the lamb that was slain? Return it as a given when conquering and to conquer is a time now relevant.”                                                                                                        – 3 Stupendous Vanities

It is these mad scientists and wicked shepherds of Israel, who the Lord addresses threateningly in Ezekiel 34, who are the real problem. Their own fear of nothingness will drive them mad when, while projecting a stalwart self image, boldly rejecting the very appearance of evil, they are confronted with the fact that the forbidden fruit is a fore-bitten fruit. When Adam (spirit) finally awakes and arises he will recall that it was himself (flesh) who took that first bite. And as the Chinese proverb states:

When sleeping women wake, mountains will move.”
sleeping woman with lion and moon

Moving mountains is an act of purest faith and it is speculated that these type of demonstrations of faith will play a big role in the literal establishment of Zion which can only come after the spiritual establishment in our hearts. This is ecofeminism. It isn’t contrary to the work of the Lord in these latter-days. Ecofeminists are not Feminazis, they don’t even wear pants to church. They wear beautiful saris in South East Asia and go topless in the rainforests of our planet. They dress in traditional Native American garb and teach the stripling warriors of the future through oral tradition. They sometimes don ski masks and fight alongside the spirit of Zapata and Moroni – true freedom fighter spirits who are not satisfied with false freedom and who don’t stop fighting till all are made free through the blood of the lamb. They are Lioness-like women who say “I am woman, hear me roar!” There is no need to be scared of the ecofeminists, unless you are fighting against God, and just don’t know it yet, like it warns of most Male-chizedek priesthood holders in D&C 121:38. Waking women are the critical mass needed to bring forth Zion. May we encourage our wives, daughters, mothers, grandmothers and ourselves to cultivate divine feminine skills and powers. May the captive daughter of Zion loose herself from the bands of her neck – in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen!
empowered-woman-2

King Noah and the Redemption of Zion


This is an elaboration of a comment I left on this blog on October 17th, 2012.

Making sense of Noah

One of the most confusing aspects of the Book of Mormon is the account of king Noah and his people, all of whom went from a state of righteousness to exceedingly great wickedness seemingly overnight. This mystery, though, can be quite easily explained and cleared up if we just make two little assumptions: 1) that the land of first inheritance (the land of Nephi) given to Lehi’s descendants was the very land of Zion [see Footnote below], meaning the land upon which, and round about where, the city of New Jerusalem (Zion) would be built by the descendants of Lehi—in other words, the area known to us as Independence, Jackson County, Missouri—and 2) that the people of Nephi were aware of this fact.

This post takes that premise and runs with it, to explain the motivations behind the actions of Noah, his priests, his people and also Abinadi and Alma.

The land of Lehi-Nephi (the land Bountiful) = the land of Zion (Independence, Missouri)

Jesus told the Nephites:

but if they [the gentiles] will repent | and hearken unto my words | and harden not their hearts | i will establish my church among them | and they shall come in unto the covenant | and be numbered among this the remnant of jacob | unto whom i have given this land for their inheritance | and they [the gentiles] shall assist my people | the remnant of jacob | and also as many of the house of israel as shall come | that they may build a city | which shall be called the new jerusalem | (3 Ne. 21:22-23)

When Jesus made this statement, He was standing upon the land Bountiful, near the temple that was built there. This was the land given to the remnant of Jacob (that He was speaking to) for their inheritance. It is on that spot of land (their land of inheritance) that the remnant of Jacob will build the New Jerusalem.

Jesus also stated, while standing upon that same land:

verily | verily i say unto you | thus hath the father commanded me |

that i should give unto this people this land for their inheritance | and then the words of the prophet isaiah shall be fulfilled | which say |

thy watchmen shall lift up the voice | with the voice together shall they sing | for they shall see eye to eye | when the lord shall bring again zion |

break forth into joy | sing together | ye waste places of jerusalem | for the lord hath comforted his people | he hath redeemed jerusalem |

the lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations | and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of god | (3 Ne. 16:16-20)

This is the same scripture that the priests of Noah quoted to Abinadi. It speaks of “bringing again Zion” and deals specifically with the land of Zion and the prophecies concerning the building of the New Jerusalem or city of Zion. When the priests of Noah quoted it to Abinadi, though, they were standing upon the land of Nephi.

Prophecy: history in reverse

The Nephites desired to know what would happen to their seed upon the land of promise, so they exercised faith:

for because of faith and great anxiety | it truly had been made manifest unto us concerning our people | what things should happen unto them | (Jacob 1:5)

and, according to their desires, God told them their future history by giving new prophecies:

and now | behold | i would speak unto you | concerning things which are | and which are to come | (2 Ne. 6:4)

The prophecies about the land of Zion, its redemption, the redemption of the people who would inherit and inhabit it (the seed of Lehi), and the holy city of God that they would build there were promises (prophecies) given to Lehi’s seed that would be fulfilled literally, not just metaphorically. Jacob taught that

the promises | which we have obtained | are promises unto us according to the flesh (2 Ne. 10:2)

So, the Nephites were blessed with a very full canon of scriptures and prophecies, brought from the Old World, in the form of the plates of brass, a kind of Bible on steroids, which the Nephite prophets fully expounded from the time of Jacob onward and they also had more scripture, pronounced by these same prophets:

behold | ye know | that i have spoken unto you exceedingly many things | nevertheless | i speak unto you again | for i am desirous for the welfare of your souls | yea | mine anxiety is great for you | and ye yourselves know | that it ever has been | for i have exhorted you with all diligence | and i have taught you the words of my father | and i have spoken unto you concerning all things | which are written | from the creation of the world | (2 Ne. 6:2-3)

This means that the Nephites possessed a whole lot more information than we do about the prophecies.

Restored knowledge

The revelation, then, that God gave to Joseph Smith about the New Jerusalem and the land of Zion, was, like everything else in this dispensation, a restoration, or restored knowledge. It was had anciently among the Nephites. They knew where the land of Zion was and they knew where the city of Zion or the New Jerusalem would be built. The city of Zion would be built by them because it was going to be built on their land of inheritance.

Now, the promised land of inheritance given to the seed of Lehi has never changed, nor will it. This is why the scripture says:

zion shall not be moved out of her place | (D&C 101:17)

zion cannot fall | neither be moved out of her place | (D&C 97:19)

The New Jerusalem can and will be built only upon the land of Zion and only by the seed of Lehi (with assistance from others.) There is no other appointed spot because the Lord has made irrevocable promises to Lehi and his seed.

The land of their “first inheritance” was the land of Zion

Zeniff wrote:

i | zeniff | having been taught in all the language of the nephites | and having had a knowledge of the land of nephi | or of the land of our fathers’ first inheritance | (Mosiah 9:1)

The land of their first inheritance would also end up being the land of their last inheritance, according to the principle that the first shall be last and the last shall be first, in all things.

Now, this land of Nephi was the same land that Nephi escaped to after Laman and Lemuel sought to take away his life. Nephi wrote:

and it came to pass | that the lord did warn me | that i | nephi | should depart from them | and flee into the wilderness | and all those who would go with me |

wherefore | it came to pass | that i | nephi | did take my family | and also zoram | and his family | and sam | mine elder brother | and his family | and jacob | and joseph | my younger brethren | and also my sisters | and all those who would go with me | and all those | who would go with me | were those | who believed in the warnings and the revelations of god | wherefore | they did hearken unto my words |

and we did take our tents | and whatsoever things were possible for us | and did journey in the wilderness for the space of many days | and after we had journeyed for the space of many days | we did pitch our tents | and my people would | that we should call the name of the place nephi | wherefore | we did call it nephi | (2 Ne. 5:5-8)

The land of Nephi, then, was the area which is now known to us as Independence, Jackson County, Missouri. The people of Nephi lived in this land from the time of Nephi until the time of the first seer Mosiah. Amaleki wrote:

behold | i am amaleki | the son of abinadom |

behold | i will speak unto you somewhat concerning mosiah | who was made king over the land of zarahemla |

for behold | he | being warned of the lord | that he should flee out of the land of nephi | and as many | as would hearken unto the voice of the lord | should also depart out of the land with him into the wilderness |

and it came to pass | that he did | according as the Lord had commanded him | and they departed out of the land into the wilderness | as many as would hearken unto the voice of the lord | and they were led by many preachings and prophesyings | and they were admonished continually by the word of god | and they were led by the power of his arm through the wilderness | until they came down into the land | which is called the land of zarahemla | (Omni 1:12-13)

From Mosiah onward, the Nephites lived in or around the land of Zarahemla, while the Lamanites took possession of the promised land (the land of Zion, which was the land of Nephi, or the land of first inheritance.) Nevertheless, it was the desire of every Nephite to return someday to that land and to redeem it, in order that the promises and prophecies be fulfilled.

Polygamy (Zarahemla) and monogamy (Nephi)

I suppose I ought to mention, at this point, that the people of Zarahemla, who were brought to the New World by Mulek, son of Zedekiah, king of Judah, had been given no monogamy restrictions by the Lord. As descendants of Jews, polygamy would have been their way of life.

After Mosiah discovered them and the two kingdoms were united under one banner, with Mosiah becoming king of both groups, they remained as a distinct group living a different set of laws. In other words, the people of Zarahemla lived the law of Moses, which allowed and even under some circumstances, commanded polygamy, whereas the people of Nephi lived the law of Moses which was modified by Lehi, their founding seer, which law allowed only monogamy, or which commanded the seed of Lehi to have only one wife and no concubines. To be even clearer, the commandment of monogamy given to Lehi’s seed was only applicable to the seed of Lehi. It had no application, whatsoever, to any other lineage. So, there were polygamists and monogamists living together under one national banner.

Much later on the people of Zarahemla would become numbered with the people of Nephi, meaning that they called themselves Nephites, or the children of Nephi, and adopted the law given to Lehi, which was monogamy. But from the time of their first landing, to the time of Mosiah discovering them, and finally to the time when they became numbered with the Nephites, polygamy was allowed for them. This is why we find that at the time of the numbering, the people of Zarahemla were more than double the population of the people of Nephi.

Now, I mention this here because if Noah, son of Zeniff, was born in Zarahemla and spent some of his childhood there, he would have grown up in that environment and would have noticed that the people of Zarahemla lived the unmodified, or more ancient form, of the law of Moses, which allowed polygamy, whereas the people of Nephi lived the modified, or more recent innovation of the law. But even if Noah did not grow up in Zarahemla, he would have been aware of these historical facts about the people living in Zarahemla.

Zeniff’s two trips to reclaim the land

Two expeditions to reclaim the land were made, as recorded by Amaleki:

and now | i would speak somewhat concerning a certain number | who went up into the wilderness to return to the land of nephi | for there was a large number | who were desirous to possess the land of their inheritance | wherefore | they went up into the wilderness | and their leader | being a strong and mighty man | and a stiffnecked man | wherefore | he caused a contention among them | and they were all slain | save fifty | in the wilderness | and they returned again to the land of zarahemla |

and it came to pass | that they also took others | to a considerable number | and took their journey again into the wilderness | and i | amaleki | had a brother | who also went with them | and i have not since known concerning them | and i am about to lie down in my grave | and these plates are full | and i make an end of my speaking | (Omni 1:27-30)

Zeniff was among both expeditions. He was the cause of the contention of the first expedition and he was the leader of the second expedition, which was successful in occupying the land.

Zeniff “redeemed” the land by bloodshed

The unnamed leader of the first expedition wanted to redeem the land of Zion by bloodshed, by attacking the Lamanites. Zeniff, though, wanted to enter into a treaty with the Lamanites and possess the land peacefully. During the second expedition, he did just that, but later the Lamanites reneged on their agreement and the Nephites who now possessed the land of their first inheritance ended up having to shed Lamanite blood anyway. It is, in this sense, that the land was “redeemed” by the shedding of blood.

Each Nephite king was (assumed to be) a prophet or seer or revelator

now | it was the custom among all the nephites to appoint for their chief captains | save it were in their times of wickedness | some one that had the spirit of revelation and also prophecy | therefore | this Gidgiddoni was a great prophet among them | as also was the chief judge | (3 Ne. 3:19)

This custom likely also applied to the time when they had kings.

Now, the Nephite king Mosiah was a seer. The Nephite king Zeniff, who led his expedition back to the land of Nephi after Mosiah had brought everyone to Zarahemla, was also a man of God, for he led his people in the strength of the Lord against Lamanite aggression and the Lord heard his prayers.

The assumption may have been, then, that each Nephite king was a man of God, capable of receiving revelations, prophecies and the like. The people of Noah would have looked at him with this same perspective.

Noah’s new revelation: the restoration and redemption of Zion

The reign and ministry of king Noah, son of Zeniff, was one of departure from what his father did. The easiest way to understand this departure is that Noah received a new revelation.

Now, it may have been a pretended revelation, thought up all by himself, for these Nephites kings were expected to be men of God, capable of receiving the word of God and that is a lot of pressure to be under. Noah may have wanted to leave a legacy behind him, as one who obtained something new from God for the people, therefore, he may have simply conceived of this himself.

Another possibility is that he got a revelation from the devil, or at least inspiration from the devil.

Whichever was the case, the result was the same. This new doctrinal idea went forth from him, first to the priests—and when the priests of his father would not accept his revelation, he interviewed other men who did accept it, and then ordained them, releasing his father’s priests from their callings—and then to the people, and it was accepted wholeheartedly by his people.

Noah also put himself out as a restorer, restoring the people to a proper worship of God, using the pure law of Moses without any of the additions of the doctrine of Christ, which was preached by Nephi and others of the Nephite prophets, nor any of the modifications made by Lehi (of monogamy.) The end result was very old school theology mixed with new school theology, with the stuff in the middle tossed out.

The gospel of Noah

The good news that Noah was giving his people was this: that the land of Zion had been redeemed by his father, by the shedding of blood, and that now they were the children of Zion, the ones who would fulfill all the prophecies of the prophets concerning this very special promised land. The land had been sanctified by the shedding of blood, and as it was redeemed, so were they, who lived upon it, redeemed, and they could now rejoice, for the great Millennial day was upon them and they would prosper in the land forever more. The promised day in which all things would come together in one was upon them and they would build and inherit and multiply in the land and be blessed by the Lord.

And so, to get on with the multiplying, a multimale-multifemale mating system was set up, where men took wives and concubines and also visited with harlots, that every available female in the land would do her part to conceive and bear redeemed children to live upon the already redeemed land of promise. Whereas the former commandments limited the number of Nephites, so that they remained small compared to the Lamanites, this new day of redemption called for a much larger population of redeemed souls, for they wanted to bring as many children as they could into their new paradise on earth.

That may have been the surface reason, given to the people, for why this new gospel of procreation was going around. Secretly, Noah may have realized that there was strength in numbers, for they were surrounded by an innumerable host of Lamanites. Therefore, this new revelation made much more practical and strategic sense than the previous ones that demanded the Nephites stick to monogamy, and thus small numbers.

As this was the land of Zion, which had the promises concerning the building of the city of Zion, Noah set about to construct many elaborate and spacious buildings, for Zion must be beautified. Again, the land of Zion was redeemed, as were the people living upon it, therefore their task was to build it up, to build up a city that would be worthy of the fulfillment of the prophecies. So, although Noah exacted a heavy tax from the people, of one-fifth of all they possessed, there wasn’t so much as a peep of a complaint from any of his people. They all saw eye to eye on this project, for they were building Zion, and Noah was the man God raised up and inspired to accomplish this task.

Now, the former priests, consecrated by his father, were not in the habit of telling people how good they were, but instead they were in the habit of admonishing the people for their sins. The new priests consecrated by Noah, though, understood his new gospel and revelation, which was quite literally good news, namely, that they were all redeemed of the Lord. “No more need to repent, just enjoy the blessings of the Lord that he has bestowed and do your part to build up the land.” In other words, everyone was now to be proud of their heritage and birthright, as heirs of the promised land. Pride was no longer a sin, but was the very gospel preached, for they were redeemed.

These priests began to practice idolatry—for whenever a people develop prideful hearts and come under the control of the devil, he introduces them to idolatry—and the priests then taught the people to also be idolatrous. In the minds of Noah, his priests and his people, they were already living the Millennial day, which was, as Joseph Smith wrote, “a time to come in the which nothing shall be withheld, whether there be one God or many gods, they shall be manifest” (D&C 121:28.) The priests of Noah had taken the liberty to divulge the “truths” that were to be revealed, namely that there be many gods, even idols, and they flattered the people into divulging in these sinful practices.

(There was, again, a hidden practicality to their practice of idolatry. Idolatry and excessive sexuality go hand in hand and the kingdom law was to procreate, so idolatry would only increase the number of pregnancies in the land.)

Regardless of the contrariness of Noah’s gospel to former commandments, none of that applied to these people, for they were now in a new dispensation, a time of redemption of both land and people, and the former constraints and commandments did not apply. New dispensations come with new commandments and revelations, and Noah’s reign was to be noted in history as the beginning of the children of redemption. They were the ones who did what others could not, because they were not, yet, redeemed.

Noah took for patterns what he found in the scriptures. For example, to get around the Lord’s prohibition on polygamy, he turned to Jacob’s words which actually presuppose that at some point the Lord would lift the ban on multiple wives and concubines for the seed of Lehi:

for if i will |

saith the lord of hosts |

raise up seed unto me | i will command my people | otherwise | they shall hearken unto these things |  (Jacob 2:30)

All he needed to say was that the time had finally and fully come, in which the Lord would lift the polygamy ban, using an Official Declaration, such as the following:

Aware of the promises made by the prophets and [kings] of the [Lord’s people] who have preceded us that at some time, in God’s eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive [a plurality of wives], and witnessing the faithfulness of those from whom [multiple wives have] been withheld, we have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these, our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the Upper Room of the Temple [built by our father Nephi] supplicating the Lord for divine guidance.

He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man [of the seed of Lehi living in this blessed land] may receive [additional wives, and concubines, too.]

The prophecies concerning the building of a great tower he thought to fulfill literally and built two of them, one near the temple (for the city of Lehi-Nephi) and one on a historically significant hill (for the city of Shilom.)

He read about vineyards and so he planted vineyards. He read that there would be a temple in Zion, but since Nephi had already built a temple there, he instead restored it and beautified it with all manner of fine workmanship to make it match more precisely the Solomon temple. Everything that seemed to indicate what would happen in the day of Zion’s redemption, he sought to do, that his reign would go down in history as the fulfillment of these prophecies.

It was all about the redemption of Zion

The basis for all this iniquity was that the prophecies concerning the redemption of Zion had already taken place, for their fathers had inherited the land, then had to leave it, then had come back (with Zeniff), fulfilling the prophecies of its redemption. Since the land had been redeemed, that meant that they themselves had also been redeemed. Their redemption was tied to the redemption of the land. As evidence of such redemption, all could see that they were prospering like crazy in the land. Also, because of their victory against the Lamanites, under the leadership of king Noah, the people believed that the strength of the Lord was still with them, which was more evidence of Noah’s inspired reign.

The truth of the matter, though, was that they had achieved that victory without the Lord’s strength, for He had retained it, and so when they began to boast that a small number of them could slay thousands of Lamanites, that was the final straw for the Lord and it was time to set them straight by sending another prophet to prophesy evil against them.

Abinadi’s teaching that redemption was tied to Christ

When Abinadi started preaching, he was seen as a disturber of the peace, for everyone was enjoying the high life, and he brought everyone low again with his “repent or be brought into bondage” sayings. Then, his sayings concerning the king really got on everyone’s nerves since everyone thought of king Noah as an inspired man of God, who had done marvels in his time as king, making the people happy and prosperous. Abinadi was like the cop that knocks on the door of a midnight party to tell the people in the house the noise is too loud and everyone needs to go home and stop partying. He was a total downer.

Noah had begun a gospel (good news) celebration based upon a perversion of the doctrine of redemption, and it had the unintended consequences of making them all weak, meaning that the Lord had removed His strength from them. They were literally on their own and were very soon to be brought into unbreakable bondage by the Lamanites. Abinadi was sent to get them to repent so that they could stave off the coming captivity.

The people’s reaction to Abinadi’s words, of anger and seeking to kill him, is understandable when one considers that they truly believed that what they were doing was the will of God, that their king and priests were men of God, that these (perverse) teachings had come down the proper and approved channels, that all that Noah and priests had taught had been confirmed by signs of peace, prosperity and (supposed) strength of the Lord, that there was no indication, whatsoever, that God was not blessing the people according to His promises, etc. Abinadi had no leg to stand on, in their view, but was slandering the entire population and making people feel bad about themselves, breaking the law himself (disturbing the peace) and speaking false prophecies. They, the people, were acting in righteousness in seeking to shut the mouth of this obvious false prophet, by killing him. Had not the ancients done the same?

Now, Abinadi was countering this redemption perversion by saying that they were not redeemed, at all, for all this evil he prophesied upon them could not come to pass on a redeemed population. Such evil could only befall sinners. The fulfillment of his prophecies, then, would be proof positive that Noah and priests were liars, and their doctrine was either of men or of the devil; and that the redemption of Zion had not yet come, nor would it until some other future day; also that redemption does not come from the land, but from Christ.

This was the question posed to Abinadi by one of the priests:

what meaneth the words | which are written | and which have been taught by our fathers | saying |

how beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him | that bringeth good tidings | that publisheth peace | that bringeth good tidings of good | that publisheth salvation | that saith unto zion |

thy god reigneth |

thy watchmen shall lift up the voice | with the voice together shall they sing | for they shall see eye to eye | when the lord shall bring again zion |

break forth into joy | sing together | ye waste places of jerusalem | for the lord hath comforted his people | he hath redeemed jerusalem |

the lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations | and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our god | (Mosiah 12:20-24)

In the eyes of Noah, his priests and his people, Noah was the one whose feet were beautiful, for Noah (and his priests) were bringing good tidings of good and publishing peace and salvation. Noah was the one saying to Zion—for, remember, they were living in the very land of Zion—that their God reigns. Noah had watchmen upon the tower. Noah’s people sang with the voice together and everyone saw eye to eye. Zion had been brought again, or it had been redeemed. The waste places of this new Jerusalem were being built up again. It was a time of comfort and joy and redemption, all because of Noah (and his father.) This is why the priest asked Abinadi about this scripture, for they all believed that it was fulfilled by Noah and they held it up as proof of his divine calling as their king.

If you read through Abinadi’s sermon, you will see that he mentions “redemption” 18 times, all pointing to the fact that it is God that redeems:

“…for they understood not that there could not any man be saved except it were through the redemption of God.”

“For behold, did not Moses prophesy unto them concerning the coming of the Messiah, and that God should redeem his people?”

“I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people.”

“And thus God breaketh the bands of death, having gained the victory over death; giving the Son power to make intercession for the children of men…having redeemed them, and satisfied the demands of justice.”

“…all those who have hearkened unto their words, and believed that the Lord would redeem his people, and have looked forward to that day for a remission of their sins…are the heirs of the kingdom of God.

“For these are they whose sins he has borne; these are they for whom he has died, to redeem them from their transgressions.”

“For O how beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that is the founder of peace, yea, even the Lord, who has redeemed his people…”

“For were it not for the redemption which he hath made for his people, which was prepared from the foundation of the world…all mankind must have perished.”

“They are raised to dwell with God who has redeemed them; thus they have eternal life through Christ, who has broken the bands of death. “

“And thus the Lord bringeth about the restoration of these; and they have a part in the first resurrection, or have eternal life, being redeemed by the Lord. “

“But behold, and fear, and tremble before God, for ye ought to tremble; for the Lord redeemeth none such that rebel against him and die in their sins…“

“Therefore ought ye not to tremble? For salvation cometh to none such; for the Lord hath redeemed none such; yea, neither can the Lord redeem such; for he cannot deny himself; for he cannot deny justice when it has its claim. “

“Break forth into joy, sing together, ye waste places of Jerusalem; for the Lord hath comforted his people, he hath redeemed Jerusalem. “

“And then shall the wicked be cast out, and they shall have cause to howl, and weep, and wail, and gnash their teeth; and this because they would not hearken unto the voice of the Lord; therefore the Lord redeemeth them not. “

“Thus all mankind were lost; and behold, they would have been endlessly lost were it not that God redeemed his people from their lost and fallen state.“

“But remember that he that persists in his own carnal nature, and goes on in the ways of sin and rebellion against God, remaineth in his fallen state and the devil hath all power over him. Therefore he is as though there was no redemption made, being an enemy to God; and also is the devil an enemy to God. “

“Therefore, if ye teach the law of Moses, also teach that it is a shadow of those things which are to come—teach them that redemption cometh through Christ the Lord, who is the very Eternal Father. Amen.”

Redemption through Christ is the topic of Abinadi’s sermon because these people believed they were already redeemed, through the redemption of the land of Zion, without the necessity of believing in Christ, etc.

The result: captivity

After they killed Abinadi—and sought to kill the sole convert among the priests, who was Alma—and the Lamanites came in, subjecting them to bondage, affliction and death, they were faced with the realization that they were not the redeemed children of Zion, and that they had misunderstood the prophecies, putting them in the wrong context and breaking a host of the Lord’s still-in-force commandments. Essentially, these people had their hopes completely dashed to pieces and had to start from an exceedingly humble place.

Now, this people fell into these grave errors because they put their trust in their leaders, even their king and priests, trusting that they interpreted the prophecies correctly, instead of searching the scriptures themselves and coming to their own, God-inspired conclusions. Had they done the legwork of searching the scriptures and obtaining the gift of the Holy Ghost for themselves, neither Noah nor his priests could have deceived them with false revelations. As we know, it turned out that Noah and his priests were wrong in their interpretations on the prophecies, so wrong in fact that it resulted in death, destruction of property, bondage, humiliation (the Lamanites treated them like dumb asses) and general misery. This shows that misinterpreting a prophecy can have disastrous results.

It also shows why Alma was so emphatic in the teaching that he gave to his people of trusting no one:

trust no man to be a king over you | and also trust no one to be your teacher | nor your minister | except he be a man of god | walking in his ways | and keeping his commandments | (Mosiah 23:13-14)

Don’t mess with the land of Zion

There appears to be a blessing and a curse upon that land. Those who live upon it, who have the laws of God, must live them, otherwise, captivity and destruction will be their lot. This may be one of the reasons why Mosiah left that land, and also why eventually Alma and Limhi left, to preserve their people from destruction. It requires a righteous people, otherwise, nobody can be established there as Zion.

The unconverted Lamanites, and now also the non-Mormon Gentiles, who currently live there, appear to be the temporary care-takers of the land, and it might be wise to leave it that way, until such time arrives that the Lord specifically and plainly commands and leads His people to return and redeem it.

This might be an important point to keep in mind, since what Noah and his priests did upon that land may be repeated in the future with another group of unauthorized persons, that attempts to “redeem Zion,” with the same (or even more) disastrous results.

Gentiles upon the land of Zion

Here are the Lord’s words regarding the establishment of Zion, given to the Nephites while He stood in the land Bountiful:

and verily i say unto you |

i give unto you a sign | that ye may know the time | when these things shall be about to take place | that i shall gather in | from their long dispersion | my people | o house of israel | and shall establish again among them my zion |

and behold | this is the thing | which i will give unto you for a sign | for verily I say unto you |

that when these things | which i declare unto you | and which i shall declare unto you hereafter of myself | and by the power of the holy ghost | which shall be given unto you of the father | shall be made known unto the gentiles | that they may know concerning this people | who are a remnant of the house of Jacob | and concerning this my people | who shall be scattered by them |

verily | verily i say unto you |

when these things shall be made known unto them of the father | and shall come forth of the father from them unto you |

for it is wisdom in the father | that they should be established in this land | and be set up as a free people by the power of the father | that these things might come forth from them unto a remnant of your seed | that the covenant of the father may be fulfilled | which he hath covenanted with his people | o house of israel |

therefore | when these works | and the works which shall be wrought among you hereafter | shall come forth from the gentiles unto your seed | which shall dwindle in unbelief because of iniquity |

for thus it behooveth the father | that it should come forth from the gentiles | that he may show forth his power unto the gentiles | for this cause |

that the gentiles | if they will not harden their hearts | that they may repent | and come unto me | and be baptized in my name | and know of the true points of my doctrine | that they may be numbered among my people | o house of israel |

and when these things come to pass | that thy seed shall begin to know these things | it shall be a sign unto them | that they may know | that the work of the father hath already commenced unto the fulfilling of the covenant | which he hath made unto the people | who are of the house of israel | (3 Ne. 21:1-7)

Now, the meaning of these words it this: when the establishment of Zion commences in the land of Zion (Independence, Jackson County, Missouri area), there will be Gentiles established upon that very land and living in anarchy, gathered there by the miraculous power of the Father. They will then receive additional records, which they will share with the remnant of Jacob. When these events occur, that will be the sign to the remnant of Jacob that the fulfillment of the covenant the Lord made with their fathers has commenced.

This true gathering of Gentiles upon the land of Zion will be attended by the miraculous works of the Father and will fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah: “The Lord hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations,” or Gentiles. However, prior to that true gathering, there may be false gatherings of Gentiles, which are not attended to by the power of the Father. Jacob prophesied:

but behold | this land |

said god |

shall be a land of thine inheritance |

and the gentiles shall be blessed upon the land |

and this land shall be a land of liberty unto the gentiles |

and there shall be no kings upon the land | who shall raise up unto the gentiles |

and i will fortify this land against all other nations |

and he that fighteth against zion shall perish |

saith god |

for he | that raiseth up a king against me | shall perish | for i | the lord | the king of heaven | will be their king | and i will be a light unto them forever | that hear my words | (2 Ne. 10:10-14)

These words are speaking of the same establishment-of-Zion event. The land in question is the land of Zion (Independence, Jackson County, Missouri area.) These prophecies have shadows, of course, but the literal and last fulfillment concerns a specific spot of land and a specific group of Gentiles. The other Gentiles, or other nations, as it is written—for the text could have also been worded this way: “and i will fortify this land against all other gentiles”—will raise up, or attempt to raise up, kings, contrary to the commandment of God, and these other groups of Gentiles will perish, for they misunderstand and misinterpret the prophecies, which brings disaster upon them.

So, there will be no kings raised up unto one group of Gentiles, while another group (or groups) will raise up king(s) and will perish. This latter group (or groups, for this prophecy may be fulfilled multiple times), will be those who gather upon the land of Zion and attempt to establish Zion and fulfill the prophecy without being authorized or directed by the Lord, just as king Noah and people did thousands of years earlier.

Mormon put the account of king Noah and his people in his book because it would be especially applicable to our times, for these same tactics inspired by Satan, of false gatherings upon the land of Zion and forcing the fulfillment of the prophecies about Zion, would be repeated.


Footnote: If Independence, Jackson County, Missouri currently does not match the pre-destruction descriptions of the land of Nephi, it does not matter, because after the death of Christ, Mormon tells us:

and there was a great and terrible destruction in the land southward |

but behold | there was a more great and terrible destruction in the land northward |

for behold | the whole face of the land was changed | because of the tempest | and the whirlwinds | and the thunderings | and the lightnings | and the exceedingly great quaking of the whole earth | (3 Ne. 8:11-12)

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

My letter to Prolife Christians about the HHS Mandate


Dear Pro-life Christians Against the HHS Mandate,

The Supreme Court has already decided that there cannot be a religious exception to a law that applies to all persons equally. They’ve already decided that while the Congress can’t legislate that you agree with abortion in your mind — they certainly have the power to legislate that you agree with abortion with your actions.

You might not remember it — but it was back in the 19th century when the LDS were deprived of their 1st Amendment right to freely practice their religion by the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act.  You probably don’t recall because you were too busy celebrating with the rest of the country that those pagan, polygamous Mormons “got theirs” for daring to insist that God wanted them to love more than one spouse at a time.

The church of jesus christ of latter day saints challenged it on the grounds that passing an anti-polygamy law is unconstitutional because consenting adults entering plural marriages was a matter of the religious practice and duty of a Mormon’s faith.

While the Supreme Court said it recognized that under the 1st Amendment, Congress could not pass a law prohibiting the free exercise of religionit argued that a law prohibiting polygamy doesn’t fall under that prohibition.  And they said that although the constitution didn’t expressly define “religion”, they quoted a letter from Thomas Jefferson in support of drawing a hard distinction between religion as a matter of belief/the mind and one’s actions that might flow from religious belief.

It was their opinion that while a matter of belief lies solely between a man and his God — the legislative powers of the state can reach actions [just not opinions] — despite the fact that beliefs inform action, and all action is predicated upon a corresponding belief.

The court argued that if polygamy was allowed, someone might eventually argue that human sacrifice was a necessary part of their religion [plural marriages vs. murder — talk about “apples to apples”]:

So here, as a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed.  Can a man excuse his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief?

To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and, in effect, to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.  Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.

A criminal intent is generally an element of crime, but every man is presumed to intend the necessary and legitimate consequences of what he knowingly does.  Here, the accused knew he had been once married, and that his first wife was living.  He also knew that his second marriage was forbidden by law.  When, therefore, he married the second time, he is presumed to have intended to break the law.  And the breaking of the law is the crime.  Every act necessary to constitute the crime was knowingly done, and the crime was therefore knowingly committed.  Ignorance of a fact may sometimes be taken as evidence of a want of criminal intent, but not ignorance of the law.  The only defense of the accused in this case is his belief that the law ought not to have been enacted.  It matters not that his belief was a part of his professed religion; it was still belief, and belief only.

[Reynolds v. United States]:

What all this means is — that as soon as the Supreme Court decided that those who believe in practicing polygamy could no more be exempt from an anti-polygamy law than those who may wish to practice human sacrifice as part of their religious belief would be bound by laws against murder:

  • religion as a matter of belief and religion as a matter of practice was legally dichotomized
  • the state was given jurisdiction over your religion as a matter of action
  • you lost your case against a mandate that employers provide contraceptive and abortive birth control as a part of the Affordable Health Care Act.
I’m sorry — but I hear the world’s tiniest violin playing, “My heart bleeds for you” whenever I hear Pro-life Christians complaining about how a healthcare mandate for employers to cover contraception and abortive procedures:  “trashes their freedom of religious expression.”You’ve allowed the State already to declare its power to demarcate religion into the realm of “belief” and the “mind” [rather than a function of “practice” and of the “physical”] way back in the 1890’s.   Sorry — but this is a battle you’ve already lost when the Supreme Court upheld the right of the State to imprison LDS church leaders, confiscate their property, and terminate the church’s corporate charter — all because of the Mormon’s freely exercising their religion.

When all the other Christians sat back and applauded as the State passed laws prohibiting the free exercise of the Mormon religion — simply because of their hatred of men and women having plural spouses — the fate over this comparatively light matter of employers covering birth control in their health care plans was settled.

Sincerely,
A Mormon tired of hearing your whining

Next Article by Justin:  Lukewarm = Good for nothing

Previous Article by Justin:  The Unity of God

From the Right Brain of God and the Left Brain of Mr. S.


I write posts for this blog. And when I do I know and accept the fact that whatever I write can be picked apart and disagreed with right here next to my words. I like that. It isn’t because I like contention. I don’t. I like it because it helps us all to learn. Anything that is true can be seen as truth even when opposing information/ideas are viewed also.

Now you can comprehend and feel the truth of that simple concept. And other people can also. So when I read a blog which deals with spiritual and religious matter and there are no comments I wonder. Then I realize the author does not allow comments. Do they understand what I just wrote? Yes they do. And here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.

This was the experience I had when I visited Denver Snuffer’s blog. I tried to comment and yet nothing is ever allowed to be seen by his audience. Why does he not allow comments?

The writer is like a magician, the modern trickster type not the worker of spiritual powers. The magician literally sets the stage so he can make the audience “see” what he wishes them to see. He spends many hours perfecting his illusion. His audience comes prepared only to receive a show. They have not taken the time to study all the ways the magician can produce effects which seem supernatural.

So it is with a post on religion. The writer has taken the time to build a structure which he presents as inclusive and grounded in truth. He spends time to make it believable. The reader might require hours, days or even weeks to find the flaws in the author’s post. And many readers will never actually see the lies for what they are. But if comments are allowed then there are those who know the scriptures and truth well enough to reveal the deception.

If it was just a magic show no harm is done. If you are speaking of the things of God and putting forth an idea as truth when it is actually deception it is a serious crime against your readers. True followers of God and Jesus do not do such a things.

I have praise for this LDSA site where people feel free and are free to disagree with anything they read here. I like this because I like the truth to be known.

There can be lots of excuses for not allowing the comments on your post be seen. But I believe they are all false. A writer could say, “I don’t want to foster contention.” You mean the way God fosters contention by giving everyone a mind and a mouth? So you believe that preventing others from expressing their ideas is being righteous?

What if I said, “There will be no commenting on this post.”? I think some one would be asking LDSA to revoke my status as contributor. In any case it is prideful. Yes Jesus did take and answer questions. Yes there were times when he challenged them to answer his question first or gave them an answer which defied their understanding. In this way he pointed out that they were not being honest in their questions or with their audience.

So in the spirit of pointing out truth and arming you against being deceived by a trickster posing as a man of God I take exception with a post I read from the desk of Denver Snuffer.
This is the post I read.

It was posted July 1st of 2012 and is entitled The Lord Delights in Chastity. A little background on Denver Snuffer. A web page called Mormon Podcast Stories says of him, “Denver Snuffer – A Progressive, Fundamentalist, Non-Polygamist Mormon Lawyer Who Claims to Have Seen Christ.” Well you can see he is getting some accolades and surely he has a following. He has written a few books about gospel subjects with titles like The Second Comforter: Conversing With the Lord Through the Veil and Passing the Heavenly Gift. I understand he is an active member of the LDS church.

If Mr. Snuffer allowed comments I would have addressed the issue there. But in studying this circumstance I have found a communication to us from the scriptures which I believe will help counter the lies perpetrated by Mr. S. This post maybe faulted as if all I am doing is trying to tear someone down. But if it is a sin to point out a lie when it is seen then I am going to sin. I write this that the truth may be known.

I had read parts of posts by Mr. Snuffer and thought some of what he said made sense. I became aware of this post when it was shared on FB. So when I read it I was stunned.

It is about polygamy. Mr. S quotes scripture and makes reference to historical events. But the scriptures which are left out and the facts of history which are left out create a deception for the readers. After he places this misinformation in the reader’s mind he then demonizes those who practice polygamy. And the icing on the cake is he uses fear to motivate his readers to not even think about acting on the principles of plural marriage. So misinformation, false accusations and fear are the cards played in his post. If you recognize those tactics then you know who the real author of this post is.

I will go over what I am talking about briefly. You can read the post yourself and see if I am telling the truth.

There are only two quotes from the scriptures in the entire post. Both in the first paragraph. And both are from Jacob chapter two. If you talking about polygamy and only quote two scriptures and they are from Jacob 2 you are not trying to communicate the truth. You are trying to lead your audience astray. This is exactly what Mr. S did. He said that Jacob’s sermon condemns taking multiple wives. In any one’s mind the term “taking multiple wives” and “practicing plural marriage” would mean the same thing. How can a prophet of God condemn that which God does not condemn? We could spend a lot of time talking about what Jacob chapter 2 says about polygamy and it has already been done right here on this blog. Justin can get you the reference. Thanks Justin. But suffice it to say the first paragraph is a communication calculated to deceive. So one paragraph one lie.

In the post Mr. S uses the following terms to describe the practice of polygamy by those other than Joseph: promiscuity, indiscriminate breeding, exploitation of women, abomination, whoredom, adultery, fornication, gratification, vanity, and foolishness. Well bashing plural marriage in that way is very popular in the LDS crowds these days. It is also very popular to do this among the famous and well loved of the world. Interesting how the LDS church and Idumea now have the exact same view on this subject. If you want to be in good standing with the governments of the world and well liked by the world you better be against polygamy. And Mr. S is totally against polygamy.

In the second paragraph Mr. S states that David lost his exaltation by offending the law of plural marriage. Really? Wow, how is that possible? The unpardonable sin is clearly defined in section 132:27 and it must include as part of it the shedding of innocent blood. David shed innocent blood when he had Uriah murdered to cover up David’s violation of Uriah’s marriage with Bathsheba. If David had just been intimate with Bathsheba and offended the law of plural marriage he could have repented and not lost his exaltation. Case in point Solomon did offend the law of plural marriage by taking wives which God did not want him to take. And yet the scriptures do not state that Solomon lost his exaltation. Okay paragraph 2 lie number 2. You will find that Mr. S is very consistent in that practice, lying that is.

In the third paragraph Mr. S communicates the idea that very often murders and violence are the fruit of those who live plural marriage. No percentages or numbers used he just states it as if it were common knowledge. Yes there are a few small sects of polygamists where violence and murder occurred. Do I hear you saying those LDS fundamentalist are not small groups? They might be seen as big in Utah but compared to the world population of Muslims, 2.1 billion (Christians in this estimate were 2 billion) the Utah polygamists are miniscule. Even if only 1 Muslim in 1000 practiced polygamy that would be 2 million people. The point is the groups where murder has taken place are by no means representative of people who live polygamy in the world today nor in the past. The words of Mr. S in this paragraph are just sensationalism. This communication is also calculated to deceive so I say he is 3 for 3 so far.

There is one more bit of misinformation that I will mention. Mr. S makes it seem as if Joseph Smith barely even practiced polygamy at all. He said Joseph’s plural wives were  “governmental”. “Governmental”? What is Mr. S alluding to? Perhaps he is trying to make us believe that Joseph Smith was like the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt. In ancient Egypt polygamy was allowed but not practiced much by the common folk since in their slave state economy they couldn’t afford more than one wife. However the Pharaohs did have multiple wives as a way of building ties to other kingdoms or ensuring an heir. So what is Mr. S saying? Is it that Joseph was a step above all other converts to the restored gospel, that he was one of the elites like the Pharaohs, designated to build up God’s family on the earth? Well here is the quote. You decide. “For Joseph, the multiple wives were governmental, sealed to him to construct the family of God on earth. Tying together lines of what was to be a single family, with himself as the patriarchal father of a new branch of the Family of Israel.”
I think that is exactly what Mr. S would have us believe, that Joseph viewed himself as one of the elite chosen by God to do things that if other men did it would be “a matter of lust and physical gratification.”
That is arrogant and completely contrary to the ways of God and at odds with the historical record. And I for one want the record to show that I testify that Joseph Smith had no such arrogance nor ever set a hypocritical double standard for himself. Mr. S passes on the lie that plural marriage was supposed to be for just a few select super righteous people. Yeah? So how does this work? Maybe it was just for those who claim to have had a vision of Christ or have written books.

Now you might be thinking that Mr. S did not demonize everyone who practiced polygamy as I said earlier because he didn’t demonize Joseph. Or maybe you were thinking about that strange episode of Teletubbies, hey let it go, they were all strange. But Mr. S did demonize even Joseph’s practice. He knows what he has passed on does not endear anyone to Joseph. It makes Joseph out as a hypocritical elitist. It causes division and malice between people. Surely it is that spirit of superiority which was the cause of murder among those mentioned.

But the truth is God is no respecter of persons. All are alike unto Him. If God commanded Joseph to practice it then He can just as easily inspire any man to practice it. And if it is inspired of God it is just as covenantal and sacral, and would not involve indiscriminate breeding of multiple women. Mr. S is not rehabilitating Joseph or helping him come clean. He is building a perversion of the real Joseph and placing a false concept into his mouth. Did Joseph deny practicing polygamy? You bet he did! If he had not they would have killed him even faster than they did. And there is no doubt that it was because Joseph did teach others his belief in plural marriage even polyandry that he was arrested and then killed while in jail. But what Joseph taught in private and we have to this day in the historical and scriptural records is the opposite of what Mr. S is leading people to believe.

Enough of discussing here what came from the left brain of Mr. S. You can read it yourself and if you are honest about it you will see that after the misinformation comes the accusations and then the fear mongering.

I now will talk about comes to us from the right brain of God and those He inspired to practice plural marriage. This is information which Mr. S did not want his readers to think about.

Many of you know about the split brain concept explained on this blog. It is here.
If you have not read it I suggest you do. You won’t be sorry for the time you invest to learn this concept.

The left mind uses words to communicate. That is it’s forte and its weakness. Language is not real life. It is abstract symbols used to convey meaning. It can not convey full reality. The right brain has no abstract symbols for written or verbal language. The right brain communicates in imagery, emotions and actions. In the scriptures we don’t have the full record of events and scriptures are all written so they are left brain communications.  But what we do have is very significant and by looking not at what was said or written about plural marriage but at the actions of the people who practiced it and God’s reaction to those actions we have a non verbal right brain communication.

Abraham

God spoke to a man and established his covenant with this man, Abraham. Abraham lived plural marriage. The promise of a numberless posterity and all the other promises of God to this man are being fulfilled. And it is not true that all people who have lived have an ever growing posterity. This is demonstrated in the last few paragraphs of the post.

Isaac

We have no record of Isaac, Abraham’s birthright son as having more than one wife. Isaac had born to him twin sons and he favored the older over the younger. And yet Isaac’s wife had revelation that the younger was to be the birthright son. As the years went by the older son did not value God’s ways yet Isaac did not of himself reconsider who should be the birthright son. To his credit after Isaac had been tricked into giving the younger son the birthright blessing Isaac though blind began to see the light.  So on the whole the record supports believing that Isaac may not have listened real closely to what God was saying. Or at a minimum for whatever reason God’s purposes had to be fulfilled through Rebecca, Isaac’s wife rather than Isaac being open to receive the inspiration. Isaac was not condemned but neither has he been highly praised by God. And again we don’t even know for sure that Isaac did not have other wives.

Jacob

God established his covenant with Jacob, Abraham’s grandson. Jacob had 4 wives. Jacob was highly favored of the Lord and all the faithful people of God have been invited into a tribe named for this man, Israel.

Moses

For the next 400 years we have no record of plural marriage as being outlawed by God. Yet we are given the account of a person born in the house of Israel nearly 400 years after Israel finding fault with polygamy. It is noteworthy that she had been born and raised in the state sponsored slavery of Egypt. This person was Miriam, Moses’ sister by birth. She found fault with Moses specifically because he had two wives. He had married an Ethiopian woman and also married Zipporah daughter of Reuel (also known as Jethro Priest of Midian). The Lord stated that he did not like Miriam finding fault with Moses and smote her with leprosy. She was healed after she withdrew the fault finding. Moses was praised by God as being like unto the only begotten. He was given the privilege of not tasting death but being translated and remained in his body to appear to Jesus on the mount of transfiguration. God has highly praised Moses ever since.

Children of Israel under the Law given to Moses

Moses’ life in Egypt and among the people of Midian was all done prior to the Lord altering the covenant to be under the law given to Moses. And yet even under that second law given through Moses God did not call polygamy an abomination or a whoredom. The opposite of condemning it God made it a practice that if a man’s brother died he was to take the widowed sister in law as a wife, in addition to his other wife/wives. That established the practice of plural marriage as widespread and not requiring any case by case special dispensation for its practice. The children of Israel for all their folly were loved and succored by God for 1500 years and much like the remnant of the Lamanites (who by the way also practiced and many still practice  plural marriage) the blood descendents of Jacob have been promised to be restored to righteousness in the last days.

Jacob’s in laws and Esau thrown in for good measure

But speaking of not requiring any special dispensation let’s look more closely at Jacob’s experience. Jacob was sent to live among his mother’s family because they were followers of God. This was to help ensure he married in the covenant. Unlike his brother Esau who married women from families who did not follow the ways of God as taught to Abraham. And yet even Esau had three wives (one of the wives might have been from a covenant people family in an attempt to please his parents. I couldn’t be sure and didn’t spend the time to verify it). And even though Esau wept bitterly about not getting the birthright blessing and Isaac said he had no blessing to give, the reality was Esau did get a pretty good blessing and was even promised that he would not be under Jacob’s yoke forever. Yes Esau did get mad and planned to kill Jacob but when the time came he repented and set aside his anger and loved his brother.
Back to Jacob’s experience. Jacob was married to Leah by the act of being intimate with her. If there were even any vows spoken by Jacob prior to the wedding night they were void because Jacob was speaking them in his heart and mind to Rachel. If they had a big party and ceremony it was still all under deception for Jacob. If the ceremony made them married then it would have easily been voided. But the act of being intimate with Leah would not be so easily brushed aside. But we have no record of anyone lodging any complaints about Jacob taking Rachel as a second wife nor any complaints when he took their handmaidens as wives also. So all these people on Jacob’s mother’s side had no problem with polygamy. It is only rational to believe that all those people were at liberty to practice polygamy.  And what is important to us is that God did not complain or condemn these people. He didn’t even condemn Esau who took wives without any hint of heavenly inspiration in the matter. Or was there? God did give Esau the miracle of being able to forgive and by all we know of the gospel that means he too was able to be forgiven which is just what Isaac’s blessing indicated. Esau’s descendents were many and are still among us. And as we all know God blessed Israel above measure.

Ruth

Ruth was married to a man who died due to a real big famine. Her mother in law said to her and the other widowed daughter in law, You girls are young still. Go to your home lands and you can find a husband who will support you. I am too old to marry so save yourselves. Ruth who was not from the tribe of Israel, said no and chose to stay with Naomi. She said your people will be my people. Kind of covenant entering thing huh? Ruth was blessed to become one of Boaz’s wives. Boaz said he would marry her to preserve the name of the dead in the land. This was surely a reference to the requirements of the law and would be a public explanation of why Boaz was taking another wife. A man of Boaz’s wealth in a time of so much famine was surely married and likely had several wives already. He was following the Lord’s law from Moses. Ruth and her mother in law were saved from starvation and Ruth was given the honor no only of having a child but of being one of the ancestors of Jesus. Ruth’s name has become synonymous with faithfulness and devotion.

Many people of the LDS believe that the practice of plural marriage must be done under the direction of a presiding authority. Why would anyone be surprised about this? The LDS believe that all blessings required for salvation must be received under the direction of an external presiding authority. I would say that is the defining characteristic of members of the LDS group. They do not trust themselves to be directed personally by God in matters effecting their salvation. For that reason none of the members of the LDS Church can be as Alma was.

But let us look at the record of events.

In the case of Abraham, Jacob, Moses, the generations of people in Jacobs mother’s family and 1500 years worth of the Lord’s people under the law of Moses who was it that received the revelation that it was approved of God to practice plural marriage?

The individuals who practiced it.

And what were the motivating circumstances? Here is some examples of the motivations which are known from the record.

The motivation is followed by the person’s name:

We want a child/Abraham and Sarah

We want more children/Leah speaking in behalf of herself and her handmaiden

I need a husband/Ruth

She needs a husband/God via the law given to Moses

I love her and she loves me/Jacob and Rachel.

Now we have read Mr. S’s teachings on why Joseph Smith took additional wives. Here is a review. Mr. S says it was “governmental” for the purpose of “Tying together lines of what was to be a single family, with himself as the patriarchal father of a new branch of the Family of Israel.”, very Pharaoh like to be sure. Time for a reality check. I do not tear down Joseph. Rather I lift up as Godlike the common desires of the heart of many righteous men throughout the ages of the world. They are desires placed there by God Himself. And no man under any circumstance should be using pressure or deception to have a woman marry him. Neither should any woman for that matter. I don’t care who did it unless it was a unusual revelation from God to do it (ie Nephi being told to kill Laban) pressure or deception in this thing will need to be repented of. I do not think for a second that Joseph’s was a desire for self aggrandizement or the pride of the Pharaohs and kings of the world. Just the honest love of a man for a woman and the desire to be a husband to her. A desire which God did not limit to just one person in either men or women. A simple and yet pure desire which has been vilified in our minds by all the devil has at his disposal. And yet I believe the historical record shows it was there in Joseph’s pure heart.

Joseph’s first polygamous wife was Fanny Alger. Before Joseph married Fanny she came into the house of Joseph and Emma as a maid at the age of 16. Joseph and Emma were 26. Sometime in her 18th year Fanny was forced to leave the house when Emma found out that Joseph had married her. This information is taken from this website and you can see the sources listed there. Fanny left the house in between 1833 to 1835. It was 5 years before Joseph took another plural wife.
Fanny Alger was not taken as wife by Joseph for “governmental” reasons. I respect the reason which I assign for the marriage. I believe God respects it also. And that is why He answered Joseph’s prayer on how the people in the Old testament were justified in practicing plural marriage. I think Joseph knew he loved Fanny and knew that Fanny loved him. He probably asked what to do about it and wondered if he could be allowed to marry her with God’s approval. So to the motivation list I add:

I love her and she loves me/Joseph and Fanny.

Now if you look at these motivations and see a bunch of people simply justifying themselves in committing whoredoms I am sorry for you. But when you read Mr. S’s post it is crystal clear that he wants his readers to view those who practice polygamy as self justifying men who exploit their wives and treat them like property and are bent on practicing an abomination and reducing their relationships to a whoredom. I am practically quoting him there. And you thought I was rough to call the man a liar? The post wants you to feel that people who choose to practice polygamy are just whoremongers. Mr. S especially wants you to feel that if you want to practice polygamy you are a whorermonger.

I believe Denver Snuffer’s post of July 1, 2012 was designed to have the effect of putting fear into the hearts of people who want to practice plural marriage. I believe without question that is the intent behind his post. I don’t even know if he is aware of it. But the true author of that post is very aware of it.

You might point to Pearl of Great Price Moses chapter 5 verse 3 to validate the idea that monogamy is the standard of God’s people from the beginning. It says, “3 And from that time forth, the sons and daughters of Adam began to divide two and two in the land, and to till the land, and to tend flocks, and they also begat sons and daughters.”

No that verse should not be viewed as the ways of God. Why? Because ten verses later the records says of these same people “13 And Satan came among them, saying: I am also a son of God; and he commanded them, saying: Believe it not; and they believed it not, and they loved Satan more than God. And men began from that time forth to be carnal, sensual, and devilish.”

To be accurate you must say that the people who began “to divide two and two in the land” later “loved Satan more than God. And men began from that time forth to be carnal, sensual, and devilish.”

The scriptures do not support the notion that monogamy has been God’s standard from the beginning. What we have been given in the scriptural record shows over 2,000 years of God giving His blessing to plural marriage among the largest group known of God’s people and Him saying no to one isolated branch which lasted for less than 1,000 years and in fact destroyed themselves by their pride.

Prideful and selfish people can not live the law which requires unselfishness in its deepest form. Pride and Selfishness continued does lead to becoming carnal, sensual and devilish. Selfish people can not even comprehend what the law is about. They accept lies about it and say it was a very limited practice with strict narrow limits. They see it as something which requires a license. A license is a grant from a ruling authority to practice an act which is sinful. Yes in the minds of those who see plural marriage as a sin they see a God who says, “Do not practice plural marriage unless I say so.” But God’s actions in the scriptural record show He allows all people to practice plural marriage unless he has told them not to.

Now would you like a left brain language communication of God proving that monogamy was not the way things started out?

“David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.” (D&C 132:38)

So if you believe that God was speaking there then it is clear that He said it was plural marriage which was from Him from the beginning of creation. That is even before the fall. Funny that Mr. S did not quote that verse.
Mr. S bashed Brigham Young for converting the principle of plural marriage into a mandatory practice for exaltation. He also bashed Brigham for bragging about his ability to get wives. Frankly that is something that can be repented of. But since plural marriage was there from the beginning how could it not be a principle for all people as soon as they will accept it? And is it mandatory? Nothing in all God’s universe is mandatory in terms of Him forcing us. In terms of if you want B you must do A that is the nature of existence itself requiring it. God simply puts it into words so we can receive His blessings if we are willing.
And in that way D&C 132:3 says “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 revealed unto them must obey the same.” And what are the consequences for not obeying this law once it is revealed to us?  “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…And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent…” (D&C 84:54-57). It is a damnation(!), until we repent and then move forward again.

And as we read the left brain communication of the actions of the people and God’s reaction to their actions we see a pattern emerge. We see two different way of acting regarding this principle and two different results.

On the one hand we have people who in one form or another obey the injunction of the Lord in D&C 132: 32 “Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.” They practice some form of polygamy and their posterity remains in the earth growing forever. And many of them have continued to have their societies last for thousands of years.

Then you have people who are prideful and set up laws against polygamy. They set up governments of men none of which last for more than 1000 years because they become filled with secret combinations. The Book of Mormon covers a quite small portion of the earth and tracks three main groups of people. And two of them follow this path of setting up governments and being so prideful that they can not be trusted with any form of plural marriage. The result is that eventually all their descendents are wiped off the face of the earth and their family lines stop.

I do not trust a man who lies, falsely accuses and puts fear in to other people’s hearts.

One final note the name Mr. S does not refer to Denver Snuffer. It refers to Mr. Satan.