Who is supposed to take the lead of meetings?

The day after general conference, I began looking over the scriptures that speak of priesthood offices and duties and new thoughts came to mind, some of which I am publishing here.

D&C 20:38-45 describes the calling and duties of an elder:

The duty of the elders, priests, teachers, deacons, and members of the church of Christ—An apostle is an elder, and it is his calling to baptize; and to ordain other elders, priests, teachers, and deacons; and to administer bread and wine—the emblems of the flesh and blood of Christ—and to confirm those who are baptized into the church, by the laying on of hands for the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost, according to the scriptures; and to teach, expound, exhort, baptize, and watch over the church; and to confirm the church by the laying on of the hands, and the giving of the Holy Ghost; and to take the lead of all meetings.

The elders are to conduct the meetings as they are led by the Holy Ghost, according to the commandments and revelations of God.

So, “an elder” is “to take the lead of all meetings.”

Which elder takes the lead?

The presiding elder.

And which elder is the presiding elder?

The elders’ quorum president is the presiding elder.

Deacons

A congregation has a quorum of elders and deacons, with presidencies for both, all present in a meeting.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

And to take the lead of all meetings.  (D&C 20:44)

Teachers

A congregation has a quorum of elders, deacons and teachers, with presidencies for each, all present in a meeting.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

If all the elders go missing, who then takes the lead?

The teachers’ quorum president, per D&C 20:56.

And he is to take the lead of meetings in the absence of the elder or priest—  (D&C 20:56)

Priests

A congregation has a quorum of elders, deacons, teachers and priests, with presidencies for each, all present in a meeting.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

If all the elders go missing, who then takes the lead?

The priests’ quorum president, per D&C 20:49.

And he is to take the lead of meetings when there is no elder present;  (D&C 20:49)

If all the elders and priests go missing, who then takes the lead?

The teachers’ quorum president, per D&C 20:56.

Priests’ quorum president!? What’s that?

That’s a presidency formed of three priests, one priest presiding and two priests as his counselors, just as the elders’, teachers’ and deacons’ quorums are all set up:

Verily, I say unto you, saith the Lord of Hosts, there must needs be presiding elders to preside over those who are of the office of an elder; and also priests to preside over those who are of the office of a priest; and also teachers to preside over those who are of the office of a teacher, in like manner, and also the deacons—wherefore, from deacon to teacher, and from teacher to priest, and from priest to elder, severally as they are appointed, according to the covenants and commandments of the church.  (D&C 107:60-63)

Continuing on…

The bishopric

A congregation has a quorum of elders, deacons, teachers and priests, with presidencies for each, all present in a meeting. Additionally, the bishopric also attends.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

If all the elders go missing, who then takes the lead?

The priests’ quorum president, per D&C 20:49.

If all the elders and priests go missing, who then takes the lead?

The teachers’ quorum president, per D&C 20:56.

Wait! Isn’t the bishop supposed to take the lead?

Nope. All bishops in the church are high priests who have been called, ordained and set apart as bishops. They function in the capacity of a bishop, not as a high priest. Their jurisdiction, while holding this calling, is that of a bishop. A bishop’s jurisdiction is over the Priesthood of Aaron in a ward, which includes presiding over the priests:

Also the duty of the president over the Priesthood of Aaron is to preside over forty-eight priests, and sit in council with them, to teach them the duties of their office, as is given in the covenants—this president is to be a bishop; for this is one of the duties of this priesthood. (D&C 107:87-88)

The office of a bishop pertains to both the higher or Melchizedek priesthood, being an appendage of it, and also to the lesser or Aaronic priesthood, presiding over it:

And again, the offices of elder and bishop are necessary appendages belonging unto the high priesthood.

And again, the offices of teacher and deacon are necessary appendages belonging to the lesser priesthood, which priesthood was confirmed upon Aaron and his sons. (D&C 84:29-30)

If we were to show this vertically, we could more clearly see that the office an elder always takes precedence over the office a bishop.

Lesser Priesthood

Teacher (1^st listed appendage)

Deacon (2^nd listed appendage)

High Priesthood

Elder (1^st listed appendage)

Bishop (2^nd listed appendage)

So, it does not matter whether a bishop is a high priest or a literal descendant of Aaron, once he has been set apart as a bishop, he is locked into it for the duration of the calling, meaning he cannot take the lead of any meeting in which an elder is present, for taking the lead of all meetings pertains to the office of an elder.

Now, in the case of a meeting in which members, priests and the bishopric are all present, but no elders are present, the president of the priests’ quorum*** takes the lead of the meeting, not the bishop.  This is because the scripture specifically gives this as the duty of a priest.  A bishop is given no such duty anywhere in the scriptures.

***

Keep in mind that the priests’ quorum presidency, which is made up of three priests, and the bishopric, which is made up of a high priest and two (elders or high priests) counselors, might be interpreted as two separate presidencies.  For example:

And again, I say unto you, I give unto you Vinson Knight, Samuel H. Smith, and Shadrach Roundy, if he will receive it, to preside over the bishopric; a knowledge of said bishopric is given unto you in the book of Doctrine and Covenants.

And again, I say unto you, Samuel Rolfe and his counselors for priests, and the president of the teachers and his counselors, and also the president of the deacons and his counselors, and also the president of the stake and his counselors.  (D&C 124:141-142)

Historically, these scriptures have been interpreted as meaning that the priests’ quorum is different than the teachers’ and deacons’ quorums, in that those quorums have quorum members (teachers and deacons) composing their presidencies, while the priests’ quorum has the bishopric as its presidency.  So, in the above, Vinson and counselors would have become a presiding bishopric, while Rolfe and counselors would have become a normal bishopric.  That is, indeed, one way of reading these verses.

But the wording also permits presidencies of deacons, teachers and priests, and also a separate bishopric which presides over the entire Aaronic Priesthood and has some special connection, in particular, to the quorum of priests.

In fact, taking this alternate view, we can also see that president of a stake and the president over the high priests’ quorum, which historically have been combined together into one president, can also be interpreted as two separate presidencies.  For example:

And again, I give unto you Don C. Smith to be a president over a quorum of high priests; which ordinance is instituted for the purpose of qualifying those who shall be appointed standing presidents or servants over different stakes scattered abroad; and they may travel also if they choose, but rather be ordained for standing presidents; this is the office of their calling, saith the Lord your God.

I give unto him Amasa Lyman and Noah Packard for counselors, that they may preside over the quorum of high priests of my church, saith the Lord.  (D&C 124:133-136)

So, the presidencies of the quorum of high priests are instituted for the purpose of qualifying men for the presidencies of the stakes.  The one is for the other, but they are not the same.  And so, after we read the Lord appointing who will be the presidency of the quorum of the high priests, we read that they were to also appoint a president of the stake and counselors:

And again, I say unto you, Samuel Rolfe and his counselors for priests, and the president of the teachers and his counselors, and also the president of the deacons and his counselors, and also the president of the stake and his counselors.  (D&C 124:141-142)

In like manner, the presidency of the quorum of priests, which presidency is made up of three priests of the quorum, may have been instituted for the purpose of qualifying men for the bishopric, hence the link between the bishopric and the priests.

In other words, the Aaronic priesthood priests’ quorum was to have two presidents: one an ordained bishop and the other an ordained priest.  This was to correspond to how the Melchizedek priesthood was originally set up: with two presidents; a first elder, apostle or president (Joseph Smith) and a second elder, apostle or president (Oliver Cowdery and later Hyrum Smith.)  The locally organized Melchizedek priesthood would also have two presidents: a president of the stake and a high priest president over the high priests’ quorum.

I suppose I could take this further, but I think what I have written will suffice.

High priests

A congregation has a bishopric as well as quorums of elders, deacons, teachers and priests, with presidencies for each, all present in a meeting. Additionally, there are high priests present.

Who takes the lead?

The elders’ quorum president, per D&C 20:44.

Why doesn’t the high priest take the lead?

High priests may only officiate as high priests when they are called to do so by the stake presidency.

High priests after the order of the Melchizedek Priesthood have a right to officiate in their own standing, under the direction of the presidency, in administering spiritual things, and also in the office of an elder, priest (of the Levitical order), teacher, deacon, and member. (D&C 107:10)

They may officiate in the office of an elder, priest, teacher, deacon and member, without permission from the stake presidency, but in any of these capacities, they still are subject to the leadership of the elders’ quorum president, who is to take the lead of all meetings.

What if the high priest officiates in his own standing?

Okay, in that case the high priest is given an assignment by the stake president and is sent out, (essentially as a local apostle). A high priest’s main duty is to teach:

And again, my brethren, I would cite your minds forward to the time when the Lord God gave these commandments unto his children; and I would that ye should remember that the Lord God ordained priests, after his holy order, which was after the order of his Son, to teach these things unto the people. (Alma 13:1)

therefore, the high priest will be sent to his own ward or to some other ward of the stake, to deliver some message or teaching. We get these all the time in the form of high counselors delivering their talks on assignment from the stake presidency. In such a case, the high priest still doesn’t take the lead of the meeting.

The reason is because they are acting in their capacity as, or exercising their right to officiate as, high priests, not as elders. Elders have the right to take the lead of all meetings, therefore, a high priest on assignment, sent by the stake presidency, must still defer meeting conducting and leadership to the elders’ quorum president. Although the high priest is there on his own authority, once an elders’ quorum is established with an elders’ quorum presidency, the elders’ quorum president is the man in charge of all the meetings. So, although he may get up and speak to the congregation, he must do so with the permission or consent of the elders’ quorum president. If he tries to take the lead of any meeting, while a presiding elder is there, he will be trampling upon the elder’s rights and the priesthood order set up by God in the scriptures.

Now, if there are no presiding elders present in the congregation, then the high priest who is officiating in his standing, defers to the priests’ quorum president.  If there are no priests, then he defers to the teachers’ quorum president.  This is because these quorums have been given the jurisdiction of leading meetings in the absence of elders or priests.  High priests have no such right of leading meetings.

Also, if there is a high priest in the congregation, but he is not officiating in his own standing, not currently being under assignment, and if the congregation is missing all its elders, then the high priest can officiate in the office of an elder (without anyone’s permission) and he has the right to take the lead of that meeting, even with priests and teachers present, because they cannot take the lead when an elder is present.

However, the moment an elders’ quorum member enters the meeting, that man is the elder who takes the lead of the meeting. This is because his membership in the established quorum of elders takes precedence over any high priest officiating in the office of an elder, for although the high priest can be considered an elder while he’s officiating as such, he does not pertain to the elders’ quorum established in that ward, from which presiding elders are to be chosen. So the quorum member elder becomes the de facto presiding elder (and thus the leader of the meeting) the moment he walks into the room.

What about apostles and seventies?

Apostles and seventies are all elders that travel. As such, they have all the duties of the normal elders, but because they do not pertain to the elders’ quorums of the wards they attend, they must submit to the leadership of the established elders’ quorum president, so they cannot take the lead of any meeting that is attended by a quorum member elder.

What about the stake presidency? Surely they can take the lead!

Not on a ward level. The name of the game is jurisdiction. The elders’ quorum president has complete jurisdiction over taking the lead of all meetings of his ward. Only if there is a stake meeting, of several wards and branches, only then does the stake presidency take the lead of the meetings. So, the reunion of a stake brings everyone under his jurisdiction, while the reunion of a ward brings everyone under the jurisdiction of an elders’ quorum president. When the stake president enters a ward to speak, he does so as a visiting high priest (an apostle), and not as a president of anything in the ward, and so everything that pertains to a high priest officiating in his own standing pertains to him, including having to submit to the leadership of the elders’ quorum president.

What about the president of the church?!

It doesn’t matter what title a person holds. There are only a limited number of priesthood offices and a president of the church is a high priest, so everything that applies to a high priest applies to him. If the president of the church comes to a ward, he must submit to the leadership of the elders’ quorum presidency:

No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; by kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile— (D&C 121:41-42)

The principle is this: When you enter the jurisdiction of someone else’s priesthood quorum, you essentially enter without priesthood. You may influence them, or attempt to influence them, but cannot do so by virtue of your priesthood office, nor can you remove the rights that pertain to their office, calling and quorum.

I will close with a final scripture:

But notwithstanding those things which are written, it always has been given to the elders of my church from the beginning, and ever shall be, to conduct all meetings… (D&C 46:2)

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The Parable of the Redemption of Zion (D&C 101: 43-62), Take Two: a Purely Planetary/Plasma Interpretation

Prophecy = Planetary Movements

It is my understanding that the heavenly precedes the earthly and that prophecy takes as its template what happens in the heavens: the movements of planets. Prophecy is merely the description of these movements and the plasma interactions that result from them.

The 1^st Key

All true prophecy follows the same pattern: every element is some celestial body or plasma display—a star, a planet, a comet, etc.–and the imagery in the prophetic story is imagery seen in the heavens. So, for example, if the prophecy mentions a sword, it doesn’t mean that there is a real sword in the heavens (the sky or outer space) but that there are planetary movements and plasma formations that, when seen from Earth, create the image of, or look like, a sword. Again, it is merely the image of a sword, not a real, earthly sword. This is a key to understanding prophecy.

So, any prophecy is merely the movements of the planets and the resulting plasma interactions, converted into a story. To understand the prophecy, one must convert the story back into the planetary movements and plasma interactions.

Prophets Prophesy of the Heavenly

In any true prophecy of the future, the prophet is explaining what is going to occur in the heavens: the movements and plasma interactions of the planets.

Prophets Prophesy of the Earthly

After the planets go through their motions, fulfilling the elements of the prophecy, the same story then plays out here on Earth.

The 2^nd Key

A second key, then, to understanding prophecy is that first comes the heavenly fulfillment followed by an earthly fulfillment.

Elements and Their Order: The 3^rd Key

For a prophecy to be fulfilled, every element of it must be present, in the correct sequential order. If any element is missing or if any two elements are out of order, the prophecy is not fulfilled. This is a third key to understanding prophecy.

Why D&C 101: 43-62 is still future

When applying these three keys to the parable of the redemption of Zion, it becomes clear that this parable, which is a prophetic story, has not been fulfilled in any way.

Most people who comment on the parable assign a strictly earth-based meaning to it. Not possessing the first two keys, they fail to examine the past and present astronomical history to see if the heavenly aspect of it has been fulfilled. Had they used these keys, they would have quickly noticed that nothing even remotely similar to the parable has occurred in the heavens. This would halt their search for any earthly fulfillment, because the earthly must follow the heavenly.

By forcing an earth-only fulfillment, commentators must use the third key alone, but even here they often don’t turn it. If a prophecy contains exactly 10 elements, they will often accept 9 as its “fulfillment.” If the order is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, they will often accept 1, 2, 4, 3, 5, 6 and call it “fulfilled.” Coming close is their standard, not exactness.

For example, many people still believe that the first part of this parable (D&C 101: 43-51) was fulfilled in Independence, Missouri or in Nauvoo, Illinois, because the parable speaks of a failed attempt to build a tower, which everyone interprets as a temple, and the Missouri saints failed to build a temple. In the case of Nauvoo, some people also believe that the Nauvoo temple was not completed (either entirely or in the time designated by the Lord to be completed).

A simple look at the parable will show that neither interpretation is correct. Notice the sequential order and the number of elements:

• 1^st, the servants of the Nobleman plant 12 olive-trees, which Joseph Smith interpreted as being 12 stakes. (A tree is a stick of wood sticking straight out of the ground. A stake is a stick of wood sticking straight out of the ground.  To the prophetic mind, they are the same.) This never occurred during Joseph’s lifetime. (A number of stakes were established, but not 12.)
• 2^nd, the servants build a hedge around the 12 trees (stakes). This also never occurred.
• 3^rd, the servants set watchmen upon the hedge. This also never occurred.

The first three elements are completely missing from the Missouri and Nauvoo histories. There is no way around this, so interpreters merely ignore these elements and start with the 4^th.

• 4^th, the servants begin to construct a tower but get no farther than laying its foundation. Joseph interpreted the tower as an observatory, distinct from a temple, but everyone else combines them together. His design for the Nauvoo temple called for a tower to be built on top of (in addition to) the temple. The parable only mentions a tower, not a temple. So, tower does not equate to temple, yet people routinely mix these elements up.

These first four elements of the parable are sufficient to show that neither Missouri nor Nauvoo fulfills the parable/prophecy. There are similarities to past and current events for some elements, but coming close is not the same as fulfillment. For example, some will see the City Creek Development as fulfillment of D&C 101: 49 (“Might not this money be given to the exchangers?”) Prophecy is based upon true patterns, so sure we’ll see aspects of prophecy repeated among men, but we shouldn’t be so quick to declare that “this is prophecy being fulfilled before our very eyes.” When we take one element of a 10-element prophecy out of context, it sets us up to miss the real event.

About this post

In my previous post, I attempted to interpret the parable of the redemption of Zion using key #3 alone, as an earth-only fulfillment. Halfway through my examination, I realized that the entire thing was evidently speaking of the planets and I thought to scratch out what I was writing and start all over again, this time applying the three keys, but I didn’t because I found the exercise fun and also because the information I had drawn out of the text interested me. Despite my attempt at using only the third key, I still couldn’t come up with a strictly earth-bound interpretation because my mind kept seeing the heavens move about and I ended up with a mixed bag: half earth-bound, half planetary. I found the post strange and wonderful at the same time, if not wholly accurate, and felt compelled to hit the publish button.

The very next day, I re-interpreted it according to the three prophetic keys and wrote out this post. Unfortunately, I had computer/Internet connection problems and I wasn’t able to publish this until today. What follows is what I believe to be the actual meaning of the parable, the real celestial events that the parable’s story was placed over. Unlike the previous post, these aren’t musings, but consist of my scriptural exposition of this parable.

Parable of the Redemption of Zion

And now, I will show unto you a parable, that you may know my will concerning the redemption of Zion.

The Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE

A certain nobleman

Nobleman is the massive Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE owns Our Solar System

had a spot of land, very choice;

The very choice land is the empty space that makes up Our Solar System, such as the field that a man had, “and he sent forth his servants [planets] into the field [Our Solar System] to dig in the field [Our Solar System]” (D&C 88: 51.)

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE speaks to Servant Planets; i.e., Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

and he said unto his servants:

Servants are planets located in the empty spaces between the various Solar Systems.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE commands Servant Planets to go to a Solar System

Go ye unto my vineyard,

Vineyard is any of the Solar Systems, where the bulk of the fruit (planets) are located. Servant Planets are to travel to one of these Solar Systems.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE commands Servant Planets to go to Our Solar System

even upon this very choice piece of land,

Servant Planets are to travel to Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE commands Servant Planets to plant Twelve Planet/Plasma Trees

and plant twelve olive-trees;

Servant Planets are to discharge plasma and/or rearrange the objects of Our Solar System, creating the visual image of olive-trees in twelve locations around Our Solar System. To do this, the trees must be “planted” on the Planets of Our Solar System. When the Planets of Our Solar System are properly arranged, they discharge plasma, creating the visual image of a tree coming from their poles. This can be accomplished with a minimum of six planets (two trees per planet, one out of each pole.)

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE commands Servant Planets to set Moons around Twelve Planet/Plasma Trees

and set watchmen round about them,

Servant Planets are to discharge plasma and/or rearrange the objects of Our Solar System, creating the visual images of watchmen around the olive-tree plasma formations. The visual images of watchmen are moons that circle a planet.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE commands Servant Planets to build an Interplanetary Plasma Tube

and build a tower,

Servant Planets are to discharge plasma and/or rearrange the objects of Our Solar System, creating the visual image of a tower (plasma tube). The visual image of a tower can be formed by a stack of planets with a plasma tube connecting them.

so that a Planet Sun, set upon the Interplanetary Plasma Tube, can illuminate the space surrounding Our Solar System

that one may overlook the land round about, to be a watchman upon the tower,

Servant Planets are to discharge plasma and/or rearrange the objects of Our Solar System, creating the visual image of a watchman upon the tower. The visual image of a watchman upon a tower can be formed by a planet sitting atop a plasma tube.

so that when the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System come, they don’t destroy the plasma and planetary formations

that mine olive-trees may not be broken down when the enemy shall come to spoil

The enemy are Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System.

and capture the Planets of Our Solar System

and take upon themselves the fruit of my vineyard.

The fruit of the vineyard are the Planets of Our Solar System. If the Servant Planets have not accomplished their work by the time the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System enter Our Solar System, these Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System will break up the plasma and planetary formations of the olive-trees, hedge, watchmen, tower, and watchman upon the tower and will capture the Planets of Our Solar System.

Servant Planets enter Our Solar System

Now, the servants of the nobleman went and did as their lord commanded them,

The Servant Planets enter Our Solar System.

Servant Planets form Twelve Planet/Plasma Trees

and planted the olive-trees,

The Servant Planets discharge plasma and/or rearrange the objects of Our Solar System, creating the visual images of twelve olive-trees around Our Solar System.

Servant Planets form Planetary Rings around Twelve Planet/Plasma Trees

and built a hedge round about,

The Servant Planets discharge plasma and/or rearrange the objects of Our Solar System, creating the visual image of a hedge around the twelve olive-tree plasma formations. The visual image of a hedge is a planetary ring, such as the rings of the planet Saturn. It could also be an asteroid belt.

Servant Planets set Moons upon the Planetary Rings

and set watchmen,

The Servant Planets discharge plasma and/or rearrange the objects of Our Solar System, creating the visual image of a hedge around the plasma formations of the twelve olive-trees and also creating the visual image of watchmen upon the hedge. The visual image of watchmen upon the hedge is of moons orbiting the planet, on the outskirts of the planetary rings, as if the moons were set upon the rings. It can also be of planets skirting the edge of the asteroid belt.

Servant Planets form a Partial Interplanetary Plasma Tube

and began to build a tower.

The Servant Planets discharge plasma and/or rearrange the objects of Our Solar System, creating the visual image of the foundation of a tower. The visual image of a tower is of a plasma tube connecting two (or more) planets. A plasma tube between two planets that only goes part of the way up from only one of the planets (it doesn’t actually connect the planets) will look like the foundation of a tower and not a completed tower.

Servant Planets discharge Interplanetary Thunderbolts after forming Partial Interplanetary Plasma Tube

And while they were yet laying the foundation thereof, they began to say among themselves:

After the foundation of a tower image is formed, the Servant Planets discharge plasma between themselves, creating interplanetary thunderbolts (celestial sound/thunder).

Servant Planets discharge Interplanetary Thunderbolts

And what need hath my lord of this tower?

The Servant Planets discharge plasma between themselves, creating interplanetary thunderbolts (celestial sound/thunder).

Servant Planets discharge Interplanetary Thunderbolts for a long time

And consulted for a long time,

The Servant Planets continue discharging plasma between themselves, creating interplanetary thunderbolts (celestial sound/thunder) for a long time.

Servant Planets discharge Interplanetary Thunderbolts

saying among themselves:

The Servant Planets discharge plasma between themselves, creating interplanetary thunderbolts (celestial sound/thunder).

Servant Planets discharge Interplanetary Thunderbolts

What need hath my lord of this tower, seeing this is a time of peace?

The Servant Planets discharge plasma between themselves, creating interplanetary thunderbolts (celestial sound/thunder).

Servant Planets discharge Interplanetary Thunderbolts

Might not this money be given to the exchangers?

The Servant Planets discharge plasma between themselves, creating interplanetary thunderbolts (celestial sound/thunder).

Servant Planets discharge Interplanetary Thunderbolts

For there is no need of these things.

The Servant Planets discharge plasma between themselves, creating interplanetary thunderbolts (celestial sound/thunder).

Servant Planets discharge Interplanetary Thunderbolts

And while they were at variance one with another

The Servant Planets discharge plasma between themselves, creating interplanetary thunderbolts (celestial sound/thunder).

Servant Planets slow down their rotation and celestial movements

they became very slothful,

The Servant Planets begin to rotate and move in their orbits much more slowly, slowing down to a near standstill.

Servant Planets stop forming the Interplanetary Plasma Tube

and they hearkened not unto the commandments of their lord.

The Servant Planets no longer go through the spatial movements necessary to finish the creation of the visual image of a tower (a plasma formation).

Servant Planets stop discharging; afterward Disruptive Planets enter Our Solar System

And the enemy came by night,

The Servant Planets stop discharging interplanetary thunderbolts between themselves, so that there is no more celestial sound/thunder. The watchmen (moons) upon the hedge move off and away. The only visual images that remain when one looks upon into the sky are the twelve olive-trees, the hedge and the foundation of a tower. But even these displays of plasma are reduced in power, so that everything seems like it is nighttime and the heavens are asleep. In this setting, the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System enter Our Solar System.

Disruptive Planets break down Planetary Rings (that have no Moons skirting their edges)

and broke down the hedge;

The Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System break down the hedge (planetary rings/asteroid belt).

Servant Planets begin discharging and leave Our Solar System

and the servants of the nobleman arose and were affrighted, and fled;

The Servant Planets begin to discharge wildly and begin moving again, leaving Our Solar System.

Disruptive Planets destroy planetary/plasma formations of Servant Planets

and the enemy destroyed their works,

The Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System destroy all the plasma/planetary formations created by the Servant Planets.

Disruptive Planets break down formation of Twelve Planetary/Plasma Trees

and broke down the olive-trees.

The Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System remove the plasma formation of the olive-trees.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

Now, behold, the nobleman, the lord of the vineyard, called upon his servants, and said unto them,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

Why! what is the cause of this great evil?

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

Ought ye not to have done even as I commanded you, and—after ye had planted the vineyard, and built the hedge round about, and set watchmen upon the walls thereof—built the tower also,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets. In this “conversation,” the Servant Planets are chastised for not completing the plasma tube (tower).

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

and set a watchman upon the tower,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets. In this “conversation,” the Servant Planets are chastised for not setting a planet atop the completed plasma tube (tower).

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

and watched for my vineyard,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets. In this “conversation,” the Servant Planets are chastised for not keeping the watchmen (moons/planets) upon the hedge (rings/asteroid belt).

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

and not have fallen asleep, lest the enemy should come upon you?

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets. In this “conversation,” the Servant Planets are chastised for going into a low power mode, slowing down their orbits and rotations, reducing the energy field of Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

And behold, the watchman upon the tower would have seen the enemy while he was yet afar off;

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets. In this “conversation,” the Servant Planets are told that had a planet been set atop the plasma tube (tower), it would have discharged, illuminating the space surrounding Our Solar System so that the approaching Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System would have been seen.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

and then ye could have made ready

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets. In this “conversation,” the Servant Planets are told that then Our Solar System would have gone into high energy mode, creating a strong plasma double layer.

Hannes Alfvén described a double layer as, “…a plasma formation by which a plasma, in the physical meaning of this word, protects itself from the environment. It is analogous to a cell wall by which a plasma, in the biological meaning of this word, protects itself from the environment.” (Source.)

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

and kept the enemy from breaking down the hedge thereof,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets. In this “conversation,” the Servant Planets are told that then Our Solar System would have gone into high energy mode, creating a strong plasma double layer, which would have repelled the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to the Servant Planets

and saved my vineyard from the hands of the destroyer.

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and the Servant Planets. In this “conversation,” the Servant Planets are told that then Our Solar System would have gone into high energy mode, creating a strong plasma double layer, which would have repelled the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Servant Planet Joseph

And the lord of the vineyard said unto one of his servants:

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and one of the Servant Planets called Joseph.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

Go and gather together the residue of my servants,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” the Planet Joseph is told that it is to capture other Servant Planets in the area.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

and take all the strength of mine house, which are my warriors, my young men, and they that are of middle age also among all my servants, who are the strength of mine house,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph is told that it is to capture small and medium sized Servant Planets in the area.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

save those only whom I have appointed to tarry;

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph is told that it is to not capture some of the small and medium sized Servant Planets in the area.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

and go ye straightway unto the land of my vineyard,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph is told to take the captured small and medium sized Servant Planets in the area to Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

and redeem my vineyard;

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph is told that it is to liberate Our Solar System from the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

for it is mine; I have bought it with money.

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph is told that the Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE owns Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

Therefore, get ye straightway unto my land;

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph is told to leave at once for Our Solar System with the captured Servant Planets.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

break down the walls of mine enemies;

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph and captured Servant Planets are to break down the walls of the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System. This could be synonymous with planetary rings and/or the asteroid belt, or it could be referring to strong plasma double layers (which are like cellular walls) that have been formed by the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System. Whatever the planetary configuration or plasma formation they consist of, when viewed from Earth they will appear to man as walls in the heavens above.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

throw down their tower,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph and captured Servant Planets are to break up the interplanetary plasma tube that the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System have formed.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

and scatter their watchmen.

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph and captured Servant Planets are to scatter the moons (remove them from their orbits) of the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

And inasmuch as they gather together against you,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” it is learned that the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System may gather together, presenting themselves as a barrier to Planet Joseph and the captured Servant Planets.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

avenge me of mine enemies,

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph is told that it and the captured Servant Planets are to scatter any of the gathered Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System, removing them from Our Solar System.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

that by and by I may come with the residue of mine house and possess the land.

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. In this “conversation,” Planet Joseph learns that immediately after the Disruptive Planets Not From Our Solar System are removed from Our Solar System, the massive Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and all its captive planetary entourage (planets, moon, comets, etc.) will enter Our Solar System and take control of it.

Planet Joseph discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE

And the servant said unto his lord: When shall these things be?

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet Joseph and Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

And he said unto his servant: When I will;

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

go ye straightway, and do all things whatsoever I have commanded you;

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph.

Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE discharges Interplanetary Thunderbolts to Planet Joseph

and this shall be my seal and blessing upon you—a faithful and wise steward in the midst of mine house, a ruler in my kingdom.

Outside of Our Solar System, plasma discharges occur between Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and Planet Joseph. Planet Joseph will be located in the center of the group of planets that will make up Our Solar System, and will become a ruling planet (a sun).

Planet Joseph captures the Servant Planets, enters Our Solar System and scatters the Disruptive Planets and their plasma/planetary configurations

And his servant went straightway, and did all things whatsoever his lord commanded him;

After many days all these planetary movements/plasma formations come to pass

and after many days all things were fulfilled.

What all this means

There are four groups of planets that are to enter our Solar System in the future.

Group One: The Servant Planets

These planets will cause great changes to our Solar System. After this group arrives we will see trees, a hedge and watchmen in the heavens, as well as the foundation of a tower, but no watchman upon the tower. In other words, they will not complete the Interplanetary Plasma Tube and ignite a Sun at the top of that tube.

Group Two: The Disruptive Planets

These planets will break up whatever has been formed by the first group and will cause the first group to leave our Solar System. This group will create an Interplanetary Plasma Tube but there will be no plasma trees and possibly no hedge, though there will be plasma walls erected. They will also cause watchmen to appear, though there will likely be no watchman upon the tower, as none is mentioned in the parable. So, like the first group, there will be no ignited Sun at the top of the tube.

Group Three: Planet Joseph and the Servant Planet Army

When this group enters, they will scatter the second group’s watchmen, break up the walls and throw down the Interplanetary Plasma Tube. They will cause the second group to leave our Solar System. The parable does not mention that this group builds anything, only that it will sweep away what encumbered the spot (the Disruptive Planets and their works.)

Group Four: Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE and entourage

The fourth and final group will enter Our Solar System and take possession of it, meaning that the massive Planet ^EEAA_OOAA^EE will capture everything found within the confines of our Solar System, including Planet Joseph and the Servant Planet Army which will be there awaiting the arrival of the fourth group.

Conclusion: this parable is a future prophecy

Group one needs to arrive and start doing its thing before the earthly part of the prophecy can even begin to be fulfilled. This group has not, yet, arrived. This parable, then, in its entirety, pertains to the future.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The Parable of the Redemption of Zion (D&C 101: 43-62): a Series of FUTURE (not Past) Events

My text for this post is D&C 101: 43-62, which is a parable.  OWIW recently attempted to interpret it, followed by zo-ma-rah.  I thought I’d give it a try, too.  The following is what I noticed from the text of the parable itself.  I haven’t done any deep, scholarly studies, so much of it may be totally off.  Perhaps with more study, my views may change.  These are just some quick impressions I had as I read over it today.  It is not so much a scriptural exposition, as it is scriptural musings.  I also haven’t confirmed anything with the Spirit.  So, nothing to see here, just keep moving!  😉  Okay, I think that is enough of a disclaimer.  Here we go…

Parable of the Redemption of Zion

And now, I will show unto you a parable, that you may know my will concerning the redemption of Zion.

Nobleman

A certain nobleman

This Nobleman is obviously Jesus Christ.

Nobleman has a very choice spot of land

had a spot of land, very choice;

Where is the very choice spot of land? Applying the parable to the cosmos (plasma theology), it could be interpreted as being Earth. Applying the parable to the Earth (earthly things), it could be interpreted as being North and South America.

Nobleman speaks to servants

and he said unto his servants:

These servants start out obedient and end up disobedient (apostatizing), eventually abandoning the Nobleman’s land (dying?). The servants are not prophets, seers or revelators. They are priests. They possess authority to act in the name of the Nobleman, but cannot see afar off (they have no vision, or are not seers or prophets). All they can do is counsel among themselves and when faced with a question about why the Nobleman commands this or that, they can’t get answers (they have no revelation, meaning they are not revelators). Nevertheless, they are authorized servants of the Nobleman (priesthood holders).

Nobleman commands servants to go to his vineyard

Go ye unto my vineyard,

Where is the vineyard? On the cosmic scale, the vineyard could be the solar system, with the choice land being the Earth. Speaking of earthly things, the vineyard could be the entire planet, with the American Continent (North and South) being the choice land. At any rate, the servants must go to the vineyard, meaning that they were originally not in the vineyard. So, this may indicate that the servants are in heaven and are being told to go to Earth to begin their earthly probation and missions.

Nobleman commands servants to go to very choice piece of land

even upon this very choice piece of land,

Here we have a very choice piece of land. This is likely the same land as the very choice spot of land. Again, the servants must go to it, so they originally were not in the choice spot. So, again, this may mean that they are to be born on the American Continent/planet Earth.

Nobleman commands servants to plant twelve olive-trees

and plant twelve olive-trees;

According to Joseph Smith, the twelve olive trees are twelve stakes of Zion.  (See Twelve Olive Trees.)

Nobleman commands servants to set watchmen around trees

and set watchmen round about them,

The watchmen are not servants, but men hired by the servants to watch (see). These are prophets, seers and revelators. It is their job to see what is coming (the future) from afar off and to warn (prophesy to) the people of what they see (seership) and learn (revelation). The servants are to set (apart) the watchmen (prophets, seers, revelators) around the olive-trees (stakes).

Nobleman commands servants to build a tower

and build a tower,

This tower is not a temple, but is an observatory, as in an astronomical observatory. It may be set upon a temple or set alone, but its purpose is to be able to see afar off.

so that a watchman upon the tower can see the land around the very choice piece of land

that one may overlook the land round about, to be a watchman upon the tower,

In an earthly sense, the “land round about” the choice piece of land is the land round about North and South America. In a plasma theological sense, it is the “land” round about the Earth, meaning the planets and stars, comets, meteors, etc. The one watchman to be placed upon the tower is, again, not a servant, but a prophet, seer and revelator. In a plasma theological sense, he is to be an astronomer, just as Abraham was an astronomer, looking at the skies for any sign that the enemy is approaching.

so that “the enemy” (plural) doesn’t destroy the trees when they come (as prophesied)

that mine olive-trees may not be broken down when the enemy shall come to spoil

The enemy is a plurality of “baddies” and their purpose is to spoil the fruit of the vineyard. This part of the parable is a prophecy that: “the enemy shall come to spoil.” If they come and there is no watchmen (prophets, seers, revelators), no tower (astronomical observatory) and no watchman upon the tower (astronomer), the olive-trees (stakes) will be broken down.

so that they (the enemy) don’t take the fruit of the Nobleman’s vineyard

and take upon themselves the fruit of my vineyard.

“Themselves” indicates that the enemy is a plurality. This can be a plurality of astronomical objects whose close encounters with Earth will cause destruction. Or, speaking of earthly enemies, it could be a plurality of earthly enemies (mankind) who will attempt to plunder and rob and glut upon the fruit of the vineyard (Earth). Although most commentators would ascribe these elements to earthly things, plasma theology explains the imagery perfectly.

What is a vineyard composed of? Vines of grapes. And how are grapes arranged? In clusters, the grapes themselves being round spheres. If you look at the solar system, with its round planets orbiting a round sun, all of which are suspended, it kind of looks like a bunch of grapes. Add the invisible Birkland currents or power lines connecting all the planets, and we’d see the “branches” the grapes (planets) hang on.

The enemy is coming into the vineyard, meaning that the enemy is outside the vineyard, or outside the solar system. When they (the enemy) come in, their purpose is to spoil and take upon themselves the fruit of the vineyard. The fruit are the planets in this solar system, the grapes. A large object coming in from outside the solar system can capture planets (“take upon themselves”) or spoil planets (plunder, rob, destroy, harm).

The main concern is not for the fruit of the vineyard, which will be spoiled and taken upon the enemy, but for the olive-trees which are found on the choice spot of land (Earth). The Nobleman does not want these trees broken down when these enemies enter the solar system, hence these commandments.

If the tower is an astronomical tower, looking to the heavens for these enemies that are to enter the solar system and disturb the planets, this parable makes perfect sense. However, if we interpret it as a tower that is to be used to look at the land round about North and South America for mortal enemies, it doesn’t make sense. A tower can only see so far around it and no size tower can see the land masses around North and South America (Europe and other continents and islands.) However, an astronomical tower can see outer space, the planets, stars, sun, comets, etc. In other words, using a tower in this manner, it is possible to see extremely great distances.

If the vineyard is thought in earthly terms to be Earth, the imagery of the fruit of the vineyard is lost. What is the fruit of the Earth? The parable here is not talking of the fruit of the olive-trees (which would be olives), but the fruit of the vineyard. The olive-trees are located in the choice spot of land, which itself is located in the vineyard.

Anyway I look at it, my mind can only see this fitting astronomically.

Nobleman’s servants are obedient

Now, the servants of the nobleman went and did as their lord commanded them,

Here the servants (priests) go to Earth/North or South America (are born?) and start obeying the instructions.

Nobleman’s servants plant twelve olive-trees

and planted the olive-trees,

They plant 12 stakes of Zion.

Nobleman’s servants build a hedge around trees

and built a hedge round about,

If we take this literally, then the servant-priests build a barrier of defense (or a wall) around the 12 stakes. When was the last time you heard of a stake of Zion having a wall around it? These 12 stakes sound more like cities of Zion with city walls built around. This follows the pattern of Jerusalem and other ancient cities which also had walls built around them.

Nobleman’s servants set watchmen upon the hedge

and set watchmen,

The watchmen are prophets, seers and revelators. They are set (set apart) by the servants (who hold priesthood) upon the hedge (barrier or wall) surrounding the olive-trees (stakes/cities of Zion).

Nobleman’s servants begin to build a tower

and began to build a tower.

Now the servants begin to build the astronomical tower. So, far so good. They have been perfectly obedient servant-priests.

Nobleman’s servants ask each other questions while laying the foundation of the tower

And while they were yet laying the foundation thereof, they began to say among themselves:

The foundation of the tower (not the foundation of a temple) has not yet been fully laid when they start to ask themselves questions concerning all these instructions given by the Nobleman. Notice that they do not inquire of the Nobleman, but merely talk to each other in councils.

Nobleman’s servants ask each other why the Nobleman needs the tower

And what need hath my lord of this tower?

The servant-priests do not understand the purpose of the tower. They think it has as its purpose protection from mortal man and not an astronomical tower looking at the heavens.

Nobleman’s servants hold council for a long time

And consulted for a long time,

The servant-priests are not able to figure out the answer to their question. So they consult with each other in church priesthood councils as to what this tower is for. Perhaps they even consult with the “best minds” that they can find outside of their priesthood quorums.

Nobleman’s servants ask each other questions

saying among themselves:

They have lots of church councils in which they talk to each other, but they never talk to the Nobleman. They just talk among themselves.

Nobleman’s servants ask each other why the Nobleman needs the tower during this time of peace

What need hath my lord of this tower, seeing this is a time of peace?

Again, the only conclusion they can come to is that the tower is for a defense against some man-made enemy, but as they live during a time of peace, to them (and to the others they have consulted with), the construction endeavor seems like an enormous waste of the Nobleman’s money.

Nobleman’s servants ask each other if the Nobleman’s money could be given to the bankers

Might not this money be given to the exchangers?

Gee, I wonder who gave them that idea? Could it be the “best minds” that they had consulted? Could it be that those “best minds” whom they consulted consisted of exchangers (bankers)? Surely by giving the Nobleman’s money to the bankers and investors, the Nobleman’s money will be multiplied exponentially, making the Nobleman’s very happy.

This is a seemingly noble goal. Unfortunately, the Nobleman doesn’t care about making more money. His instructions were to use his money in construction endeavors so that the twelve olive-trees (stakes) would be saved from destruction when the destroyer comes. In other words, the servant-priests were commissioned by the Nobleman to spend money on specific construction projects he had authorized, not to make money with the Nobleman’s money and fund other, unauthorized projects.

Nobleman’s servants conclude there is no need for tower, hedge and watchmen

For there is no need of these things.

The servant-priests conclude their long church councils over the question of whether to proceed and conclude that based upon the present conditions among men (the great peace in the land), it would be wasteful to use the Nobleman’s money per his instructions and build a useless tower.

Nobleman’s servants have disagreements

And while they were at variance one with another

The servant-priests, though, are not united on the conclusion and disagreements ensue.

Nobleman’s servants slow down their work to a crawl

they became very slothful,

Instead of altogether stopping the work of building the tower, they slow the work of construction to a near stand-still. In their view, they will still complete the tower, but it will take many, many years and over time eventually the tower will be finished.

Nobleman’s servants disobey Nobleman and stop working on the tower and paying watchmen

and they hearkened not unto the commandments of their lord.

Finally, they stop the work altogether and change the plans of how the Nobleman’s money is to be used. They stop paying the watchmen on the walls and relieve them of their duties (no more prophets, seers and revelators) and no longer work to build a tower. The money is diverted to other purposes, such as giving it to the exchangers. Satisfied that they have made the wise decision, the servant-priests go to sleep.

The enemy comes at night while the Nobleman’s servants are asleep

And the enemy came by night,

Unfortunately, during the nighttime, while the servant-priests are asleep, the enemy enters the vineyard (solar system).

The enemy breaks down the hedge (which has no watchmen upon it)

and broke down the hedge;

The enemy wreaks havoc among the vineyard but also in the very choice spot of land where the twelve olive-trees (stake/cities) are located. The passage through the solar system (vineyard) of the enemy causes the hedge (barrier/fence/wall) that surrounds the twelve olive-trees (stake/cities) to be broken down, exposing the olive-trees to the fury of the enemy.

Nobleman’s servants awake, are frightened and flee

and the servants of the nobleman arose and were affrighted, and fled;

In this commotion, the servant-priests wake up and, seeing the hedge in shambles and the destructive fury of nature’s elements upon the stake/cities, mortal fear comes upon them and they run away, abandoning the olive-trees (stakes).

Notice there is no mention of the watchmen upon the hedge. This is because there were no watchmen upon the hedge when the enemy comes.

The enemy destroys the work of the Nobleman’s servants

and the enemy destroyed their works,

The enemy’s fury destroys the works of the servant-priests. This refers to the money of the Nobleman that the servant-priests diverted to other projects, unauthorized projects. These projects, these extra works of the servant-priests are destroyed by the enemy’s fury. These are the works of men (the servant-priests), not the works of the Nobleman which he commanded the servant-priests to do in his name and with his money.

The enemy breaks down the olive-trees

and broke down the olive-trees.

The fury of the enemy also breaks down the olive-trees (stakes/cities of Zion), leaving the land desolate.

Nobleman calls to his disobedient servants and speaks to them

Now, behold, the nobleman, the lord of the vineyard, called upon his servants, and said unto them,

Where did the disobedient servant-priests flee to? Did they just leave the olive-trees and go to another part of the choice land? If so, perhaps they are still alive. Did they leave the very choice spot of land (North and South America/Earth)? If they left the choice land and we interpret that as the American Continent, perhaps they are still alive in Europe or other continents. If they left the choice land and we interpret that as Earth, then they are dead, having left the Earth, or their mortal probation. In that case, when the Nobleman calls upon them, he is calling upon them in the spirit world and talking to them while they are disembodied spirits, having disobeyed his instructions.

Nobleman asks disobedient servants how the enemy was able to do this

Why! what is the cause of this great evil?

The Nobleman chastises them by asking them what caused this destruction. Was it the enemy that caused this destruction, or was it the disobedience of the servant-priests?

Nobleman chastises disobedient servants for not building the tower

Ought ye not to have done even as I commanded you, and—after ye had planted the vineyard, and built the hedge round about, and set watchmen upon the walls thereof—built the tower also,

They did everything correctly, but they failed to build the astronomical tower.

(Also notice that the vineyard/solar system is only considered “planted” when olive-trees are planted/present.)

for not setting a watchman upon the tower

and set a watchman upon the tower,

They failed to set (apart) an astronomer-seer upon that astronomical observatory tower.

for not watching

and watched for my vineyard,

They didn’t watch for the vineyard (solar system). Their eyes were on the Earth, not on the heavens (planets, stars, etc.) They were focused on the conditions among men on Earth and not on the conditions found in the heavens, as was their commission.

and for falling asleep

and not have fallen asleep, lest the enemy should come upon you?

Lastly, they even fell asleep. Instead of continuing to pay the watchmen (prophets, seers, revelators) to be set (apart) on the hedge, they stopped paying them and let them go (released them). So, they had no more prophets, seers and revelators among them. The only ones available to watch upon the hedge, then, were the servant-priests, but even in this they were lacking, because they chose, instead, to just go asleep, leaving no one upon the hedge. This makes sense because there is no need for watchmen upon the hedge, as the entire land is at peace (they thinking only of the conditions among men).

Nobleman explains to disobedient servants that the watchman upon the tower would have seen the enemy while he was still far away

And behold, the watchman upon the tower would have seen the enemy while he was yet afar off;

Here the Nobleman explains that had they placed a watchmen on the tower, the celestial enemy would have been seen entering the solar system (for the signs in the heavens, among the planets, would have been noticed), giving them plenty of heads up.

Nobleman explains to disobedient servants that the servants could have prepared for the enemy

and then ye could have made ready

Once the celestial signs were noticed, they could have made preparations to protect everything owned by the Nobleman.

Nobleman explains to disobedient servants that servants could have stopped the enemy from destroying the hedge

and kept the enemy from breaking down the hedge thereof,

They could have then used their priesthood power and authority to stop the enemy from breaking down the hedge (wall/barrier/fence) that surrounded the twelve olive-trees (stakes/cities of Zion).

Nobleman explains to disobedient servants that servants could have saved the vineyard from the destroyer

and saved my vineyard from the hands of the destroyer.

In fact, they could have then used their priesthood power and authority to save the entire vineyard (solar system) from the effects of the destroyer.

Nobleman speaks to his servant Joseph Smith, Jun.

And the lord of the vineyard said unto one of his servants:

Now the Nobleman turns to an altogether different servant-priest, who is also a spirit in the spirit world, even Joseph Smith, Jun. (See D&C 103: 21.)

Notice that Joseph was not among the first group of disobedient servant-priests. This is the very first mention of him.

Nobleman commands Joseph to gather together all the scattered servants who still serve the Nobleman

Go and gather together the residue of my servants,

Joseph is to go back to Earth and gather all of the servant-priests of the Nobleman who were not disobedient. This is the residue of the servant-priests that didn’t run away (die).

Nobleman commands Joseph to take all the young and middle aged servants among all the faithful servants

and take all the strength of mine house, which are my warriors, my young men, and they that are of middle age also among all my servants, who are the strength of mine house,

From among all the gathered faithful servant-priests, Joseph is instructed to take all the strong warriors, consisting of the young men and the middle aged men. (There is no mention of old men. Apparently the Nobleman wants no more to do with old men. Or, whatever old men of the gathered, faithful servant-priests are present, are to remain behind.)

leaving only those of young and middle age whom the Nobleman designates are to remain with the gathered body of faithful servants

save those only whom I have appointed to tarry;

Some of the young and middle aged men are to stay with the gathered servant-priests who are not going with Joseph (the old men).

and commands Joseph and young and middle aged servant army to go immediately to the vineyard

and go ye straightway unto the land of my vineyard,

Joseph is to take this army of young and middle aged servant-priests and go to the land of the vineyard, meaning the very choice spot of land (Earth/North and South America). This priesthood army may consist of both returned-from-the-dead individuals (such as Joseph), translated individuals, as well as mortal servant-priests.

and redeem it

and redeem my vineyard;

The priesthood army is to liberate the vineyard (solar system), which is held captive by the enemy (celestial objects which have entered the solar system, capturing planets, etc.) They are the only ones who can perform such works, as it is beyond the technology of mankind. They will be able to do these marvels by using the power of the priesthood.

because it has been bought with money

for it is mine; I have bought it with money.

The Nobleman owns this solar system, so it is within his right to take it back from the usurpers who entered and spoiled it (foreign celestial objects.)

Nobleman commands Joseph and servant army to go immediately to Nobleman’s land

Therefore, get ye straightway unto my land;

The Nobleman again commands Joseph to immediately go to the very choice piece of land.

Nobleman commands Joseph and servant army to break down enemy walls

break down the walls of mine enemies;

Now Joseph receives specific instructions on how he is going to liberate (redeem) the vineyard (solar system) from the enemy. Apparently, the enemy (now written in plural form, “enemies”) has “walls” in the solar system. In other words, when looking up to the heaven, there will be plasma phenomena that, to the human eye, looks like walls. These walls must be broken down by the power of the priesthood.

Nobleman commands Joseph and servant army to throw down enemy tower

throw down their tower,

Apparently, the entrance of the enemy into the solar system will create a stacked plasma phenomenon which, to the human eye, will look like a tower. This tower must be thrown down by the power of the priesthood.

Nobleman commands Joseph and servant army to scatter enemy watchmen

and scatter their watchmen.

Again, to the human eye, gazing into the heavens, there will be either plasma phenomena, or physical objects, which appear to be watchmen, or things watching and protecting the enemy, guarding them, etc. These “watchmen” celestial objects must be scattered by the power of the priesthood.

Enemy to gather against Joseph and servant army

And inasmuch as they gather together against you,

Some of these celestial objects will be gathered together, creating dangerous plasma manifestations to the detriment of Joseph and his priesthood army.

Nobleman commands Joseph and servant army to avenge Nobleman of all enemies gathered against them

avenge me of mine enemies,

When this happens, Joseph and army is to use the priesthood against the objects.

so that immediately afterward (by and by) the Nobleman himself can lead the rest of his people to the land and possess it

that by and by I may come with the residue of mine house and possess the land.

Soon (or immediately) afterward (which is what the term “by and by” means), the Nobleman will come with whatever is left of his house (saints, servants, prophets, tribes) and take possession of the very choice piece of land (North and South America/Earth).

Joseph asks the Nobleman when these prophecies will be fulfilled

And the servant said unto his lord: When shall these things be?

Nobleman tells Joseph it will be in his own due time

And he said unto his servant: When I will;

Nobleman commands Joseph and servant army to immediately go and obey his commandments

go ye straightway, and do all things whatsoever I have commanded you;

Nobleman seals and blesses his servant Joseph

and this shall be my seal and blessing upon you—a faithful and wise steward in the midst of mine house, a ruler in my kingdom.

Joseph goes immediately and obeys all of the Nobleman’s commandments

And his servant went straightway, and did all things whatsoever his lord commanded him;

After many days all the prophecies are fulfilled

and after many days all things were fulfilled.

Conclusion

The parable appears to have a dual fulfillment. It seems to me to be based, principally, upon plasma theology, dealing with things happening in the heavens. I’ve interpreted the servants, watchmen, earthly tower, etc., as all earthly elements of the parable, but even these may be celestial objects, for all I know. At any rate, what happens in the heavens also happens on Earth, so we may see an earthly counterpart and my interpretation of the servants, etc., as earthly men may be valid.

I will give it as my personal opinion that this parable has not, yet, been fulfilled in any part. I know that many think that the tower is talking of the temple and city of Zion in Missouri and I know that some believe the tower is the temple in Nauvoo, but none of these historical events fit perfectly into the parable, as I understand it. So, based upon this brief examination, I’d have to say that the fulfillment of the parable, every part of it, is still a future event.

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Agency: The Single Principle of a Continuous War

Note: I found this essay while surfing the Internet this past week.  I took it from the mormon_anarchy Yahoo group.  Wake_Up posted it there on Sun Oct 6, 2000, as the seventh message and now I’m re-posting it here in a slightly edited fashion (I tried to correct some typos). I have also re-posted three more of his essays.  (See Why Father is an Anarchist, What the Priesthood Is, and Congruence vs. Obedience.)

Please keep in mind that I did not write this article. I tried to contact the author, (whose real name, according to Stirling D. Allen, is Jahnihah Wrede), but my email was returned as “Undelivered Mail Returned to Sender.”  If you want more information about him or his views, I suggest you visit his (now defunct) web site, which you can view by using the Way Back Machine.

Agency: The Single Principle of a Continuous War

Freedom of choice. Free agency. The absolute ability to choose.  Isaiah taught us about a great war in Heaven between Christ and Lucifer over which of two plans were to be implemented here on earth; one of freedom to choose to sin and repent to become congruent, and the other of compulsion to live only in obedience.  Both were presented to ‘save’ mankind. Both were based upon adherence to righteousness. Both recognized the availability of free choice prior to coming to earth, but only one attempted to violate that eternal principle. Lucifer’s plan of compelled righteousness was rejected by God, and he was cast down to earth according to Isaiah.

Today we have BOTH plans available to choose from. We are either exerting compulsion or refraining from exerting compulsion during our progression here. The principle of free agency can not be violated without violating Heaven itself for they are co-eternal (see: D&C 121 & King Follett Discourse). Lucifer’s attempt to end free agency violated eternal congruence and harmony as it always existed. His own end of congruence to those principles were available, ironically, only because he had the freedom of choice and exercised it.

According to all of Holy Writ, we have no other indication as to any other principle being of any issue or cause for this War in Heaven, except for that of free agency.

Today we have the opportunity to gravitate towards either compulsion, or freedom, as a matter of fulfilling our potential to become like Lucifer or to become like God, respectively. All of it has its foundation in the principle of freedom of choice. Without it, all of us could not experience either good or evil, and choose which one we would be congruent to, and consequently which Master we choose.

There is a grand Key in understanding free agency as a principle. It allows one to discern by what means a person or system is operating, and hence who it is they follow. If free agency is the single principle that Lucifer fell over, and caused a War to be waged in Heaven, then certainly it is a serious issue worthy of a great deal of attention and understanding.

Because agency is available to everyone, it is necessary to determine the parameters and boundaries someone’s agency extends before it violates another’s agency, else we may violate this eternal principle even as Lucifer did, and fall ourselves.

D&C 121: 34-46 (emphasis & colors, mine)

121:34 Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?

(Please remember the context Father is speaking in, is to the Elders & High Priests, not gentiles who don’t even read the BoM.)

121:35 Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this ONE lesson–

121:36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon principles of righteousness.

(This means that righteousness alone – which [is] a correct attribute – is NOT the ‘controlling’ or ‘handling’ power of Heaven & Priesthood, but there IS SOMETHING ELSE.)

121:37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

121:38 Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the saints, and to fight against God.

(He is an enemy to God at this point.)

121:39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

(Remember, this is spoken by Father to the High Priesthood, not to the world although the principles still apply there, too, in secular positions of ‘authority’.)

121:40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

Now we have the parameters within which the congruent operations of the ‘Priesthood’ can function on earth, and in Heaven. But now we need to find out what this ‘Priesthood’ is, so that we can operate it in the parameters congruent to Father’s will, and in Harmony with Heaven itself.  Continuing:

121:41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

(Again, “That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but…”, in any degree of unrighteous dominion, the Priesthood is immediately withdrawn – no ‘vote’ or court hearing’ is needed – and the conference is rendered invalid for the Priesthood is WITHDRAWN, and no man may by mere name of the ‘office’ – BY ‘VIRTUE’ – they now hold ultra vires officiate or exercise any authority without blaspheming Father, and condemning themselves.)

121:42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile–

121:43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou has reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

(This is an excellent verse, but it distracts from the focus of the attributes themselves, and their POWER, so try reading past this verse a few times before letting it enlighten you with it’s rich intent)

121:44 That he may know that thy faithfulness (Charity) is stronger than the cords of death.

(Faith is an attribute of Charity, and Charity never faileth, so ‘faithfulness’ does not convey the intent as accurately as ‘Charity’ does.)

121:45 Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of God; and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distill upon thy soul as the dews from heaven.

(These verses are the beginning of the ‘doctrine of the priesthood’.)

121:46 The Holy Ghost shall be thy constant companion, and thy scepter an unchanging scepter of righteousness and truth; and thy dominion shall be an everlasting dominion, and without compulsory means it shall flow unto thee forever and ever.

In this is contained the fallacy of ‘obedience’ and ‘righteousness’ as the sole means whereby typical ‘Priesthood leaders’ rely to exert their will. It is time to uncover that darkness with Light and Truth.  Congruence and Free agency in operating Priesthood is the only way Father allows, withstanding all the traditions of men – be they called ‘prophets, seers, or revelators,’ or ‘president, father, or patriarch’.

To ignore this is to deny that Eternal foundation upon which men may become even as He is. This single principle of free agency is what the War in Heaven is fought over, and continues even now, because upon it hinges the Priesthood, it’s Rights, and Power both in Heaven and on Earth. They are all as Eternal as the rest, but to destroy free agency is to destroy everything; including saving every living soul without compulsory means.

Holding fast to free agency FIRST, and applying Priesthood only in the manner described above shall ensure being congruent to Father, for this is how He is Himself. Just as stated above, any degree – which includes INTENT – of violation of free agency, will IMMEDIATELY result as if they never had Priesthood in the first place, but because they HAD IT, and violated the covenant and Trust inherent in using it, they are accountable and left unto themselves as an ENEMY to God, until they fully repent.

There are only two verses of scripture that are identical, excepting ONE WORD, when discussing being an ‘enemy’ to God.

“Satan is an enemy to God….”
“Carnal man is an enemy to God…”

[Note by LDS Anarchist: the scripture being referred to appears to be Mosiah 16: 5.  There are other scriptures, though, that also speak of being an enemy to God.]

In this light, on a personal level of understanding, the ‘man of sin (enemy to God) revealed in the Temple (body) of God’ IS the man/woman who violates the free agency of another, and repents not; being that the principle of free agency is the discerning Key to true or false Priesthood. Hence the War in Heaven continues with every choice; yea, even every intent of a man/woman’s heart. We wage war inside of ourselves to obtain congruence, and we manifest that outwardly in all of our choices. Are we violating free agency and thereby becoming an enemy to God as Satan? OR, are we taking seriously the weightiness of all our intents and choices, being careful to truly allow all men/women their agency, and thereby keep from falling and able to hold fast to the Holy Priesthood, and have the Holy Ghost as our constant companion?

I suspect a very serious and honest introspection is long overdue upon this one issue. I hope that we are filled with Charity to overcome the temptation to deny the strong delusion we’ve deeply slept under, in condemnation, and to fully repent of the awful situation that has come upon us to ourselves personally, and also to the world affected by the choices we each have made, that we are reconciled to the Father, that we are seen to BE even as He is: congruent.

Wake_Up

Previous Guest Contributor article: Congruence vs. Obedience

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

“David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me”

Recently, I made some comments on another blog concerning the LDS revelation on polygamy (D&C 132) and I thought that I would re-publish them here.  As Jacob 2: 22-35 always seems to come up whenever discussing D&C 132 with people who do not believe that that section is a revelation from God, I felt the need to expound those verses somewhat.  Here is my exposition:

Comment expounding Jacob 2: 22-35

[Note: Check out this comment and this comment below for my updated and current (Nov. 9, 2015) understanding of Jacob 2:23-24.—LDS Anarchist.]

Let me attempt a brief explanation of what is going on in Jacob 2, as I understand it. The key to understanding the verses found in 22-35 is the word “whoredoms.” What is being condemned by the Lord is whoredom. And what is a whoredom? A whoredom is any illicit sexual commerce, in other words, whatever the Lord has said, “No,” to, is a whoredom. That is the key. So, with that in mind, let’s take yet another look at these verses:

22 And now I make an end of speaking unto you concerning this pride. And were it not that I must speak unto you concerning a grosser crime, my heart would rejoice exceedingly because of you.

23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms [illicit sexual commerce], because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.

Lehi had received commandments from the Lord modifying the law of Moses and taking away all the plural marriage provisions of it and causing monogamy with no concubinage to be the approved marriage doctrine for the Nephites. Because of this, from Lehi onward plural marriage became a whoredom (illicit sexual commerce.) The Nephite men thought to commence plural marriage anyway, as that was a part of the original law of Moses, and were using the same old prophet (good, righteous and pure, meaning undiluted or unmodified doctrine) – new prophet (modified doctrine, meaning apostate) tactic many people use nowadays. Specifically, they were pointing to David and Solomon and the righteous deeds these polygamous men had done.

24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

To counteract this, the Lord points to the unrighteous deeds of David and Solomon. He doesn’t point to plural marriage in general, but to the abominations David and Solomon committed in the name of plural marriage, meaning that they “had many wives and concubines” instead of “receiving many wives and concubines” from the Lord. In other words, they illicitly took wives which were forbidden them to take. In the case of David, this was the Uriah affair. In the case of Solomon, he took wives of a forbidden people. Again, to be even plainer in writing, the Lord here is pointing to the whoredoms of David and Solomon.

25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.

26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.

A righteous branch is a branch that obeys the Lord. The Lord is not referring to polygamy here and equating righteousness with monogamy and unrighteousness with polygamy. Had the Jews of the Old World obeyed the Lord’s commands, they would have been a righteous branch even while practicing polygamy.

When the Lord says He doesn’t want the Nephites to do like them of old, He is not referring to the Old World practice of polygamy, but to the Old World practice of disobedience. So, the Lord is simply saying that this Nephite branch is to hearken to His words (obedience) or THEY WILL BE CURSED. He will not allow them to prosper in disobedience.

27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;

28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity [approved sexual commerce] of women. And whoredoms [illicit sexual commerce] are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

These are the commandments given to Lehi, repeated here by Jacob. Whoredoms is not referring to polygamy but to all sexual commerce prohibited by the Lord. In the case of the Nephites, as they had received a law of monogamy (a modification of the law of Moses), polygamy in their case was a whoredom, whereas in the case of the Old World Jews, polygamy was not a whoredom, as it was permitted.

29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.

The emphasis is on keeping the current commandments of the Lord. It is the current prophet’s words that are the most important, not the words of dead prophets. The Lord is not so much concerned with polygamy, as He is concerned with obedience.

30 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.

This is self-explanatory, but I’ll explain it anyway. “Raise up seed unto me” refers to plural marriage. “I will command my people” means that plural marriage is illicit sexual commerce (a whoredom) to the Nephites unless the Lord commands its practice. “These things” refers to the new commandments received by Lehi, which modified the law of Moses for the Nephites.

31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.

The abominations and wickedness that the Lord speaks of do not apply to the law of Moses-approved practice of plural marriage found among the Old World Jews (and those of other lands), but to their disobedience to His commandments. Again, the Lord is talking of disobedience to His commandments and not specifically of the general practice of polygamy.

32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.

33 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 commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.

Remember, the Lord is still talking about whoredoms (illicit sexual commerce) and other disobedience, not about polygamy in general. Polygamy in the Old World was not whoredom, but in the New World it was.

34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.

35 Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.

Okay, that seems self-explanatory to me. They did wrong not because polygamy was intrinsically wrong, but because the Lord made it wrong through Lehi for the Nephite people, until the Lord should make it right again (which He did later on in 4 Nephi.)

End of comment

Here’s another comment I made on the same post, concerning what I had mentioned above about 4 Nephi:

Comment expounding 4 Nephi polygamy

The Nephite branch became righteous when the Lord visited them and they “graduated” from the law of Moses to the law of Christ. Everybody still alive (after the destructions caused by His death) then converted to Christ. Interestingly enough, upon becoming a “righteous branch,” the record states the following:

And now, behold, it came to pass that the people of Nephi did wax strong, and did multiply exceedingly fast, and became an exceedingly fair and delightsome people.

And they were married, and given in marriage, and were blessed according to the multitude of the promises which the Lord had made unto them. (4 Nephi 1: 10-11)

These passages are referring to the doctrine of plural marriage and the promises made to those who enter therein. When the full Nephite record comes forth, it will show this. So, the Nephites were temporarily prohibited from entering into this practice while they lived the law of Moses, for reasons known only to the Lord, while the Jews in the Old World and the 10 Tribes of Israel in the Northern Countries, were allowed by the Lord to have plural marriage under the same law of Moses. In other words, these were three groups of contemporary people living different laws of the Lord. This doesn’t mean that one group’s laws were unjustified before the Lord. The Lord “commands and revokes” as He pleases. It is His privilege and as long as each group of people kept the commandments He gave to that particular group, they were justified.

Also, it should be kept in mind that the plural marriage under the law of Moses was not the plural marriage under the law of Christ. Plural marriage under the law of Christ is a doctrine of exaltation. Plural marriage under the law of Moses was not a doctrine of exaltation, however, it did prepare a people for the doctrine that came under the law of Christ. And that was what the law of Moses was for, to point people to Christ and to prepare them for Him and His doctrines.

So, the Nephites lived the doctrine of plural marriages under the law of Christ, from the visit of Christ to them onward, a period of 300+ years. Most people miss this and I can only believe that this is by the design of the Lord. When the Book of Mormon went forth at first, it was the intention of the Lord that it be the public doctrine, the milk, while the meat was to be revealed privately and over time revealed publicly as the public was ready for it. Had the Book of Mormon been exceedingly plain on this point of plural marriage, from the get-go, upon it being published, everyone would have rejected it, as the world was not ready for the doctrine of plural marriage.

As it is, the wording in the Book of Mormon was sufficiently obscure (on purpose) that people (even Joseph Smith!) mistook the Lord’s words in Jacob 2 as being a condemnation of all plural marriage. Most people completely missed the meaning of “For if I will, saith the Lord, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things,” the meaning being that only the unauthorized practice of plural marriage was condemned. Now, after the doctrine of plural marriage has been publicly taught, the chapter heading expounds the principle plainly, but when first published, the meaning of Jacob 2 was “hidden in plain sight.”

Also, the verses in 4 Nephi were (and still are) obscure to many people and most did not understand that they spoke of authorized plural marriage being practiced among the Nephites according to the more excellent law of Christ.

Besides all of that, Jacob 2 served another purpose: that of getting Joseph to inquire about plural marriage, which ended up revealing some meat, so we see in this that the purposes of the Lord are fulfilled and none of this has anything to do with perversion or whoring spirits, but with how the Lord works among the children of men, meaning according to their conditions.

End of comment

As I mentioned above that even Joseph Smith, at first, did not understand the meaning of Jacob 2, I will next re-publish here another couple of my comments, from that same post, which talk about Joseph’s understanding.

First, some background.  A question had been asked,

Why would Joseph Smith, as the Seer of the Lord who translated the Book of Mormon be asking why God justified David and Solomon in taking multiple wives when in fact it was through his efforts in translating the Book of Mormon that he was able to reveal to the world that David and Solomon WERE NOT JUSTIFIED in having multiple wives[?]

This question was referring to D&C 132: 1.  As an answer, I responded with this:

Comment answering question concerning D&C 132: 1

Joseph approached the Lord concerning Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, not concerning Moses, David and Solomon. Jacob’s remarks about David and Solomon made him wonder about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and so he made inquiry about these three prophets. The Lord, though, in his answer to Joseph, threw in a surprise for Joseph, for he included three more justified servants in his answer, two of which Joseph was thinking (because of Jacob’s words in the Book of Mormon) were not justified. In fact, when the angel appeared to him with the answer to his question, Joseph quoted the Book of Mormon to him. Joseph knew it was a true angel from God, as he had already received the keys to discern true and false angels and had applied the keys. So, the Lord’s response was to not only explain Abraham, Isaac and Jacob’s justification, but also to expound a bit on the meaning of the Lord’s words to Jacob, which Joseph, at the time, did not fully comprehend. This is why the first verse reads like this:

Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, [at this point there is a break of “as also” because the Lord is giving more than Joseph asked for, to teach him that David and Solomon were also justified, except in those things which they did not receive from the Lord, in other words, the Lord’s intention was to more fully explain Jacob’s words in the Book of Mormon] as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—

Had Joseph made inquiry of all six men, it would have read, “as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David and Solomon, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—”

End of comment

After this, I was asked a question:

“Why would the Lord reveal that David and Solomon were not Justified in the Book of Mormon and then say that they were justified in this revelation?”

My answer was the following:

Comment concerning Joseph’s understanding of Jacob 2

Because the Lord didn’t say that David and Solomon were not justified in the Book of Mormon, he said, “which thing was abominable before me.” He never mentioned justification. He just mentions a “thing” that was abominable before Him.

At first, Joseph (and currently yourself and others) misunderstood Jacob’s words and thought that David and Solomon were unjustified by the practice. He did not understand just what the “thing” the Lord was referring to was and erroneously thought that it referred to all instances of the practice of plural marriage. This is why Joseph quoted Jacob’s words to the angel when he was told of the principle of plural marriage.

And so we have one of Joseph’s wives saying the following:

An angel came to him and the last time he came with a drawn sword in his hand and told Joseph if he did not go into that principle [plural marriage], he would slay him. Joseph said he talked to him soberly about it, and told him it was an abomination and quoted scripture to him. He said in the Book of Mormon it was an abomination in the eyes of the Lord, and they were to adhere to these things except the Lord speak. (Mary Lightner 1905 Address, typescript, BYU, Pg.1 – Pg.2)

So, this shows that Joseph was confused over Jacob’s words in the Book of Mormon and inquired of the Lord about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and NOT Moses, David and Solomon, because he already believed David and Solomon were unjustified per the Book of Mormon. This is why the Lord phrased it “as also,” which means “and also,” to indicate to Joseph that not only were the first three justified, but the last three were also.

So, Joseph’s question was doctrinally sound and consistent with what we know of those times. The problem you are having, then, is not with Joseph’s question, but with the Lord’s answer to him. Joseph applied the keys to determine a real angel from a false angel, so a real angel from God appeared to him and delivered this real doctrine in answer to his honest inquiry.

Again:

I [Mary Lightner] asked him [Joseph Smith] if Emma knew about me, and he said, “Emma thinks the world of you.” I was not sealed to him until I had a witness. I had been dreaming for a number of years I was his wife. I thought I was a great sinner. I prayed to God to take it from me for I felt it was a sin; but when Joseph sent for me he told me all of these things. “Well,” said I, “don’t you think it was an angel of the devil that told you these things?” Said he, “No, it was an angel of God. God Almighty showed me the difference between an angel of light and Satan’s angels. The angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me. “But,” said he, “they called me a false and fallen prophet but I am more in favor with my God this day than I ever was in all my life before.” (Mary Lightner 1905 Address, typescript, BYU, Pg.1 – Pg.2)

The answer made him recoil and resist, but he eventually was able to wrap his mind around it and embrace it.

End of comment

My next group of comments were originally split up into multiple comments, but I’m here putting them all together:

Comments concerning polygamy & the law of Moses

I find it interesting how the Lord’s words to Jacob are held up as the final word and the rest of the Lord’s words given in the Bible are discarded. That is what I see on this post and comments. Of course, anyone is free to do this, but this is the same sort of tactic used by apostate Christianity, but in reverse order: they throw out the Book of Mormon in favor of the Bible.

When both the Bible and Book of Mormon are held up, and both are accepted as the word of God, you cannot honestly take the Lord’s words of “which thing was abominable before me” as meaning a wholesale condemnation of the practice of plural marriage. It must mean something other than that. If you force such a meaning, you must throw the Bible out the window, for the Bible contradicts such an interpretation.

For example:

Paul said of the law of Moses: “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.” (Romans 7: 12) And in verse 14 he said, “For we know that the law is spiritual.” So, the law of Moses is holy, just, good and spiritual. Paul’s words, not mine. To say, then, that the law of Moses, which was given by Yahweh, was abomination, or allowed abomination, or even commanded abomination, is contradictory.

We know, from the Bible, that King David married at least 4 women with the approval of the Lord:

David, king of Israel took Abigail and Ahinoam, “and they were also both of them his wives;” (1 Sam. 25: 42-43). Then he “took him more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem;” (2 Sam. 5: 13). With two wives and concubines (plural) he at this time had at least 4 wives. The Bible later says that “David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from anything that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite;” (1 Kings 15: 5). In this passage we have an assurance that David done right in taking all his wives and concubines, except in one instance, for which he was severely chastised. In the case of Uriah the Hittite, David committed adultery with his wife, and then had Uriah killed in the Battlefield. This was adultery and murder and it was condemned by the Lord, but his prior marriages were, according to the Bible, approved as “right in the eyes of the Lord”.

This is consistent with D&C 132, which basically says the same thing. In order for Jacob 2: 24 to be consistent with the Bible, the abominable thing referred to by the Lord concerning David was the Uriah affair and not the general practice of polygamy.

The law of Moses both permitted polygamy AND COMMANDED IT, in certain instances.

When Moses took a second wife, he was not in violation of the Law given to him by the Lord. That law does not prohibit plural marriage and in fact, recognized the possibility of multiple wives:

If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and [if] the firstborn son be hers that was hated: then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn. (Deuteronomy 21: 15-16)

In fact, the Law of Moses sometimes may have commanded Plural Marriage. When a woman’s husband died, the Lord commanded that a brother of the husband was supposed to take her as his wife. (Deut. 25: 4-10.) If he was already married, then at that point he would have had two wives. The Law as given to Moses does not mind that.

So, in order to hold onto your pet theory that the Lord’s words in Jacob 2 negates D&C 132, you have to throw out the entire Old and New Testaments, too. Now, how badly do you want to keep to such a theory?

Btw, these quotes were taken from polygamy.com. Here is another interesting quote from the same source:

Many of the leading men of the Bible had more than one wife in some form of marriage relationship at the same time. This includes Abraham, Jacob (Israel), Moses, David and others. The Law that Moses gave also made provision for plural marriage and in some cases, it seems that plural marriage was even commanded by the Law of Moses. There is evidence that multiple wives was an acceptable practice all through ancient Israel, including the time of Christ and it was not until the end of the 1st Millennium AD that some Jews officially rejected polygyny. One branch of Jews never agreed to this and still accept the practice of plural wives to this day.

One last thing, the marriage doctrine given in D&C 42 is completely compatible with plural marriage. It is not a doctrine of monogamy, but a doctrine of fidelity. It is, in essence, the law of chastity, stated differently.

End of comment

As the above comment mentioned D&C 42, I might as well talk about that, too.

In addition to holding up Jacob 2 as the standard of monogamy and the reason why D&C 132 must be a false revelation, D&C 42 is also held up as contradictory to section 132.  So, here were my answers to such a proposition.

While speaking of D&C 42: 22 and D&C 132: 54, and comparing the two verses, it was stated in a comment,

The definition of “none else” is “not one beside” or “no other.” So, if the Lord meant “none else” to indicate the exclusion of all others in 132 then that is his precise meaning in 42. If you hold to the belief that 42 allows for multiple spouses then you have to believe that the Lord was not excluding Emma from multiple spouses in 132. In which case the verse becomes nonsense. Either way, according to the verse in 132 living this “law” was required for Emma’s salvation.

I replied:

Comment concerning D&C 42: 22 and D&C 132: 54

The Lord was excluding Emma from multiple spouses in 132. The wording in section 132 is different than in section 42. In D&C 42: 22, it is a command to “cleave unto [thy wife],” whereas in D&C 132: 54 the command is to “cleave unto my servant Joseph.” Had the Lord said to Emma, “cleave unto your husband,” it would have left open multiple husbands, but He didn’t say that. He stated a specific person, not a specific title. (”Wife” being a title, designation or office of a person.) This is why the early saints who practiced plural marriage had no problem with D&C 42: 22, at all. It is compatible and not contradictory.

End of comment

Later, came the rebuttal and question,

You focused on the term “cleave” without addressing the issue of the words “none else.” To me the words “none else” are more important in these two passages. Are you suggesting that in section 42 “none else” means something other than “no other” or “not one beside?”

My reply was the following:

Comment on why D&C 42: 22 is a doctrine of fidelity, not monogamy

I left out “none else” because the phrase, when combined with just “wife” does not indicate monogamy. It only indicates fidelity. Have you ever wondered why the Article on Marriage was even necessary, if D&C 42 put forth a doctrine of monogamy? The Article on Marriage would then be redundant in stating that the saints believed in monogamy, would it not?

If I marry a wife and then she dies, does D&C 42 prohibit me from taking another wife? If section 42 indicates that I am to cleave only to one wife, then I can only be married once and I can only cleave to her and to none else, even if she dies. I am to remain single and widowed forever more, for if I take another wife I would be cleaving unto someone other than my (first) wife.

Of course this is not the meaning of the scripture. It is a doctrine of fidelity, not monogamy, meaning that I am only to cleave to my wife, whether I have one wife or ten wives. Each woman married to me, whether in succession (after their deaths) or with all of them still living (in polygamy), is to have me cleave to her and to no one else who is not my wife.

End of comment

Note: the reason why I am placing these comments all together like this in a single post is because of my intention—should I ever again find myself talking to someone about D&C 132 and they bring up Jacob 2 (or D&C 42) as proof that D&C 132 is a false revelation—to point to this post.  If you agree with the above comments and also, like me, tire of hearing the same worn out Jacob 2/D&C 42 objections, feel free to use them, also.

Previous Chastity article: The Law of Chastity: What It Is and What It Isn’t

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Keep your eye on the planets!

D&C 88 is my text for this post.  It is not my intention to expound the entire section, only to bring to the reader’s attention one very significant theological point that I feel the LDS are generally overlooking: the emphasis on PLANETS.  As a help, I will put in bold all the references to planets.

The first sentence of section 88—The First Key/Clue of Understanding

Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you who have assembled yourselves together to receive his will concerning you:  Behold, this is pleasing unto your Lord, and the angels rejoice over you; the alms of your prayers have come up into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, and are recorded in the book of the names of the sanctified, even them of the celestial world.  (D&C 88: 1-2)

This is the first indication that the Lord is going to start talking of planets, or, as He puts it here, worlds.  The terms world, planet, kingdom and thing, the Lord will explain in this section, are all synonymous.

Third sentence of section 88—The Second Key/Clue of Understanding

This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom; which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son—he that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth; which truth shineth.  (D&C 88: 4-7)

Here we have the Lord using the second designation of the celestial world, calling it the celestial kingdom.  He also starts talking about things.  Later on He will teach us that the things He is referring to are planets or worlds.  I will explain the reason for bolding God later.

The fourth sentence of section 88

This is the light of Christ.  (D&C 88: 7)

This is referring to the ether which fills space.  (I won’t get into this as it is not the topic of this post.)

The fifth sentence

As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made.  (D&C 88: 7)

The sun is one of the planet/world/kingdom things this section talks about.

The sixth sentence

As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made; as also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made; and the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand.  (D&C 88: 8-10)

The moon, stars and earth are some of the the planet/world/kingdom things this section talks about.

The seventh sentence

And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space—the light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.  (D&C 88: 11-13)

Keep in mind that the things are planets, which will be explained later.  Also God will be explained later.

The 11th sentence

And the redemption of the soul is through him that quickeneth all things, in whose bosom it is decreed that the poor and the meek of the earth shall inherit it.  (D&C 88: 17)

The 12th sentence

Therefore, it must needs be sanctified from all unrighteousness, that it may be prepared for the celestial glory; for after it hath filled the measure of its creation, it shall be crowned with glory, even with the presence of God the Father; that bodies who are of the celestial kingdom may possess it forever and ever; for, for this intent was it made and created, and for this intent are they sanctified.  (D&C 88: 20)

The 13th sentence

And they who are not sanctified through the law which I have given unto you, even the law of Christ, must inherit another kingdom, even that of a terrestrial kingdom, or that of a telestial kingdom.  (D&C 88: 21)

The 14th sentence

For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory.  (D&C 88: 22)

The 15th sentence

And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory.  (D&C 88: 23)

The 16th sentence

And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory; therefore he is not meet for a kingdom of glory.  (D&C 88: 24)

The 17th sentence

Therefore he must abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory.  (D&C 88: 24)

The 18th sentence

And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law—wherefore, it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it.  (D&C 88: 25-26)

The 30th sentence

All kingdoms have a law given; and there are many kingdoms; for there is no space in the which there is no kingdom; and there is no kingdom in which there is no space, either a greater or a lesser kingdom.  (D&C 88: 36-37)

The 31st sentence

And unto every kingdom is given a law; and unto every law there are certain bounds also and conditions.  (D&C 88: 38)

The 33rd sentence

For intelligence cleaveth unto intelligence; wisdom receiveth wisdom; truth embraceth truth; virtue loveth virtue; light cleaveth unto light; mercy hath compassion on mercy and claimeth her own; justice continueth its course and claimeth its own; judgment goeth before the face of him who sitteth upon the throne and governeth and executeth all things.  (D&C 88: 40)

The 34th sentence

He comprehendeth all things, and all things are before him, and all things are round about him; and he is above all things, and in all things, and is through all things, and is round about all things; and all things are by him, and of him, even God, forever and ever.  (D&C 88: 41)

The 35th sentence—The Third Key/Clue of Understanding

And again, verily I say unto you, he hath given a law unto all things, by which they move in their times and their seasons; and their courses are fixed, even the courses of the heavens and the earth, which comprehend the earth and all the planets. (D&C 88: 42-43)

It is here that the Lord finally explains that the things He is referring to are planets.

The 36th sentence

And they give light to each other in their times and in their seasons, in their minutes, in their hours, in their days, in their weeks, in their months, in their years—all these are one year with God, but not with man.  (D&C 88: 44)

In other words, all the times, seasons, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months and years of all of the worlds of the created Universe combined equal one God year.

The 37th sentence

The earth rolls upon her wings, and the sun giveth his light by day, and the moon giveth her light by night, and the stars also give their light, as they roll upon their wings in their glory, in the midst of the power of God.  (D&C 88: 45)

Notice that the earth and moon are both female planets, while the the sun is a male planet.  God, of course, is male.  All these worlds are referred to as if they were people with gender.

The 38th sentence—The Fourth Key/Clue of Understanding

Unto what shall I liken these kingdoms, that ye may understand?  (D&C 88: 46)

Here the Lord lumps the earth (a planet), the sun (a star), the moon (a natural satellite), and the stars (the rest of the stars or suns) together, calling them all kingdoms.  The Lord is finally tying it all together so that we understand that He is talking about planet/kingdom/world things in this section.

The 39th sentence—The Fifth Key/Clue of Understanding

Behold, all these are kingdoms, and any man who hath seen any or the least of these hath seen God moving in his majesty and power.  (D&C 88: 47)

The Lord again reiterates that these worlds are all kingdoms, as if to drive His point across so that we don’t miss it.  And then He drops a bombshell, explaining to His saints that if you’ve seen any of these worlds, you’ve seen God!

This is because God, in addition to being the anthropomorphic, personal Being we worship, is also a planet.  This is also why the ancients of every culture worshiped the planets/stars, calling them gods.

The 40th sentence—The Sixth Key/Clue of Understanding

I say unto you, he hath seen him; nevertheless, he who came unto his own was not comprehended.  (D&C 88: 48)

Again, the Lord reiterates that if we’ve seen any of the planets, we’ve seen God.

Notice, also, that the Lord doesn’t say that if we’ve seen the planets, we’ve seen the Lord.  In other words, He doesn’t say, “I say unto you, he hath seen me (the Lord).”  Instead, He says, “He hath seen him (God).”  This is because the Lord Jesus Christ, Jehovah, in addition to being an anthropomorphic, personal Being, is also a planet.  However, the planet Jehovah is not currently around (in sight).

Also, seeing a planet is not the same as comprehending it.

The 41st sentence

The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not; nevertheless, the day shall come when you shall comprehend even God, being quickened in him and by him.  (D&C 88: 49)

Keep in mind that the Lord is equating planets with God, so that if you see a planet, you see God.  Therefore, in this sentence, when He says “you shall comprehend even God,” the Lord is referring to comprehending a planet.

The 42nd sentence

Then shall ye know that ye have seen me, that I am, and that I am the true light that is in you, and that you are in me; otherwise ye could not abound.  (D&C 88: 50)

Don’t lose track, yet!  Keep your eye on the ball and topic at hand, even PLANETS!  The Lord is still talking about planets, only now He is saying that at some point we will see Jehovah (the planet.)

Perhaps to keep our attention firmly fixed on the topic of astronomy, as this is what D&C 88 is all about, the Lord gives the following parable about space and planets.

The parable of the man (Jehovah planet) sending his servants (planets) into the field (space) and visiting them in turn

Behold, I will liken these kingdoms unto a man having a field, and he sent forth his servants into the field to dig in the field.  And he said unto the first: Go ye and labor in the field, and in the first hour I will come unto you, and ye shall behold the joy of my countenance.  And he said unto the second: Go ye also into the field, and in the second hour I will visit you with the joy of my countenance.  And also unto the third, saying: I will visit you; and unto the fourth, and so on unto the twelfth.  And the lord of the field went unto the first in the first hour, and tarried with him all that hour, and he was made glad with the light of the countenance of his lord.  And then he withdrew from the first that he might visit the second also, and the third, and the fourth, and so on unto the twelfth.  And thus they all received the light of the countenance of their lord, every man in his hour, and in his time, and in his season—beginning at the first, and so on unto the last, and from the last unto the first, and from the first unto the last; every man in his own order, until his hour was finished, even according as his lord had commanded him, that his lord might be glorified in him, and he in his lord, that they all might be glorified.

Therefore, unto this parable I will liken all these kingdoms, and the inhabitants thereof—every kingdom in its hour, and in its time, and in its season, even according to the decree which God hath made.  (D&C 88: 51-61)

Note: The joy/light of the countenance of the lord in this parable indicates that the planet Jehovah is a discharging star.

Next sentence and the rest of the section

And again, verily I say unto you, my friends, I leave these sayings with you to ponder in your hearts, with this commandment which I give unto you, that ye shall call upon me while I am near—draw near unto me and I will draw near unto you; seek me diligently and ye shall find me; ask, and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.  (D&C 88: 62-63)

Now, when you read the rest of the section (D&C 88: 64-141), try to keep in mind that this section is a lesson in ASTRONOMY!  The Lord is talking of heavenly things, meaning PLANETS!  Nevertheless, as above, so below.

(D&C 88 is really long and I don’t want to take the time now to break down every single verse and show the planetary references.  Anthony Larson, if you feel up to it, you can take up where I’ve left off.  Maybe I’ll do it myself in a future post.  But if neither one of us does it, I think what I’ve written above is sufficient to get someone in the right frame of mind to extract the astronomy from the section.  Good luck to all, in that end.)

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The End of the State of Israel

Some background

For the past few months, I’ve been searching the scriptures an awful lot, especially the prophecies concerning the last days and the fulness of times.  In the last week (January 7-14), as I read the scriptures that dealt with the scattering and gathering of Israel, I was also listening to the news we’re getting of the conflict happening in Gaza and, both being in my mind, I began to hold up the State of Israel to prophetic scrutiny, meaning that I compared the State of Israel to the prophecies that were before me to see if it fulfilled them.  The conclusion I came to was that its existence did not fulfill prophecy, both the prophecies concerning the scattering of the Jews, as well as the restoration (gathering) of the Jews to the lands of their inheritance.

As this realization dawned on me, a feeling came over me that the State of Israel would be broken up, and its inhabitants scattered and then later the real gathering of the Jews would take place.  This feeling has persisted to this day.  As it wasn’t a direct revelation from the Holy Ghost, with attendant manifestations, I filed it under miscellaneous and kept it to myself.

However, on Thursday, January 15, in preparation for some advertising I was doing for the silver bartering currency, I went to the LEAP/EUROPE2020 web site to print out their summer 2009 prediction, their September 2008 prediction (which came true), and their March 2009 prediction and I noticed that they had a new article published about Israel:

Israel 2020: 2 scenarios for the future Scenario 1: Towards the end of the State of Israel / Scenario 2: Towards a durable Israeli state

Upon seeing this, I thought, “Maybe there is something to this feeling, after all.”  I called up what4anarchy to get his two cents and then decided to broach the subject on this blog.

Why the State of Israel does not fulfill prophecy

The main problem I have with the existence of the current State of Israel is that it does not appear that the Lord is the one who has gathered them.  It looks like the hand of man (the nations of the earth) used their colonial powers to establish them in Palestine.  Unlike the redemption of Zion, which will be redeemed by the power of the Lord, the gathering of Jews to Jerusalem appears to be the hand of man trying to force the fulfillment of prophecy.

Prophecies, when they are fulfilled are totally obvious to those who live during their fulfillment.  There is no guess-work involved or straining to make a prophecy fit.  Even the most enigmatic of prophecies become plain to those who live during their fulfillment.  This is why Nephi says that the Lord “doeth nothing save it be plain unto the children of men” (2 Ne. 26: 33).  The Lord aims to leave the children of men without the excuse of saying, “I couldn’t recognize the fulfillment of your prophecies.”  All men who are aware of the prophecies and who live during their fulfillment will be able to recognize their literal fulfillment.  That goes even for the prophecies of Isaiah, of which Nephi says, “in the days that the prophecies of Isaiah shall be fulfilled men shall know of a surety, at the times when they shall come to pass” (2 Ne. 25: 7).

Forcing the fulfillment of prophecy

As men, we are often guilty of super-imposing our current circumstances upon the ancient prophecies and if there is a resemblance, will often declare them fulfilled.  Those who believe in the prophecies want to see them fulfilled every whit, as their belief and faith depends upon it.  Unfulfilled or false prophecy is a great trial to faith while fulfilled prophecy confirms it.  Besides, no one likes to be wrong by believing a lie (a false prophecy), so every effort is made to force interpretations that make the prophecy seem fulfilled.

This anxiousness on the part of preachers and religionists is unnecessary because, in their literal fulfillment, prophecies become plain to all men.

Forcing prophecies is also unwise because if the literal fulfillment is still future and you broadcast its fulfillment now, conditions may change which undo the supposed fulfillment, which may cause a loss of faith.  Those putting forth the forced interpretations end up looking like jack-asses and those who otherwise might have believed the prophecies and gospel begin to doubt.

A prime example is section 87 of the Doctrine and Covenants, which prophesied the War Between the States and that it would be started “at the rebellion of South Carolina.”  At the time that the prophecy was received, though, South Carolina was already in rebellion with its nullification convention and the smell of war was in the air.  Many broadcast the prophecy far and wide, sure that its fulfillment was imminent.  Then conditions changed and South Carolina backed down.  Those taking the prophecy on their missionary journeys stopped showing it to people as proof that Joseph Smith was a prophet.  Its literal fulfillment did not come until decades later when conditions changed again.

Unless all the conditions called for in a prophecy are exact, no one should force a fulfillment upon it, no matter how closely the conditions come to the actual conditions needed for its fulfillment.

Many Christians (and LDS) have done this with the State of Israel.  Seemingly overnight the Jews went from a scattered state to a gathered one in Palestine (by the nations of the Gentiles.)  “The hand of the Lord!  Prophecy fulfilled!”  So went, and still goes, the cry.  (The religious right in particular is guilty of this.)  All government programs which supported and aided and supplied Israel with arms and other things it needed to survive in the region have been lobbied by this group so that the apparent fulfillment of prophecy remains fulfilled.  After all, the promise is that once the Jews are gathered by the Lord in the last days, they will never be scattered again.  (See 1 Ne. 15: 20.)

Not all Jews agree with the forced establishment of the State of Israel.  Over the years, I have come across Jews and Jewish organizations that say that the Jews are to remain scattered until the Lord, and the Lord alone, gathers them, and that this forced gathering is a false gathering and does not fulfill scripture.  For example, consider the following quote by one such organization:

“God-fearing Jews believe that the ultimate Redemption of the Jewish Nation will come about only through the Hands of God, and that at the time of the Redemption, peace will reign in the entire world. Any other type of forced redemption is but a sinful transgression, condemned by God and His Holy Torah.”  (Taken from The Torah Position on the Current Conflict in Gaza article found on the JewsAgainstZionism.com web site.)

My study of the prophecies bears this assessment out.

If, or when, the State of Israel ceases to exist and the Jews are scattered again, what will become of the religious right?  Will they lose credibility in the eyes of the people?  If our own LDS people have bought their faulty arguments concerning the fulfillment of prophecy, will our own people lose faith?  According to LEAP/EUROPE2020’s analysis, Israel can cease to exist in a matter of weeks. Conditions can change that rapidly.  Can our confidence in prophecy change to doubt as quickly?

The LDS are prophetic morons

Sadly, we LDS tend to skip over prophecy and just focus on the doctrines of Christ when reading the scriptures.  We rely on the chapter headings, institute and church manuals and general conference addresses to interpret prophecy and tell us what it all means.  When those sources only go so far, we then rely on the Christians’ analysis of prophecy.  In other words, we haven’t done our prophetic homework and obtained the spirit of prophecy and revelation so that we can understand these sayings.  There are few prophets left in the church.  The rest of us are led by blind guides (the Christians) who are even more in the dark concerning prophecy than we are, having less prophetic writings than we do.

So, if you are among the membership that believes the State of Israel was established by God and fulfills prophecy, I invite you to take up your scriptures alone and to leave aside the Christian and LDS commentaries.  Let nothing but the Spirit and the scriptures guide you and see if you still come to the same conclusion.

To help you in that end, let me list some Book of Mormon prophecies that deal with the scattering and gathering of the Jews.  You may start to see an emerging pattern once you take a look.

The prophecy of Lehi in 1 Ne. 10

1. Messiah slain (1 Ne. 10: 11)  2. Jews scattered (1 Ne. 10: 12-13)  3. Jews gathered/come to knowledge of true Messiah (1 Ne. 10: 14)

The prophecy of Nephi in 1 Ne. 11-15

1. Messiah slain (1 Ne. 11: 33)  2. Jews fight apostles (1 Ne. 11: 35)  3. Jews broken up, destroyed (1 Ne. 11: 36) and scattered (1 Ne. 15: 12-18)  4. Jews believe in Redeemer (1 Ne. 15: 13-16)  5. Jews restored (1 Ne. 15: 19)  6. Jews never to be scattered again (1 Ne. 15: 20)

The prophecy of Zenos in 1 Ne. 19

1. Messiah slain (1 Ne. 19: 10)  2. Jews reject Christ (1 Ne. 19: 13)  3. Jews scourged and scattered (1 Ne. 19: 13-14)  4. Jews believe in Christ (1 Ne. 19: 15)  5. Jews gathered by the Lord (1 Ne. 19: 16)

The prophecy of Nephi in 1 Ne. 22

1. Jews reject Christ (1 Ne. 22: 5)  2. Jews scattered (1 Ne. 22: 3-5)  3. Lord does marvelous work among Gentiles (1 Ne. 22: 8)  4. Jews believe in Christ [through new records] (1 Ne. 22: 9-12)  5. Jews gathered by Christ (1 Ne. 22: 12, 25)

The prophecy of Jacob in 2 Ne. 6

1. Messiah slain (2 Ne. 6: 9)  2. Jews reject Christ (2 Ne. 6: 10)  3. Jews scattered (2 Ne. 6: 11)  4. Jews believe in Christ (2 Ne. 6: 11)  5. Jews gathered by Lord (2 Ne. 6: 11, 14)

The prophecy of Jacob in 2 Ne. 10

1. Messiah slain (2 Ne. 10: 3, 5)  2. Jews reject Christ (2 Ne. 10: 5)  3. Jews scattered (2 Ne. 10: 6)  4. Jews believe in Christ (2 Ne. 10: 7)  5.  Jews gathered (2 Ne. 10: 7-8)

The prophecy of Nephi in 2 Ne. 25-30

1. Jews reject Christ (2 Ne. 25: 12)  2. Messiah slain and resurrected (2 Ne. 25: 13-14)  3. Jews fight against church of God (2 Ne. 25: 14)  4. Jews destroyed, scattered (2 Ne. 25: 14-15) and scourged for many generations (2 Ne. 25: 16)  5. Jews believe in Christ (2 Ne. 25: 16; 2 Ne. 30: 7)  6. The Lord “sets his hand again the second time to restore” Jews (2 Ne. 25: 17; 2 Ne. 27: 26)  7. Jews receive new records that will judge them (2 Ne. 25: 18; 2 Ne. 29: 11-13)  8. Both Jews and records gathered in one (2 Ne. 29: 14; 2 Ne. 30: 7)

The prophecy of Jacob in Jacob 4: 15 – 6: 4

1. Jews reject Christ (Jacob 4: 15)  2. Jews scattered (Jacob 5)  3. The Lord sets “his hand again the second time to recover” Jews (Jacob 6: 2)  4. Servants of the Lord go forth for the last time to nourish and prune vineyard (Jacob 6: 2)

The prophecy of Zenos in Jacob 5

1. Jews scattered (Jacob 5)  2. Servant and Lord bring forth new records (Jacob 5: 55-56)  3. Servant, Lord and other servants bring forth new records (Jacob 5: 61-69)  4. Servant, Lord and other servants labor for last time (Jacob 5: 70-73)  5. Both Jews and records gathered in one body (Jacob 5: 74)

The prophecy of Mormon in 3 Ne. 5

1. Jews scattered, then gathered by Lord (3 Ne. 5: 24)  2. Jews to receive new records of Christ (3 Ne. 5: 25-26)  3. Jews then to be gathered after they believe in Christ (3 Ne. 5: 26)

The prophecy of the Lord in 3 Ne. 16

1. Jews scattered (3 Ne. 16: 4)  2. Gentiles take new records to Jews (3 Ne. 16: 4)  3. Jews believe in Christ (3 Ne. 16: 4)  4. Jews gathered (3 Ne. 16: 5)

The prophecy of the Lord in 3 Ne. 20

1. Covenant of Father to Israel fulfilled when Isaiah’s words fulfilled (3 Ne. 20: 11-12)  2. Jews scattered (3 Ne. 20: 13)  3. Gentiles scatter Jews (3 Ne. 20: 15) and scourge them (3 Ne. 20: 28)  4. Jews receive new records (3 Ne. 20: 13, 30)  5. Jews believe in Christ (3 Ne. 20: 30)  6. Jews gathered by the Lord (3 Ne. 20: 13, 18, 21, 29, 33, 46)

The prophecy of the Lord in 3 Ne. 21

1. The sign that Israel is about to be gathered and Zion is about to be established (3 Ne. 21: 1) is when the record of the ministry of the Savior to the Nephites goes to the Gentiles (2 Ne. 21: 2) and from the Gentiles to the remnant of Israel (3 Ne. 21: 3.  See 3 Ne. 21: 1-7)  2. In that day kings will shut their mouths (3 Ne. 21: 8)  3. In that day Father will perform great and marvelous work (3 Ne. 21: 9)

—I will expound 3 Ne. 21: 11.  “Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.”

—”My words” in the phrase “whosoever will not believe my words” means the record of the ministry of the Savior to the Nephites (not the abridgment made by Mormon.)  Remember, Mormon was about to write the full account of the ministry contained on the large plates of Nephi, because these words were prophesied to come forth, as these were the words meant by the Savior in this verse, and these are the words that would implement the “cut off” clause of the prophecy, but the Lord forbade it (3 Ne. 26: 11).

—”Him.”  Can you guess who “him” is in the phrases “the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles”?  (See 3 Ne. 21: 9-10.)  This “him” man will bring forth the record of the Savior’s ministry.  Again, this is not speaking of the abridgment.

—”Cut off.”  The prophecy of Moses says, “A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass that every soul who will not hear that prophet shall be cut off from among the people.”  This prophet is Christ.  The fulfillment of this prophecy happens when the record of the Savior’s ministry to the Nephites (not the abridgment) comes forth.  Then, everyone who reads the record will be left without excuse.  Either they believe the words of Christ and become numbered with the house of Israel, or they disbelieve them and cut themselves off.  In other words, Moses had view of this last record coming forth when he spoke his prophecy.

—What this all means: At some point a “healed” servant of the Lord will appear and will bring forth the record of the Savior’s ministry (the full account) as well as other records.  These “last records” will show that the first records (including the Book of Mormon) are true and will convince everyone that Jesus is the Christ, leaving no one with an excuse.  They will go first to the Gentiles and then to the Jews, which will turn them both to the Lord and into bona fide Israelites.  Then the Lord will gather with power those who have accepted these last records to the lands of their inheritance.  Everyone else will be cut off and gathered into bundles to be burned.  The “last records” will cause a great division among the people (2 Ne. 30: 10).  This latter work, in which this “healed” servant comes forth and produces the “last records,” first to the Gentiles and then to the Jews, after which everyone is gathered, is known as the marvelous work and a wonder, the great and marvelous work, the second time the Lord will set his hand again to restore his people, etc.

That is all I will say about this chapter.

The prophecy of Mormon in Morm. 5: 14

1. Scattered Jews receive new records, believe in Christ and are restored (Mormon 5: 14)

The prophecy of Ether in Ether 13

1. Jerusalem destroyed (Ether 13: 5)  2. Jews scattered (Ether 13: 11)  3. Jerusalem to be built up again (Ether 13: 5)  4. Jerusalem to be a holy city of the Lord (Ether 13: 5)  5. Jews to be clean “washed in the blood of the Lamb” (Ether 13: 11.  See also 2 Ne. 25: 16 “with pure hearts and clean hands.”)

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The Root Cause of the Current Financial (Monetary) Crisis and Its Solution

Ever since I learned of the biblical prophecies—and later of the additional prophecies of the LDS—concerning these days in which we live, I’ve always wanted to be an observer of the affairs of men, watching the winding up scenes unfold before my eyes, without participating in the iniquities, frivolities and foolishness of men, nor in the judgments of God upon them.  However, I believe that the Lord wants more than this:

And now, as I spake concerning my servant Edward Partridge, this land is the land of his residence, and those whom he has appointed for his counselors; and also the land of the residence of him whom I have appointed to keep my storehouse; wherefore, let them bring their families to this land, as they shall counsel between themselves and me. For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.  Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness; for the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward.  But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness, the same is damned.  (D&C 58: 24-29)

Notice that the Lord didn’t say we should be engaged in good causes (plural) but in a good cause (singular).  Many will interpret this passage to mean that we can be engaged in any cause that is good, but I believe that the Lord had reference to only one cause which is defined by Him as being good: the cause of Zion.

For thus saith the Lord God: Him have I inspired to move the cause of Zion in mighty power for good, and his diligence I know, and his prayers I have heard.  (D&C 21: 7)

Zion holds the solution to all of the world’s problems.  Zion is not just for the saints, but for all men and the time will come that many of the wicked will flee to it (see D&C 45: 68 and 133: 12) to escape the wrath of God and the judgments upon Babylon.  Every LDS, then, after escaping Babylon themselves, should also be helping others escape.  After all, as saints, we are supposed to be a light unto the world, setting an example of godliness to all those that view our good works, so that they can glorify God.

So, when I see the crisis happening on Wall Street and the $700 billion dollar solution our president is providing, I wonder what the latter-day saints will do.  Will we accept the solution provided us by our Gentile, Babylon-based government and be cast out as good-for-nothings?  Or will we provide the Zion solution and become the temporal saviors of men, even saviors upon Mount Zion?

For they were set to be a light unto the world, and to be the saviors of men; and inasmuch as they are not the saviors of men, they are as salt that has lost its savor, and is thenceforth good for nothing but to be cast out and trodden under foot of men.  (D&C 103: 9-10)

The Financial Crisis

By now everyone should be aware that there is a financial crisis happening in America.  It is no longer a question of whether bad financial times are upon us, but how bad they are and how long they will last.  The doomsayers predict a financial depression that will last many years and make the American Great Depression of the 1930’s seem like a walk in the park.  The optimists say we can ride this wave out because America is still dynamically very strong.

On everyone’s mind is both how to fix the situation and who will do the fixing.  Specifically, the question is, “Which presidential candidate, Obama or McCain, can fix it?” The two, major, political party candidates have become the saviors of men in the eyes of the masses who support them.

As an anarchist and a latter-day saint, my view is that government is usually the one that causes these problems to begin with, and therefore, should never be called upon to fix them, as it usually only ends up making things worse.  If there is a solution to our economic situation, it will come from the people themselves, working independent from the government.

But before a solution can be offered, the problem must be identified, not just the symptoms of it.

A financial crisis is a monetary crisis

A financial problem is a monetary problem, it usually being either that there isn’t enough money going around (deflation) or that there is too much money going around (inflation).  That seems to be simple enough to fix.  In deflation, you just print more money and circulate it.  In inflation, you just stop or slow down the printing presses and also destroy money that comes into your hands.  Yet, despite (more or less) being in control of the amount of money in circulation, by being in control of the printing presses, the Fed has failed to stabilize the economy, bringing us into the Great Depression of the 1930’s twenty years after it (the Fed) was created and now bringing us into an even greater depression known by some as the Global Systemic Crisis seventy-eight years after that.

So, owing that the Fed isn’t really doing the job we were told it was supposed to do (stabilizing the economy), maybe we ought to look a bit further and deeper and consider that the problem is not how much money is going around, but whether what is going around is actually money.

The Lord talked about money

In 17 of the revelations given to Joseph Smith, the Lord mentioned money.  Here are the specific scriptures: D&C 24: 18 given in July, 1830; D&C 48: 4 given in March 1831; D&C 51: 8, 11, 13 given in May, 1831; D&C 54: 7 given in June, 1831; D&C 56: 9-12 given in June, 1831; D&C 57: 6, 8 given on July 20, 1831; D&C 58: 35-36, 49, 51 given on August 1, 1831; D&C 60: 10 given on August 8, 1831; D&C 63: 40, 43, 46 given in August, 1831; D&C 69: 1 given in November, 1831; D&C 84: 89-90, 103-104 given on September 22 and 23, 1832; D&C 90: 28-29 given on March 8, 1833; D&C 101: 49, 56, 70, 72 given on December 16, 1833; D&C 103: 22-23 given on February 24, 1834; D&C 104: 26, 68, 84 given on April 23, 1834; D&C 105: 8, 30 given on June 22, 1834; and D&C 124: 70 given on January 19, 1841.

The above scriptures cover the time between July 1830 and January 19, 1841.  This means that whatever currency was used by these Americans during that time was considered by the Lord as actual money.

But what was money during the years 1830-1841?

The 1828 Noah Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language was the dictionary in use among Americans during this time and defined money in the following manner:

MONEY, n. plu. moneys.

1. Coin; stamped metal; any piece of metal, usually gold, silver or copper, stamped by public authority, and used as the medium of commerce. We sometimes give the name of money to other coined metals, and to any other material which rude nations use a medium of trade. But among modern commercial nations, gold, silver and copper are the only metals used for this purpose. Gold and silver, containing great value in small compass, and being therefore of easy conveyance, and being also durable and little liable to diminution by use, are the most convenient metals for coin or money, which is the representative of commodities of all kinds, of lands, and of every thing that is capable of being transferred in commerce.

2. Bank notes or bills of credit issued by authority, and exchangeable for coin or redeemable, are also called money; as such notes in modern times represent coin, and are used as a substitute for it. If a man pays in hand for goods in bank notes which are current, he is said to pay in ready money.

3. Wealth; affluence.

Money can neither open new avenues to pleasure, nor block up the passages of anguish.

(Money entry of the 1828 Noah Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language)

The Lord talked about talents

Within this same time period, the Lord also mentioned talents in two of the revelations given to Joseph Smith:

But with some I am not well pleased, for they will not open their mouths, but they hide the talent which I have given unto them, because of the fear of man.  Wo unto such, for mine anger is kindled against them.

Behold, they have been sent to preach my gospel among the congregations of the wicked; wherefore, I give unto them a commandment, thus: Thou shalt not idle away thy time, neither shalt thou bury thy talent that it may not be known.

(D&C 60: 2, 13; revelation received on August 8, 1831)

And all this for the benefit of the church of the living God, that every man may improve upon his talent, that every man may gain other talents, yea, even an hundred fold, to be cast into the Lord’s storehouse, to become the common property of the whole church—every man seeking the interest of his neighbor, and doing all things with an eye single to the glory of God.

(D&C 82: 18-19; revelation received on April 26, 1832)

But what is a talent?

TALENT (Lat. talentum, adaptation of Gr. τáλατον, balance, weight, from root ταλ-, to lift, as in τληναι, to bear, τáλας, enduring, cf. Lat. tollere, to lift, Skt. tulã, balance), the name of an ancient Greek unit of weight, the heaviest in use both for monetary purposes and for commodities (see Weights and Measures).  The weight itself was originally Babylonian, and derivatives were in use in Palestine, Syria and Egypt.  In medieval Latin and also in many Romanic languages the word was used figuratively, of will, inclination or desire, derived from the sense of balance, but the general figurative use for natural endowments or gifts, faculty, capacity or ability, is due to the parable of the talents in Matt. xxv.

(Talent entry of the 11th Edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica, published in 1910)

(See also the talent entry of the 1828 Noah Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language.  That entry explains: “Among the ancients, a weight, and a coin. The true value of the talent cannot well be ascertained, but it is known that it was different among different nations.“)

So, the talents mentioned in D&C 82: 18, which were “to be cast into the Lord’s storehouse, to become the common property of the whole church” could be a reference to money, specifically, a unit of weight used for monetary purposes.  But what American unit of weight used for monetary purposes was in use on April 26, 1831?

The Lord talked about dollars

In two of the revelations received by the Prophet, the Lord mentioned dollars:

Or in other words, if any man among you obtain five dollars let him cast them into the treasury; or if he obtain ten, or twenty, or fifty, or an hundred, let him do likewise; and let not any among you say that it is his own; for it shall not be called his, nor any part of it.

If it be five dollars, or if it be ten dollars, or twenty, or fifty, or a hundred, the treasurer shall give unto him the sum which he requires to help him in his stewardship—until he be found a transgressor, and it is manifest before the council of the order plainly that he is an unfaithful and an unwise steward.

(D&C 104: 69-70, 73-74; revelation received on April 23, 1834. See also the Book of Commandments XCVIII: 12, page 244, which used the word talents in stead of dollars.)

And they shall not receive less than fifty dollars for a share of stock in that house, and they shall be permitted to receive fifteen thousand dollars from any one man for stock in that house.  But they shall not be permitted to receive over fifteen thousand dollars stock from any one man.  And they shall not be permitted to receive under fifty dollars for a share of stock from any one man in that house.

Verily I say unto you, let my servant Joseph pay stock into their hands for the building of that house, as seemeth him good; but my servant Joseph cannot pay over fifteen thousand dollars stock in that house, nor under fifty dollars; neither can any other man, saith the Lord.

(D&C 124: 64-66, 72; revelation received on January 19, 1841.)

From the above it becomes plain that the words dollars and talents are interchangeable, meaning the same thing.

But what is a dollar?

DOLLAR, n. [G.] A silver coin of Spain and of the United States, of the value of one hundred cents, or four shillings and sixpence sterling. The dollar seems to have been originally a German coin, and in different parts of Germany, the name is given to coins of different values.

(Dollar entry of the 1828 Noah Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language)

DOLLAR, a silver coin at one time current in many European countries, and adopted under varying forms of the name elsewhere. The word “dollar” is a modified form of thaler, which, with the variant forms (daler, dalar, daalder, tallero, &c.), is said to be a shortened form of Joachimsthaler. This Joachimsthaler was the name given to a coin intended to be the silver equivalent of the gold gulden, a coin current in Germany from the 14th century. In 1516 a rich silver mine was discovered in Joachimsthal (Joachim’s dale), a mining district of Bohemia, and the count of Schlitz, by whom it was appropriated, caused a great number of silver coins to be struck (the first having the date 1518), bearing an effigy of St Joachim, hence the name. The Joachimsthaler was also sometimes known as the Schlickenthaler. The first use of the word dollar in English was as applied to this silver coin, the thaler, which was current in Germany at various values from the 16th century onwards, as well as, more particularly, to the unit of the German monetary union from 1857 to 1873, when the mark was substituted for the thaler. The Spanish piece-of-eight (reals) was also commonly referred to as a dollar. When the Bank of England suspended cash payments in 1797, and the scarcity of coin was very great, a large number of these Spanish coins, which were held by the bank, were put into circulation, after having been countermarked at the Mint with a small oval bust of George III., such as was used by the Goldsmiths’ Company for marking plate. Others were simply overstamped with the initials G.R. enclosed in a shield.  In 1804 the Maundy penny head set in an octagonal compartment was employed. Several millions of these coins were issued. These Spanish pieces-of-eight were also current in the Spanish-American colonies, and were very largely used in the British North American colonies. As the reckoning was by pounds, shillings and pence in the British-American colonies, great inconveniences naturally arose, but these were to some extent lessened by the adoption of a tariff list, by which the various gold and silver coins circulating were rated. In 1787 the dollar was introduced as the unit in the United States, and it has remained as the standard of value either in silver or gold in that country. For the history of the various changes in the weights and value of the coin see Numismatics.  The Spanish piece-of-eight was also the ancestor of the Mexican dollar, the Newfoundland dollar, the British dollar circulating in Hong Kong and the Straits Settlements, and the dollar of the South American republics, although many of them are now dollars only in name.

(Dollar entry of the 11th Edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica, published in 1910)

The American Dollar is a Silver Coin

This may come as a surprise to many LDS (and Americans), but nowadays we don’t use American dollars, which is a quantity of silver, usually coined for ease of use.  What we use today are Federal Reserve Notes, otherwise known as fiat currency.  In all of the modern revelations quoted above, whenever the Lord was referring to money or talents or dollars, He was referring to the commodity currency then in use, specifically, a quantity of (usually coined) silver.

Silver is the only legal, American money

Douglas V. Gnazzo of the Honest Money Gold and Silver Report web site wrote an excellent article entitled Honest Money and published in 6 parts, in which he went over the history of American legal currency.  In it, Douglas explained that a “dollar” is defined both by the Constitution and by the Original Coinage Act of 1792 as being a specific quantity of silver, namely, 371.25 grains of silver.  This legal definition has never been changed, meaning that what we are currently calling a “dollar” is not real American currency.  To read the entire Honest Money article, click the following links:

Honest Money, Part I: The Constitution and Honest Money

Honest Money, Part II: Silver Standard with a Bimetallic Coinage System

Honest Money, Part III: Coinage Acts of 1834-1900

Honest Money, Part IV: Treasury Notes

Honest Money, Part V: History of American Money and Banking

Honest Money, Part VI: The European Connection

Honest Money, Part VII: The Moneychangers – Secrets of the Temple

Honest Money, Part VIII: Final Summary and Conclusions

You will recall, for example, that Congress has power to “coin money.”  It doesn’t have power to “make money” or to “print money,” but merely to coin it.  The money referred to in the U. S. Constitution is silver, thus, a power to coin money is a power to coin silver.  The two phrases are synonymous.  In fact, in many Latin American countries the word for money is plata, which is the word for silver. We can see from this that the Spanish milled dollar, which is what our American dollar is based upon, has had influence in many countries.

Fiat Currency, Fractional Reserve Banking and Usury is the Problem

Like evil bedfellows, fractional reserve banking and usury almost always accompany a fiat currency.  (See the above Honest Money article for an explanation about these banking practices and why they are so evil.)  Usury is condemned in the scriptures (both ours and others’ scriptures) and religions past and present have spoken against it as a great evil.  However, all three principles have been generally accepted among today’s society and even among most Latter-day Saints.  In fact, even in the church we find usury among ourselves (e.g. Perpetual Education Fund), though many do not consider it so as they interpret usury to mean excessive interest and not just any interest.

Notice that the current financial problem has nothing to do with regulation (or lack thereof) of the banking institutions by the government.  As long as a currency is metal-based, society naturally regulates itself without any need of government intervention, eliminating the practice of usury and making sure that only full-reserve banking occurs.  So, the roots of the financial crisis go deeper than mere de/un/regulation.  They go all the way to the currency itself, for fiat currency will always result in financial instability and prosperity for the few at the expense of the many.  This is a long way off from the Zion ideal of all having all things common.

Commodity Currency is the Solution

The use of metals as money has historical precedent and is the surest foundation upon which to build.  The following is part of the money entry of the 11th Edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica, published in 1910:

The Metals as Money. Reasons for their Adoption. Superiority of Silver and Gold. – The employment of metals as money material can be traced far back in the history of civilization; but as it is impossible to determine the exact order of their appearance in this capacity, it will be convenient to take them in the order of their value, beginning with the lowest.  Iron – to judge from the statement of Aristotle – was widely used as currency. One remarkable instance is the Spartan money, which was clearly a survival of a form that had died out among the other Greek states; though it has often been attributed to ascetic policy. In conjunction with copper,  iron formed one of the constituents of early Chinese currency, and at a later time was used as a subsidiary coinage in Japan.  Iron spikes are used as money in Central Africa, while Adam Smith notes the employment of nails for the same purpose in Scotland.  Lead has served as money, e.g. in Burma.  The use of copper as money has been more extensive than is the case in respect to the metals just mentioned. It, as stated, was used in China along with iron – an early instance of bimetallism – and it figured in the first Hebrew coins. It was the sole Roman coinage down to 269 B.C. and it has lingered on to a comparatively recent date in the backward European currencies. It even survives as a part of the token coinage of the present.  Tin has not been a favourite material for money: the richness of the Cornish mines accounts for its use by some British kings. Silver holds a more prominent place than any of the preceding metals. Down to the close of the 18th century it was the chief form of money, and often looked on as forming the necessary standard substance. It was the principal Greek money material, and was introduced at Rome in 269 B.C. The currencies of medieval Europe had silver as their leading constituent; while down almost to the present day Eastern countries seemed to prefer silver to gold.

The pre-eminence of gold as money is now beyond dispute; there, is, however, some difficulty in discovering its earliest employment. It is, perhaps, to be found in ” the pictures of the ancient Egyptians weighing in scales heaps of rings of gold and silver. ” According to W. Ridgeway’s ingenious theory gold comes into use as a currency in due equation to the older cattle unit, the ox. It was certainly employed by the great Eastern monarchs; its further development will be considered later on. Metals of modern discovery – such as nickel and platinum – are only used by the fancy of a few governments, though the former makes a good token coinage.

The preceding examination of the varied materials of currency, metallic and non-metallic, suggests some conclusions respecting the course of monetary evolution, viz.: (I) that the metals tend to supersede all other forms of money among progressive communities; and (2) that the more valuable metals displace the less valuable ones. The explanation of these movements is found in the qualities that are specially desirable in the articles used for money. There has been a long process of selection and elimination in the course of monetary history.

First, it is plain that nothing can serve as money which has not the attributes of wealth; i.e. unless it is useful, transferable and limited in supply. As these conditions are essential to the existence of value, the instrument for measuring and transferring values must possess them. A second requisite of great effect is the amount of value in proportion to weight or mass. High value in small bulk gives the quality of portability, want of which has been a fatal obstacle to the continued use of many early forms of money. Skins, corn and tobacco were defective in this quality, and so were iron and copper. Sheep and oxen, though technically described as ” self-moving,” are expensive to transport from place to place. That the material of money shall be the same throughout, so that one unit shall be equal in value to another, is a further desideratum, which is as decidedly lacking in cattle-currency as it is prominent in the metals. It is, further, desirable that the substance used as money shall be capable of being divided without loss of value, and, if needed, of being reunited. Most of the articles used in primitive societies – such as eggs, skins and cattle – fail in this quality. Money should also be durable, a requirement which leads to the exclusion of all animal and most vegetable substances from the class of suitable currency materials. To be easily recognized is another very desirable quality in money, and moreover to be recognized as of a given value. Articles otherwise well fitted for money-use, e.g. precious stones, suffer through the difficulty of estimating their value. Finally, it results from the function of money as a standard of value that it should alter in its own value as little as possible. Complete fixity of value is from the nature of things unattainable; but the nearest approximation that can be secured is desirable. In early societies this quality is not of great importance; for future obligations are few and inconsiderable. With the growth of industry and commerce and the expansion of the system of contracts, covering a distant future, the evil effects of a shifting standard of value attract attention, and lead to the suggestion of ingenious devices to correct fluctuations. These belong to the later history of money and currency movements. It is enough for the ordinary purposes of money that it shall not alter within short periods, which is a characteristic of the more valuable metals, and particularly of silver and gold, while in contrast such an article as corn changes considerably in value from year to year.

From the foregoing examination of the requisites desirable in the material of money it is easy to deduce the empirical laws which the history of money discloses, since metals, as compared with non-metallic substances, evidently possess those requisites in a great degree. They are all durable, homogeneous, divisible and recognizable, and in virtue of these superior advantages they are the only substances now used for money by advanced nations. Nor is the case different when the decision has to be made between the different metals. Iron has been rejected because of its low value and its liability to rust, lead from its extreme softness, and tin from its tendency to break. All these metals, as well as copper, are unsuitable from their low value, which hinders their speedy transmission so as to adjust inequalities of local prices.

The elimination of the cheaper metals leaves silver and gold as the only suitable materials for forming the principal currency. Of late years there has been a very decided movement towards the adoption of the latter as the sole monetary standard, silver being regarded as suitable only for a subsidiary coinage. The special features of gold and silver which render them the most suitable materials for currency may here be noted.  “The value of these metals changes only by slow degrees; they are readily divisible into any number of parts which may be reunited by means of fusion without loss; they do not deteriorate by being kept; their firm and compact texture makes them difficult to wear; their cost of production, especially of gold, is so considerable that they possess great value in small bulk, and can of course be transported with comparative facility; and their identity is perfect.” The possession by both these metals of all the qualities needed in money is more briefly but forcibly put by Cantillon when he says that “gold and silver alone are of small volume, of equal goodness, easy of transport, divisible without loss, easily guarded, beautiful and brilliant and durable almost to eternity.” This view has even been pushed to an extreme form in the proposition of Turgot, that they became universal money by the nature and force of things, independently of all convention and law, from which the deduction has been drawn that to proscribe silver by law from being used as money is a violation of the nature of things.

(An excerpt from the money entry of the 11th Edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica, published in 1910)

So, when the Lord told the kings of the earth and the saints to bring their gold and silver to Zion, He was referring to commodity money, as that was the commodity money of the time.  (See D&C 124: 11, 26 and 111: 4.)  Have we complied?  Do we contribute commodity money to the cause of Zion, or do we contribute fiat money?

We need a private, LDS, commodity-based (gold and silver) currency

I am among those who believe that we are currently witnessing the beginning of the eventual (and planned) break-up of the United States of America.  We may also soon witness a corresponding break-up of the Church.  Regardless of what happens, though, the prophecies must be fulfilled, which means that when we cast our talents “into the Lord’s storehouse, to become the common property of the whole church”, upon living the law of consecration, we will be casting in commodity money, specifically, gold and silver money, and not fiat money.

In anticipation of the complete break-up of the USA, the total devaluation of our current fiat currency, the attempted introduction of another currency and another type of government, even regional government, and, after all these (and other) tribulations, the cleansing of the church and the establishment of the law of consecration, we ought to be pro-actively engaged in the good cause of Zion.

Zion needs a currency, independent of the governments of the world, meaning that it must be a private currency.  As private currencies are legal in this country, there is nothing to stop the LDS from creating one.  To get us started in that direction, in the Establishment of Zion Think Tank Forum I gave some examples of what can be used as this private, LDS currency.

The corporate Church won’t do it

Many members wait for Salt Lake to issue the instructions, but the Lord has already told us that “it is not meet that I should command in all things.”  Besides, I have reason to believe that the dissolution of the corporate Church is on the horizon.  So, if a silver and gold-based commodity currency is to be had again among the saints, in fulfillment of prophecy, the saints themselves must be the ones to create it.  Such a currency would not only stabilize all LDS communities who use it among themselves, but would also allow non-LDS to escape the financial wrath of God upon all those who transact in fiat currency.

A side benefit

Having a private, LDS, precious metals-based currency will also allow those using it to get around the mark of the beast prophesied by John in the Book of Revelations.  (See Rev. 13: 16-18; Rev. 14: 9-12; Rev. 19: 20; and Rev. 20: 4-6.)

Next Anarchism/Anarchy article: Introducing a new bartering currency—the first coin: 1/2 Troy oz pure silver .999 fine

Previous Anarchism/Anarchy article: If voting could change things, it would be illegal

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

The voice of the people signifies a majority

Because concerns about my use of “51%” in regard to the law of common consent have come up on this blog before, I wanted to address them with this post:

Excerpt of Post

Although the quorum of the twelve vote for the new President of the High Priesthood, the majority of the body of the saints (51%) must sustain the calling by vote, using the law of common consent. If 51% or more raise their hands in approval, the appointment goes through. If, however, 51% or more raise their hands in disapproval, the appointment does not go through and the apostles need to choose another man for the office, which then requires another sustaining vote from the members.  (LDS Anarchist on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

Members can not nominate a candidate and hypothetically the Presiding officer, or body, can also over ride (ignore) the “will of the people”. Incidently the law of Common Consent specifies no percentage. I’d love to know where you got this 51% figure. Having said that any presiding officer conducting business in the Church would hold off setting apart someone or cannonising a revelation even if 5% or even 1% didn’t sustain the decision.  (Comment #609 by Steve on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?, emphasis mine.)

Comment on Post

You are right, there is no specification of 51% in the scriptures. I borrowed the term “51%” from what4anarchy, who uses it all the time. However, I think what4anarchy is right in that the scriptures seem to imply that “the voice of the people” is a majority, or 51%. For example, if you look at the pre-mortal experience, two-thirds (66%) sustained Jesus as the Savior, while one third (33%) didn’t. In this case, “the voice of the people” went with Jesus. The 33% number is far above your 1% or even 5%, yet it wasn’t high enough to stop the election of Jesus. Common sense would indicate, therefore, that the law of common consent works on the majority principle. It does not require a unanimous vote to sustain an appointment, nor can a minority (49% or less) stop an appointment.

You also bring up a fallacy that LDS routinely believe, namely that “the Presiding officer…can…over ride (ignore) the will of the people.” In reality, the presiding officer can only ignore the will of the minority of the people, but if a majority says left, while he says right, it is to be left, as the scriptures indicate that we are “to do [our] business by the voice of the people.” (Mosiah 29: 26.) If the Presiding officer attempts to ignore the will of the majority, he becomes a usurper and a tyrant because in the kingdom of God the governors must govern with the consent of the governed. Any attempt to govern without that consent draws Satan into the picture, as governing without consent is satanic.

As long as LDS hold these views about the law of common consent, it will never function as a means to check tyranny and error, which is its purpose.  (Comment #610 by LDS Anarchist on January 30, 2008, in Poll: Who is the most prophetic?,)

I thought that put an end to the question about the scriptural need for a majority, but then the following was written:

Excerpt of Post

Satan understood that if the vote went his way, if 51% of us voted for him (Lucifer), that the plan of the Father would have been frustrated.  (LDS Anarchist on October 31, 2007 in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

I have a quick comment to the initial question as to the “ramifications of a winning vote by Lucifer”, or “What would have happened had Lucifer won the vote?”

This is what I think would have happened if Lucifer had drawn 51% of us to his side: The scriptures would have said something like, “… and just over half of the hosts of heaven followed Lucifer’s plan.” The plan of salvation would not have been altered, compromised, or destroyed. God would not have ceased to be God. Lucifer would not have “won”.

My point is… why is a “majority” relevant in this situation? I don’t believe it is. Two-thirds of the hosts of heaven could have followed Lucifer and God would still have chosen Jesus and His plan would not have been compromised. I don’t believe this was a “vote”, but rather, a choice.  (Comment #1160 by Jgtrs on June 15, 2008 in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?, emphasis mine.)

Excerpt of Comment on Post

The 51% number has come up before on this blog. See here and here. Also, the heavens splitting into thirds sounds like what4anarchy’s idea of following the leader.  (1/3 under Lucifer, 1/3 under Jehovah and 1/3 under Michael, for example.)

My understanding is “as above, so below” and so what happened in the heavens has its counterpart here on Earth, namely, the law of common consent. So, the following common consent articles may apply to this discussion about percentages: Power of the Law of Common Consent and Is our procedure for sustaining a rubber stamp? and also, perhaps, this one on free agency: The role of free agency in political systems. As God cannot govern without the consent of the governed, I’m not sure what the difference is between a “vote” and a “choice.” There are many ways of voting, not just in raising one’s hand, and each manifestation of a vote is a demonstration of what you are choosing or not choosing.

It doesn’t make sense to me that the principle of “the voice of the people” applies on Earth but not in heaven, as these principles are revealed to us as heavenly principles so that we can pattern our lives according to that standard found in heaven and be empowered to establish Zion, or the kingdom of heaven on Earth.  (Comment #1230 by LDS Anarchist on June 17, 2008, in Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote?)

The purpose of this post is solely to show that the “voice of the people” means “majority vote.”

Voice of the people defined

Mosiah is the one who defined the expression for us, in the following verse:

Now it is not common that the voice of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the voice of the people.  (Mosiah 29: 26)

Mosiah explains that  “the voice of the people” is not the “lesser part of the people.”  The “lesser part of the people” is otherwise known as a minority. Therefore, as the “voice of the people” is not the minority, it must be the majority. The expression “the voice of the people” is synonymous with “the majority vote of the people.”

Thus, the latter part of the above verse means, “This shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the [majority vote] of the people.”

Book of Mormon scriptures

The expression “the voice of the people” occurs a lot in the scriptures, and in each instance, it means the same thing.  So, here are some examples, with the meaning of the expression rendered in plainer English :

And it came to pass that the [majority vote] of the people came, saying: We are desirous that Aaron thy son should be our king and our ruler.  Therefore, choose you by the [majority vote] of this people, judges, that ye may be judged according to the laws which have been given you by our fathers, which are correct, and which were given them by the hand of the Lord.  Now it is not common that the [majority vote] of the people desireth anything contrary to that which is right; but it is common for the lesser part of the people to desire that which is not right; therefore this shall ye observe and make it your law—to do your business by the [majority vote] of the people.  And if the time comes that the [majority vote] of the people doth choose iniquity, then is the time that the judgments of God will come upon you; yea, then is the time he will visit you with great destruction even as he has hitherto visited this land.  If your higher judges do not judge righteous judgments, ye shall cause that a small number of your lower judges should be gathered together, and they shall judge your higher judges, according to the [majority vote] of the people.  (Mosiah 29: 2, 25-27, 29)

Yea, well did Mosiah say, who was our last king, when he was about to deliver up the kingdom, having no one to confer it upon, causing that this people should be governed by their own voices—yea, well did he say that if the time should come that the [majority vote] of this people should choose iniquity, that is, if the time should come that this people should fall into transgression, they would be ripe for destruction. (Alma 10: 19)

Nevertheless, it came to pass that Pahoran was appointed by the [majority vote] of the people to be chief judge and a governor over the people of Nephi.  And it came to pass that Pacumeni, when he saw that he could not obtain the judgment-seat, he did unite with the [majority vote] of the people.  And it came to pass as he [Paanchi] was about to do this, behold, he was taken, and was tried according to the [majority vote] of the people, and condemned unto death; for he had raised up in rebellion and sought to destroy the liberty of the people.  And now behold, Pacumeni was appointed, according to the [majority vote] of the people, to be a chief judge and a governor over the people, to reign in the stead of his brother Pahoran; and it was according to his right. And all this was done in the fortieth year of the reign of the judges; and it had an end.  (Hel. 1: 5-6, 8, 13)

See also the following Book of Mormon scriptures that use this expression: Mosiah 7: 9; Mosiah 22: 1; Alma 2: 3-4, 7; Alma 4: 16; Alma 27: 21-22; Alma 46: 34; Alma 51: 7, 15-16; Hel. 2: 2; and Hel. 5: 2.

Bible scriptures

Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, and said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.  But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the Lord.  And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the [majority vote] of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.  According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.  Now therefore hearken unto their [majority vote]: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and shew them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.  And Samuel told all the words of the Lord unto the people that asked of him a king.  And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.  And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.  And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.  And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.  And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.  And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.  He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.  And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the Lord will not hear you in that day.  Nevertheless the people refused to ^aobey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles.  And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the Lord.  And the Lord said to Samuel, Hearken unto their [majority vote], and make them a king. And Samuel said unto the men of Israel, Go ye every man unto his city.  (1 Sam. 8: 4-22)

This scripture, in particular, is interesting because Samuel was the prophet of the Lord and the majority vote* was asking for something contrary to the will of the Lord (they were asking to change the tribal anarchy into a monarchical State like the nations around them), yet the Lord told his prophet to listen to and obey the majority vote of the people.  This is otherwise known as the law of common consent.

*Notice verse four where it says “all the elders of Israel.”  This seems to indicate that this wasn’t just a bare majority, but a unanimous majority.

Doctrine and Covenants scriptures

And let all things be done according to the counsel of the order, and united consent or [majority vote] of the order, which dwell in the land of Kirtland.  And it is my will that he should sell the lots that are laid off for the building up of the city of my saints, inasmuch as it shall be made known to him by the voice of the Spirit, and according to the counsel of the order, and by the [majority vote] of the order.  Therefore, you are dissolved as a united order with your brethren, that you are not bound only up to this hour unto them, only on this wise, as I said, by loan as shall be agreed by this order in council, as your circumstances will admit and the [majority vote] of the council direct.  And the avails of the sacred things shall be had in the treasury, and a seal shall be upon it; and it shall not be used or taken out of the treasury by any one, neither shall the seal be loosed which shall be placed upon it, only by the [majority vote] of the order, or by commandment.  And there shall not any part of it be used, or taken out of the treasury, only by the [majority vote] and common consent of the order.  And this shall be the [majority vote] and common consent of the order—that any man among you say to the treasurer: I have need of this to help me in my stewardship—but in case of transgression, the treasurer shall be subject unto the council and [majority vote] of the order.  And in case the treasurer is found an unfaithful and an unwise steward, he shall be subject to the council and [majority vote] of the order, and shall be removed out of his place, and another shall be appointed in his stead.  (D&C 104: 21, 36, 53, 64, 71-72, 76-77)

Joseph Smith, Jun., Sidney Rigdon and Frederick G. Williams were acknowledged presidents by the [majority vote] of the council; and Joseph Smith, Sen., John Smith, Joseph Coe, John Johnson, Martin Harris, John S. Carter, Jared Carter, Oliver Cowdery, Samuel H. Smith, Orson Hyde, Sylvester Smith, and Luke Johnson, high priests, were chosen to be a standing council for the church, by the unanimous [majority vote] of the council.  Voted: that whenever any vacancy shall occur by the death, removal from office for transgression, or removal from the bounds of this church government, of any one of the above-named councilors, it shall be filled by the nomination of the president or presidents, and sanctioned by the [majority vote] of a general council of high priests, convened for that purpose, to act in the name of the church.  The president of the church, who is also the president of the council, is appointed by revelation, and acknowledged in his administration by the [majority vote] of the church.  (D&C 102: 3, 8-9)

And let my servant Edward Partridge, when he shall appoint a man his portion, give unto him a writing that shall secure unto him his portion, that he shall hold it, even this right and this inheritance in the church, until he transgresses and is not accounted worthy by the [majority vote] of the church, according to the laws and covenants of the church, to belong to the church.  And this shall be done through the bishop or the agent, which shall be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church.  (D&C 51: 4, 12)

And now, I give unto the church in these parts a commandment, that certain men among them shall be appointed, and they shall be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church; and they shall look to the poor and the needy, and administer to their relief that they shall not suffer; and send them forth to the place which I have commanded them; and this shall be their work, to govern the affairs of the property of this church.  (D&C 38: 34-36)

And again, I have called my servant Edward Partridge; and I give a commandment, that he should be appointed by the [majority vote] of the church, and ordained a bishop unto the church, to leave his merchandise and to spend all his time in the labors of the church; to see to all things as it shall be appointed unto him in my laws in the day that I shall give them. (D&C 41: 9-10)

And let there be an agent appointed by the [majority vote] of the church, unto the church in Ohio, to receive moneys to purchase lands in Zion.  (D&C 58: 49)

We believe that all governments necessarily require civil officers and magistrates to enforce the laws of the same; and that such as will administer the law in equity and justice should be sought for and upheld by the [majority vote] of the people if a republic, or the will of the sovereign.  (D&C 134: 3)

It becomes plain, then, from these scriptures, that the church functions on the principle of majority vote.

The elders are to receive their licenses from other elders, by vote of the church to which they belong, or from the conferences.  No person is to be ordained to any office in this church, where there is a regularly organized branch of the same, without the vote of that church; but the presiding elders, traveling bishops, high councilors, high priests, and elders, may have the privilege of ordaining, where there is no branch of the church that a vote may be called.  (D&C 20: 63, 65-66)

No need for unanimity unless specified

Unless the voice is specified as having to be “unanimous,” such as in the following scripture, all majority votes (51% or more) are sufficient to decide all issues in the church.

And every decision made by either of these quorums [the First Presidency, the Twelve and the Seventy] must be by the unanimous [majority vote] of the same; that is, every member in each quorum must be agreed to its decisions, in order to make their decisions of the same power or validity one with the other—a majority may form a quorum when circumstances render it impossible to be otherwise—unless this is the case, their decisions are not entitled to the same blessings which the decisions of a quorum of three presidents were anciently, who were ordained after the order of Melchizedek, and were righteous and holy men.  (D&C 107: 27-29)

Next Common Consent article: We are not doing our business by the voice of the people

Previous Common Consent article: Apathy is not a problem, it’s a symptom and a solution

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Monson and his constipated physics redux; or, how electric gravity makes hollow earthers happy

I’ve mentioned Milton W. Monson and his curious book once before on this blog, but without really explaining its impact on me.  Whatever you think of him, after reading the book, it is hard to get it out of your mind.  A look at the reactions to it by the physics boys who’ve actually read it shows that although most give it a bad review (as in bad physics and bad mathematics), they all concede that the book is unforgettable.  How could it not be?  His was the first book, that I know of, that attempted to tackle physics using algebra alone, as well as to unite the sciences.  Plus, it was really funny.

I was one of the few individuals (actually, I don’t know the precise number of individuals) who contacted the author after reading the book.  It was then that I learned that he sent out S.T.R.R.I.P. Tease bulletins to those who contacted him, free of charge.  (S.T.R.R.I.P. = Society To Restore Rationalism In Physics, or something to that effect.  Yes, he was a dirty old man.)  The S.T.R.R.I.P. Tease bulletins were further physics lessons that he had not included in his book.

Monson was/is (I don’t know if he is still alive) an atheist and dedicated an entire chapter to debunking religion, but despite that, I had to send him some emails concerning the similarities I found in modern revelations with the physics he was proposing.  Needless to say, finding a spiritual counterpart in his theory didn’t make him very happy and he tried to convince me of the errors of my ways.  I had fun corresponding with him and I think it was fun for him, too, as he was getting up there in age and most people just thought of him as “old Monson with the crazy space balls.”  (Space balls was a theory he invented to help explain physics phenomena.)

Monson was set in his irreligious ways, and accepted a great deal of mainstream science, while attempting to debunk the rest that he felt did not hold up to rational, physics scrutiny.  He either wasn’t aware of the plasma scientists and their experiments, or chose not to consider their results in his model of the Universe.  I believe that he simply didn’t know about it.  I also believe that if he had known about it, he probably would not have liked it, as the discoveries plasma scientists make tend to confirm the scriptures, and he, being an atheist, probably would not have liked that very much.  Also, as he tended to ridicule everything he felt was wrong, if plasma science was available to him, and he thought it was erroneous, it probably would have gotten a mention in his book.

Let me just say here and now to Monson, if you are still alive: I thoroughly enjoyed your book and am glad it was written, both for its witticisms and its portrayals of new concepts. And if he is not alive, then to his son and any other surviving family members: Your departed relative made an impression for the better upon at least one individual on this planet.  I hope one day someone takes up and finishes his foundational work.

Physics Is Constipated (Intellectually That Is)

That is the title of Monson’s book.  Even if the content was horrendous, the title alone would be hard to forget.  To his credit, though, it was engaging and fun.  Heck, even the front and back cover artwork and text were thought-provoking.  But it has been many years since I last read it.  So, what was my surprise when along comes an electrical theorist, Wallace Thornhill, proposing an electric gravity model in an electric universe and using words that seemingly conveyed the same types of thoughts as Monson?

Here is Thornhill’s shortened, but nevertheless interesting paper:

Electric Gravity in an Electric Universe

Gravity, Einstein and Scientific Saints

Gravity is the most familiar force. We are subject to it every day of our lives. Newton gave us his ‘law of gravity,’ which describes its effect but doesn’t explain it. “I frame no hypotheses,” he wrote.  (Thornhill, first paragraph of Electric Gravity in an Electric Universe.)

Unlike Newton, Monson actually attempted to explain gravity.  And his explanation, using only two material types,  which he called structured space and structured matter, made pretty darn good sense.  Thornhill seems to build upon this Monsonian base—has he read Monson’s book?—, including the all-important electrical connection.

Einstein wasn’t so prudent when he introduced his “postulates.”  Unfortunately, his unreal geometry doesn’t explain gravity either. The usual demonstration using heavy steel balls on a rubber sheet to represent ‘gravity wells’ relies on gravity as its own explanation!  (Thornhill, first paragraph of Electric Gravity in an Electric Universe.)

Thornhill throughout this article does the same thing Monson did: show the Einsteinian age as the death of rational physics.  Monson is a bit harsher in his denunciation of Einstein, whereas Thornhill at least gives Einstein the benefit of doubting his own words:

How has this situation arisen? In the 20th century technology perfected wireless communication and computers and got man into space, while fundamental science fell deeper into a ‘black hole’ of complication, illogicality and metaphysics. I consider the principal cause has been the usurping, since Einstein, of natural philosophy and physics by theoretical mathematicians. Meanwhile Einstein, perhaps to his credit, remained sceptical of his own work. (Thornhill, 6th paragraph of Electric Gravity in an Electric Universe, emphasis mine.)

Monson spoke of the scientific community with disdain as being made up of “scientific saints” and “scientific priests.”  In this paper, Thornhill quotes Mike Disney in his footnotes as saying:

The most unhealthy aspect of cosmology is its unspoken parallel with religion. Both deal with big but probably unanswerable questions. The rapt audience, the media exposure, the big book-sale, tempt priests and rogues, as well as the gullible, like no other subject in science.

The Aether and the Michelson-Morley Experiment

Monson was a believer in the Aether.  He rejected the concept that space was filled with nothing.  In his view, there were but two elements that made up the entire Universe: structured space and structured matter and the interaction between these two elements as they competed for the same volume of space accounted for all of the seen and unseen energy manifestations around us.  He believed in simplification as the key to the promulgation of the sciences among the masses.  The structured space was the motive element whereas the sctructured matter was basically just pushed around.  Each element was completely opposite in its qualities.  For example, one could be compressed and deformed like a hollow balloon whereas the other was a dense ball of super hard, indestructible stuff.  There was no volume of space that was not occupied by either structured space or structured matter.

Sound familiar?  When I brought to his attention Lehi’s writings of that which acts and that which is acted upon (see 2 Ne. 2: 13-14) or the Lord’s revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants about the Light of Christ filling the immensity of space (see D&C 88: 12), etc., he wasn’t too happy, but I was pleased to see that he had come to these conclusions on his own, independent of the word of God, merely by observing nature.

Monson’s major problem was the Michelson-Morley experiment, which had apparently failed to detect the aether.  His solution was a modification to that experiment that, in his estimation, would have shown that the aether does, in fact, exist.  (He believed that the experiment failed because the experimenters didn’t know what to look for.)  At any rate, as the experiment had been discredited as a failure, any newbie (such as Monson) contending that the aether was real was laughed at as a crackpot.

Thornhill in this paper brings up the same Michelson-Morley experiment, adding, though, that Dayton Miller repeated the experiment and found an aether drift! Monson, apparently, was not aware of that fact, as Miller was written out of the text books, which would have helped his case immensely.

Structure, structure, everywhere

As stated above, Monson believed the Universe was composed of structured material of two types.  Thornhill, likewise, addresses the Universe as structured, even taking the electron and breaking it down into smaller structures called subtrons.

Gravity, Electromagnetism and Inertia

Both men tie gravity, electromagnetism and inertia to the same common source: the aether.  Whereas Monson contended that the aether “deformed balloons” pushed back at structured matter to produce gravity, Thornhill explains that the minute, structural, electric dipoles align in one direction to produce gravity.  In either case, all manifestation of any type is explained from a single source.

Gravity is a Variable

Both Monson and Thornhill come to the same conclusion: gravity varies depending upon the aether environment. Monson described the aether environment in terms of compression and torsion and Thornhill describes it in terms of charge and electricity.

The speed of light and gravity

Both men also address the near instantaneous speed of gravity, no matter how far the distances, and the slowness of light.  Both Monson and Thornhill address the e=mc2 equation, including when the speed of light is put into the equation.  Neither man gets time slowing down or Alice in Wonderland Effects.  Everything remains based in reality and rationalism.  However, Monson, again, explains things using compression and torsion, while Thornhill explains it in electrical terms.  Both men, though, make sense.

Mass

Monson and Thornhill both explain mass in terms of the aether environment and not as “quantity of matter.”  As a result, this opens up the possibility that mainstream science’s expectation of fluffy, spongy or hollow bodies could turn out to be solid and dense while the expectation of solid and dense bodies could turn out to be hollow or spongy.

Thornhill, in fact, draws from recent cometary and asteroid evidence, which should have shown fluffy snowballs (the comets) but instead showed apparently dense rocks, suggesting that our models—of what type of a body ought to produce the gravitational field were are seeing—are inaccurate.  Monson, whose book was written in the 1980’s, never had this astronomical data to work from.

Electric Gravity and Hollow Planets

Electric, or aether-generated gravity opens up the very real possibility of the planets being hollow.  The current thoughts on gravity, that it requires a certain amount of matter to have a certain amount of gravity, preclude many planets from being hollow.  They must be solid in order to account for the amount of gravity detected.  So, if gravity is shown to have an electric connection, the main obstacle to hollow planets vanishes altogether.

Although Monson never intended to promote the hollow earth theory, his model could be equally applied to both solid and hollow planets, without destroying it (the model).  Likewise, Thornhill’s model is also consistent with hollow spheres or structures, both on the subatomic level and on the planetary or galactic scale.  The electric universe theorists usually do not categorically state that their model favors a hollow planets scenario, as they are marginalized by the mainstream scientists enough, as it is, but as one reads more and more of their findings, it becomes apparent that it does.

Black holes

The major break between Monson and Thornhill is their opinion of black holes.  Whereas Monson accepted that black holes do, in fact, exist, Thornhill and the other plasma scientists think it’s just a mathematical invention, an imaginary device that has no counterpart in the real world.  But, again, Monson didn’t have the plasma data to work with.  If he had, he might have discarded the notion of black holes, too.

LDS Scientists: Pay Attention

The plasma theorists and scientists are on the cutting edge.  Despite being largely ignored by the mainstream, they are forging ahead and breaking new ground.  It would be to our benefit (as an LDS community) to pay attention to their findings.  The day may come that we will have to rebuild society.  If and when that happens, a proper understanding of all physics findings will be needed to correct the errors perpetuated by the current scientific community, your non-LDS peers, otherwise we LDS will be no better off or no more enlightened than any other people on the planet, regardless of the gospel knowledge we possess.  The electrical connection may be the most important of all.

The keys to correcting the errors are the scientific anomalies, which invalidate many theories.  Often we don’t hear about these anomalies.  They are briefly reported and then swept under the rug.  Out of sight, out of mind and the current popular scientific theory remains intact.  Inform yourself about the anomalies. Bring them up, focus on them and seek to correct the errors.  A knowledge of the plasma research will help as that field of research addresses anomalies.

Next Plasma Theology article: Plasma Rods: A Theoretical Concept

Previous Plasma Theology article: The hollow earth theory, the plasma model and Mormon theology

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist