King Noah and the Redemption of Zion

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

Making sense of Noah

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

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

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

Jesus told the Nephites:

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

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

Jesus also stated, while standing upon that same land:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Prophecy: history in reverse

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Restored knowledge

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

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

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

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

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

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

Zeniff wrote:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

behold | i am amaleki | the son of abinadom |

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

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

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

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

Polygamy (Zarahemla) and monogamy (Nephi)

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

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

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

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

Zeniff’s two trips to reclaim the land

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

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

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

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

Zeniff “redeemed” the land by bloodshed

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The gospel of Noah

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

for if i will |

saith the lord of hosts |

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

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

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

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

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

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

It was all about the redemption of Zion

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

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

Abinadi’s teaching that redemption was tied to Christ

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

thy god reigneth |

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The result: captivity

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

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

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

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

Don’t mess with the land of Zion

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

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

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

Gentiles upon the land of Zion

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

and verily i say unto you |

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

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

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

verily | verily i say unto you |

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

but behold | this land |

said god |

shall be a land of thine inheritance |

and the gentiles shall be blessed upon the land |

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

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

and i will fortify this land against all other nations |

and he that fighteth against zion shall perish |

saith god |

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

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

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

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

---

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

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

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

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

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

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

Deep Waters: Creatio ex nihilo, creatio ex materia and creatio ex deo are all true doctrines

For background on this post, please first read Lehi’s model of the universe.  This article begins where that one left off.

creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing)

Everything originally came from outer darkness, or out of the lake of fire and brimstone, into the inner light or sphere which is the kingdom of God (the created Universe.)  Everything in the created Universe (the sphere) has agency.

All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.  Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.   (D&C 93: 30)

This means that everything placed by God within the sphere of light exists, while everything without the sphere of light (in outer darkness) has no existence. In other words, what exists outside of the sphere of light?  Nothing exists outside of the sphere of light. The sphere of light is all there is. There is nothing else outside of it.  And yet, it is just from this “nothing” that God created the Universe and it is from this “nothing” that He is continually expanding His kingdom, for the sphere is growing.

Existence, as used in the above scripture, does not mean life. It does not mean that within the sphere of light things are alive and outside of it things are dead.  Instead, existence means “the state or fact of having being especially independently of human consciousness and as contrasted with nonexistence.”  A dead thing, after all, although dead, still exists. However, an empty spot, in which there is nothing there, has “no life neither death,” which is Lehi’s description of what is found outside of the sphere of light, meaning that an endless void is out there.

Creatio ex nihilo, therefore, is a true doctrine, as God created (past) the whole created Universe from that which does not exist (the “nothing”) and is continuing (present) to expand His Universe by creating more Universe from that same “nothing.”  This creative act out of “nothing” will continue on forever (future).

Note: more information concerning this non-existent state outside of the sphere of light can be found in the article Lehi’s model of the universe.  That article described the “nothing” in terms of a material or an existence.  Nevertheless, in actuality, there was nothing out there, not any substance, material or existence.  Each time you read in that Lehi article the words exist, existence, substance, material, compound or any other term that indicates some type of material or thing in regards to outer darkness, it should be read as if there were quotation [“”] marks around it.

Also, the Lord makes it plain that if there is no agency, there is no existence, therefore all things inside of the sphere of light have agency and existence, whereas outside of the sphere of light—which is the location known as outer darkness—there is no agency and no existence, in other words, there is nothing. Agency is a gift of God given to us at the moment we came into existence (when we entered the sphere of light from outer darkness.)  When the Lord states “otherwise there is no existence” it presupposes that there are things that exist (on the one hand) and that there is also nonexistence (on the other hand), in other words, that there is an opposition in all things, including the state of existing and not existing.  Not existing is just as real as existing is and by giving us His definition of what are things that exist (independent truth and intelligence placed by God within the sphere of light and given agency) God has also given us the key in determining where such nonexistence is located (outer darkness.)  For a more in-depth treatise on agency, see The role of free agency in political systems, as well as The faith of God, part ten: The relationship of faith to agency (power) and Deep Waters: What would have happened if Lucifer had won the vote? )

Lastly, all truth and intelligence placed in the sphere is independent, meaning that these are individual bits, or individuals. Outside of the sphere, the void is a single mass, with no individuality or independence.  Inside, the Universe is made up of independent individuals.

creatio ex materia (creation out of pre-existent matter)

The Spirit of truth is of God. I am the Spirit of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fulness of truth, yea, even of all truth; and no man receiveth a fulness unless he keepeth his commandments. He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things. Man was also in the beginning with God.  Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.  All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.  Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.  And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation.  For man is spirit.  The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; and when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy.  The elements are the tabernacle of God; yea, man is the tabernacle of God, even temples; and whatsoever temple is defiled, God shall destroy that temple.  The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth.  Light and truth forsake that evil one.  Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning; and God having redeemed  man from the fall, men became again, in their infant state, innocent before God.  And that wicked one cometh and taketh away light and truth, through disobedience, from the children of men, and because of the tradition of their fathers.  But I have commanded you to bring up your children in light and truth.  But verily I say unto you, my servant Frederick G. Williams, you have continued under this condemnation; you have not taught your children light and truth, according to the commandments; and that wicked one hath power, as yet, over you, and this is the cause of your affliction.  (D&C 93: 26-42)

There are but two fundamental materials that make up the created Universe: spirit and element.  The scriptures call these two materials by different names according to what aspect of the material is being described.  And so we have fire (spirit) and brimstone (element), light (spirit) and truth (element), intelligence (spirit) and truth (element), wisdom (spirit) and knowledge (element), that which acts (spirit) and that which is acted upon (element).  We also have Spirit of truth (spirit of element) as well as descriptions of intelligence as both the light of truth (spirit of element) and light and truth (spirit and element).  (It is interesting to note that the scriptures never speak of truth of light or truth of spirit [both element of spirit], only of light of truth and spirit of truth [both spirit of element].)

The term “intelligence” throws everyone off.  For most LDS, when asked what an intelligence is, according to the scriptures, they would probably say it is the third part of us that is neither spirit nor element, that is our fundamental being, and which is neither created nor made but exists from all eternity.  This definition, of course, is an invention on their part, as the scriptures do not describe a third part of our being.  The scriptures only describe two parts of us: spirit and element.  The reason why the word “intelligence” is so confusing is that the Lord uses it to mean more than one thing, even in the above quoted scripture.

Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.  (D&C 93: 29)

Intelligence, in this sentence, is referring to the “nothing” that has no existence located in outer darkness.  It is the compound-in-one, good-for-nothing “substance” described by Lehi and referred here by the Lord as intelligence.  (It is useful to refer to “nothing” intelligence as a “substance,” although a substance would technically be something.  Just keep in mind that I’m not actually saying it is a substance when I use the term “substance.”)  This “nothing” intelligence has no purpose and cannot be created or made, as it would destroy God and His purposes were He to create nothing (“something” that has no purpose according to Lehi.)  This “nothing” intelligence is also described as the “light of truth,” which allows us to understand that it is the compound-in-one substance from which the light (spirit) part was extracted from the truth (element) part, in the godly splitting operation which continuously makes an opposition in all things at the lake of fire and brimstone.

All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence. (D&C 93: 30)

Intelligence in this sentence refers only to the spirit material that is split from the compound-in-one “nothing” intelligence.  Truth (element) and intelligence (spirit) are then the fundamental building materials, preexisting prior to the creation (formation or organization) of the Universe.  This process is creatio ex materia and is ongoing as the Universe both expands and is re-organized into its various stages of development.

There are two other uses of the word “intelligence.”  One meaning is of a spirit body, such as the spirit bodies of men, which were “organized before the world was.”  (See Abraham 3: 22.)  Another meaning of intelligence is “something” intelligence, as opposed to “nothing” intelligence:

The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth.  (D&C 93: 36)

Whereas the “nothing” intelligence is the light of truth, the “something” intelligence is light and truth.  To recap: the “nothing” intelligence is the original “nothing”, namely, spirit and element compounded into one “substance,” good for nothing, not existing, and found outside the sphere of light in a region called outer darkness.  This “nothing” intelligence cannot be created or made by God (or anyone else.)  Creatio ex nihilo occurs at the lake of fire and brimstone whereby this “nothing” intelligence is split into two fundamental materials: spirit and element (or light and truth).  This creates the opposition in all things.  It is now “something” intelligence, meaning, it has purpose, existence, agency and can be useful for constructing or organizing an entire Universe (creatio ex materia.)

creatio ex deo (creation out of the being of God)

There are two ways or senses in which all things were and are created out of the being of God.  One is that everything came from the same nothingness, the “nothing” intelligence, including God:

Man was also in the beginning with God.  Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.  (D&C 93: 29)

The “beginning” referred to in this scripture is the very first beginning, when we were part of the compound-in-one “nothing” intelligence that cannot be created or made.  We were there, in our uncreated nothing state, and God was there, too, in His uncreated nothing state.  We were all as one body. We did not exist as individuals, but as part of a single mass of nothingness, and in fact, we did not exist at all.   A portion of this mass was brought out of outer darkness before us, becoming the individual we now know as God.  Thus, God was brought out first.  Then, later, He brought us out along with all of the rest of the created Universe, so that we now all exist as individuals.  But keep in mind that originally, we all were part of the same whole, the same mass of nothingness, including God.  Thus, as the “nothing” intelligence literally was/is a part of the being of God and we were/are a part of it, too, creatio ex deo is a true doctrine.

Another way we are created out of the being of God is through the Light of Christ.  The Light of Christ is the (extended) body of God.  Through it He is able to both be in one single location at a time and also everywhere at once (omnipresent).  Although the Light of Christ is a creation of God, it has been endowed with all of His vast powers, knowledge and all other attributes in their fullness.  This is one of the reasons why the Light of Christ is indistinguishable to modern Christians from the real God that created it.  Nevertheless, as it is the arm of His power, extended throughout the Universe, it can be considered an extension of His very being, allowing Him to be both the one and the infinite at the same time.  It is the Light of Christ that has organized (creatio ex materia) and that maintains the entire Universe.  In this sense, creatio ex deo is a true doctrine:

Wherefore, I now send upon you another Comforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John.  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. This is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made.  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.  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: 3-13)

God does it all

To summarize, God splits the nothingness of outer darkess into its two component parts, spirit and element, bringing the single-mass nothingness (singular intelligence) into individual somethingnesses (a plurality of intelligences), from nonexistence into existence, placing the individual spirit and element bits within the growing sphere of light (the created Universe) and granting both components agency.  This creative act occurs at the lake of fire and brimstone, is in reality creatio ex nihilo and is ongoing.  As the singular nothingness was/is part of the being of God, this creative act is also creatio ex deo.

Once inside the sphere of light, split into spirit and element and granted agency, God organizes these fundamental bits into spirit and physical bodies.  This creative act is creatio ex materia and is ongoing.  As the Light of Christ is (essentially) part of the being of God (an extension of Him) and as we are organized (created) by and of the Light of Christ, it being in us, powering us and maintaining us (and all other things), this creative act is also creatio ex deo.

Previous Deep Waters article: Deep Waters:Lehi’s model of the universe

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Lakota independence—prophecy starting to be fulfilled?

Christian Kenny Heap brought to my attention the recent Lakota declaration of independence from the U.S. and I thought it was important enough news to merit a blog post. As I stated in my follow-up comment to his remark, it reminded me of a scripture:

The Lord said, “And it shall come to pass also that the remnants who are left of the land will marshal themselves, and shall become exceedingly angry, and shall vex the Gentiles with a sore vexation.” (D&C 87: 5. See also Micah 5: 8-15; 3 Ne. 16: 7-15; 3 Ne. 20: 15-21; 3 Ne. 21: 12-21; D&C 109: 65-67.)

In case you are not up to speed on what the Lakota nation is doing, read the FoxNews report, visit any of the Lakotah Oyate web sites (LakotahOyate.com, LakotahOyate.org and LakotahOyate.net), visit the Republic of Lakota web sites (RepublicOfLakota.com and LakotaFreedom.com), check out the WordPress blogs talking about Lakota, or just Ixquick “Lakota, independence” or some other term like that.

So, now that the Lakota nation has declared its independence, does this mean we are entering the time in history when the prophecies of the above listed scriptures will be fulfilled? My gut feeling (not inspiration or revelation, yet) is that both the Lakota secession and the Aztlan movement (Ixquick“Aztlan”) are pieces of the future (perhaps not-so-future?) fulfillment of these prophecies.

So, what do you, dear reader, see in these occurrences? Does the Spirit whisper that the departure of Lakota from the U.S. is a sign of the times to be examined, or is it nothing of any significance and to be ignored?

For me, this can play out any number of ways, but none of the peaceful ones seem likely.

First of all, the enemies of the U.S. would probably immediately jump on the legitimizing secession bandwagon, by recognizing the Lakota nation as a sovereign country. Apparently Russia is already considering this. If foreign countries recognize Lakota, it will be fuel to the fire if the U.S. decides to handle another bid at secession like the War of Northern Aggression (for Southerners) or the War Between The States (for some Southerners and some Northerners) or the Civil War (for Northerners), however you call that conflict. Even if the U.S. tries to handle the situation peacefully, by fighting it through the courts, the Lakota nation is pretty well grounded legally, and probably would win legally, but with recognition by other nations, the Lakota people will have already won the first battle in declaring their legitimacy as a sovereign nation. The recognition by other nations of the Lakota nation will but help to divide America into two parts: U.S. citizens and Lakota citizens. A divided nation is good if you have ideas of conquering it.

Secondly, there is a large amount of land involved, in which plenty of non-Lakota people live. These Americans “own” land, which apparently really belonged to the Lakota people, and when the Lakota nation starts issuing liens, what is going to be the reaction from these people? There is definitely going to be a whole lot of irate individuals as a result of this.

The Lakota are extending an invitation to all people, of any race, that they can come and live in their land tax-free, if they will renounce their U.S. citizenship. They are already issuing Lakota passports and Lakota driver’s licenses to accommodate people. How many people who have had it with U.S. taxation are going to take them up on this offer? The influx of people may be exceedingly great if the U.S. allows secession to go through peacefully. Only the threat of violence or illegitimacy from the U.S. might dissuade tax evaders and those who are tired of oppressive U.S. taxes (a great number of people) from becoming Lakota citizens.

If the U.S. decides to determine the right of secession by conflict, like Lincoln did, it will be facing an impoverished people who currently have nothing to live or die for. In other words, these people are destitute right now and may become galvanized into action by conflict. They have an extremely high suicide rate, indicating nothing to live for. If suddenly they have to fight for their land and freedom, the U.S. will have given them both a reason to live and a reason to die. Such an enemy will be on the defence, defending their lands, homes, wives, children, etc. (Just fill in Moroni’s whole title of liberty.)

There is also the problem of justification. Would the U.S. be justified in the eyes of God in attacking the Lakota nation? Is the Lakota nation justified in seceding from the U.S.? As LDS, we have modern scriptures that help us arrive at the correct answer to these questions, as the Lord has revealed his laws of justification in D&C 98: 33-38, as well as other places.

All in all, based upon the U.S. government’s past behavior when it comes to secession, a peaceful solution does not seem likely. Conflict seems probable. I do not expect the U.S. government to give up sizable chunks of real estate in 5 States and the accompanying tax revenue, nor allow itself to be drained of tax-paying citizens who renounce U.S. citizenship to live tax-free in another part of America, without objection. (The Lakota still live in America, so, it is not like they would be going to a totally foreign country or a completely foreign land.)

Finally, if the Lakota situation does erupt, Aztlan or other groups (such as Vermont secessionists) might see it as the opportune moment to take what they want of America. The potential for a firestorm is definitely here.

In case this comes up…

Yes, Russell Means, otherwise known as Oyate Wacinyapin, is part of the Lakota Freedom Delegation and is also the actor who starred in (among other movies) The Last of the Mohicans with Daniel Day-Lewis. Means played Chingachgook, the very last of the Mohicans, but in actuality, he “was born an Oglala/Lakota Sioux Indian,” according to IMDb (the Internet Movie Database.)

Next Anarchism/Anarchy article: The tribal nature of the gospel

Previous Anarchism/Anarchy article: A basic right denied

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist

Scriptural Discussion #6: Tribulation Upon Church

TRIBULATION UPON CHURCH

Peter said, “For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?” (1 Pet. 4: 17)

The Lord said, “That through my providence, notwithstanding the tribulation which shall descend upon you, that the church may stand independent above all other creatures beneath the celestial world;” (D&C 78: 14)

The Lord said, “Nevertheless, Zion shall escape if she observe to do all things whatsoever I have commanded her. But if she observe not to do whatsoever I have commanded her, I will visit her according to all her works, with sore affliction, with pestilence, with plague, with sword, with vengeance, with devouring fire.” (D&C 97: 25-26)

The Lord said, “Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord. And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord; first among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.” (D&C 112: 24-26)

Discuss.

Next Scriptural Discussion: #7 AFFLICTIONS—CAN BE SWALLOWED UP IN JOY OF CHRIST

Previous Scriptural Discussion: #5 TEACHERS—MUST BE SANCTIFIED

Complete List of Articles authored by LDS Anarchist