Blog

  • Helaman 13:9-10 — LeGrand Baker — Prophecy as testimony

    Helaman 13:9-10 — LeGrand Baker — Prophecy as testimony

    Helaman 13:9-10
    9 And four hundred years shall not pass away before I will cause that they shall be smitten; yea, I will visit them with the sword and with famine and with pestilence.
    10 Yea, I will visit them in my fierce anger, and there shall be those of the fourth generation who shall live, of your enemies, to behold your utter destruction; and this shall surely come except ye repent, saith the Lord; and those of the fourth generation shall visit your destruction.

    The timing of this prophecy was given asks interesting questions: It seems to say that if the people who are hearing Samuel do not repent then their great-great-great grandchildren will be destroyed. That really doesn’t seem to be very pressing or even all that relevant to the people he is talking to. Besides that, the modern reader who is reading the Book of Mormon for the umpteenth time knows that these people who refuse to repent will meet their own end when the earth expresses its anger just before the coming of the Savior and that there will be a millennial-like peace after that. Thus one has to ask, why is this prophecy relevant to the people who are hearing it? The answer is: so the righteous among the hearers will be able to warn those great-great-great grandchildren that the turmoil they are encountering in their lives was known by the Lord— and by his prophets— well before they had to face its dangers. That knowledge, that God is fully aware of their problems, encouraged and gave strength to the faithful of Mormon’s generation.

    While Mormon did not mention the prophecy as a source of encouragement, he did call attention to its fulfillment in his own lifetime, perhaps suggesting that the faithful need not be surprised at the depravity that reigned free in the land (Mormon 1:19).

    It appears that the Lord uses prophecies about the future for three separate purposes. One is to help prepare the faithful Saints so they will not be thrown off balance by events that are soon to come. An example is Samuel’s prophecy of the birth of the Savior which emboldened the faithful to stay true to their beliefs.

    Another example of a distant, but very explicit prophecy is in Revelation 11:2-13. There, two prophets will be killed in Jerusalem before the Savior comes to protect the Jews. The prophecy partly answers our curiosity about what will happen in the future, but will, no doubt, be a great comfort to those who have to live through the war and turmoil that is described there.

    A second reason is to give the Saints a sense of the ultimate triumph of the forces of righteousness over the forces of evil. By giving the faithful a glimpse of the chronology of future events, they can understand that whatever happens in their own times or even in their own lives, neither the difficulty nor the tragedy will have a permanent, eternal effect on their security and happiness.

    The third reason is the most important of all. As the angel explained to John the Beloved, “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy (Revelation 19:10.).” Mormon said it even more clearly:

    8 And Alma went and began to declare the word of God unto the church … according to the spirit of prophecy which was in him, according to the testimony of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who should come to redeem his people from their sins, and the holy order by which he was called. And thus it is written. Amen (Alma 6:8).

    As we see the prophecies fulfilled, or as the Spirit testifies to us that they have been or will yet be fulfilled, the Spirit also assures us that God is very much in charge, and however impossible it may seem to us just now, God will do everything to his ultimate glory and to our ultimate salvation.

  • Psalm 25 — LeGrand Baker– Poor and Meek

    Psalm 25 — LeGrand Baker– Poor and Meek

    This was written as a comment about 2 Nephi 30:7-18, but it is equally relevant to Psalms 37 and 25.

    2 Nephi 30:7-18
    7   And it shall come to pass that the Jews which are scattered also shall begin to believe in Christ; and they shall begin to gather in upon the face of the land; and as many as shall believe in Christ shall also become a delightsome people.
    8   And it shall come to pass that the Lord God shall commence his work among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, to bring about the restoration of his people upon the earth.
    9   And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth. And he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth; and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
    10   For the time speedily cometh that the Lord God shall cause a great division among the people, and the wicked will he destroy; and he will spare his people, yea, even if it so be that he must destroy the wicked by fire.
    11   And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
    12   And then shall the wolf dwell with the lamb; and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, and the calf, and the young lion, and the fatling, together; and a little child shall lead them.
    13   And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
    14   And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall
    put his hand on the cockatrice’s den.
    15   They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.
    16   Wherefore, the things of all nations shall be made known; yea, all things shall be made known unto the children of men.
    17   There is nothing which is secret save it shall be revealed; there is no work of darkness save it shall be made manifest in the light; and there is nothing which is sealed upon the earth save it shall be loosed.
    18   Wherefore, all things which have been revealed unto the children of men shall at that day be revealed; and Satan shall have power over the hearts of the children of men no more, for a long time. And now, my beloved brethren, I make an end of my sayings.

    In these few short verses Nephi carries us from the time of the gathering of the Jews to the beginning of the millennium. He goes so quickly that it almost causes one to try to catch him and ask, “You have just skipped through the events of my lifetime, but where am I in your story.”

    I suppose, if we could do that, he would respond, “I have told you already, that’s why we have read so much of Isaiah together.” At least, I think that’s what he might say, because as I read the parts of these verses which speak specifically of the members of Christ’s church, my mind moves back to Nephi’s emphasis on Isaiah, then, almost with transition, forward to the Beatitudes (for it’s all the same story). Now, as I sit here, my mind replaying some of the things Nephi has taught, I just go “WOW,” and wonder what to write to make that “WOW” intelligible to my friends.

    It seems to me that in these passages Nephi does not write about our times as much as he writes about us – individually. The verse I have in mind is the one which he quoted from Isaiah before (Isaiah 11:4 quoted in 2 Nephi 21:4), and which he now pulls from its original context to paraphrase again here. In Isaiah’s code words (as I read the words) Nephi sums up our lives and our missions. He paraphrases Isaiah, “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth.”(2 Ne. 30: 9a )

    I think what I would like to write today, is a review of the meaning of the code words, especially “poor,” “meek,” and “judge.” In looking at the meaning of “meek” we will have to look at other code words, like “way,” “path,” “secrets (sode),” and a few others. For some of you who have been a part of our Book of Mormon Project for about as long as I have, what I am going to write may contain nothing new. Some of you will recognize parts of this as being lifted almost verbatim from other things I have written. To you, I apologize for the redundancy, and suggest you may want to stop reading now. But for others of you, some of these ideas may be new, and may even have some value. I believe it is important in order to understand our verses, to observe that the two major code words which are used here are the same ones which are used in D&C 88:17. “And the redemption of the soul is through him that quickeneth all things, in whose bosom it is decreed that the poor and the meek of the earth shall inherit it.” The earth, as I understand that passage in its full context, was created, and will be celestialized, for the express purpose of being inhabited by the “poor” and the “meek.” Those are the same words which describe the people in our Book of Mormon verse. So our quest to understand either verse needs to begin with our discussing the answers to the questions: “Who are the ‘poor?’ and Who are the ‘meek’?”

    First, Who are the poor?

    The place to begin to look is in the Beatitudes (I will quote the ones in 3 Nephi 12 rather than in Matthew 5.), where verse three reads, “Yea, blesed are the poor in spirit who come unto me, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”

    Non-LDS scholars don’t know (and most are honest enough that they say they really don’t know) what “poor” means in the Beatitude, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, who come unto me, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” (3 Nephi version rather than the one in Matthew) However these scholars do insist that “poor” has nothing to do with poverty, or a lack of spirituality. The Anchor Bible translation uses ‘pious’ or God-fearing as a substitute for poor. That substitution makes sense in the first part of the verse, but it does not account for why the Saviour used “poor” as the requisite condition of those who will ultimately own the Kingdom of Heaven (It says, “theirs is the kingdom” – It does not say, “they shall be citizens of the kingdom”) People to whom kingdoms belong are called “kings” and “queens,” or, if it is an ecclesiastical kingdom, “priests,” and “priestesses.”

    Some scholars have noted that the first three Beatitudes seem to be something of a paraphrase of Isaiah 61:1-3, which speaks of a coronation ceremony, of comforting those who mourn, and of the “meek.” In fact, Isaiah 1:3 is a review of the ancient royal and priestly coronation ceremonies. It mentions a washing (symbolized by exchanging ashes for a crown), anointing, clothing, and giving of a new name (“called”). (See: Margaret Dee Bratcher, “Salvation Achieved, Isaiah 61:1-7, 65: 17-66:2,” in Review and Expositor, Spring, 1991, Vol. 88, No. 2, p. 177-187; Paul D. Hanson, Isaiah 40 – 66, Interpretation, A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, John Knox Press, 1995), p. 223-226; George A. Knight, The New Israel, A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 56–66 (Grand Rapids, Mich., Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1985) p. 50-57; Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40 – 66 (Philadelphia, Westminster Press, 1969), p. 364-367.)

    That coronation setting reenforces the idea that the “poor” to whom the kingdom of heaven belong, are its kings and queens rather than just its citizens, but it still doesn’t answer the question of why this adoptive royalty should be described by the word “poor.”

    I believe the Book of Mormon gives us the answer to that question by telling us the sequence of the Saviour’s teachings. Third Nephi reports that one of the first things he did was to instruct the people about a fundamental change in the law of sacrifice. He told them the only appropriate sacrifice would be their own broken hearts and contrite spirits. That was not a new teaching, it was also found in the Psalms. The thing which was new in the instruction was that the outward sacrifices were to be discontinued, where major importance would be placed on the inward sacrifices instead. Soon after giving these instructions he said, “Blessed are the poor in spirit….”

    (Other scriptures which suggest the same conclusion are: Psalms 34:18, Psalms 51:17, Isaiah 29:19, Isaiah 57:15, Isaiah 66:2, 2 Nephi 9:30, 2 Nephi 2:7, 2 Nephi 4:32, 2 Nephi 27:30, 2 Nephi 28:13, Helaman 8:15, 3 Nephi 9:20, 3 Nephi 12:19, Ether 4:15, Moroni 6:2, D&C 20:37, D&C 52:15, D&C 56:17-18, D&C 59:8, D&C 109:72 )

    It seems to me that one who has sacrificed a broken heart and contrite spirit can legitimately be called “poor” in the only sense which is perfectly consistent with the meaning of the first Beatitude. For that reason, I often read that Beatitude this way: Blessed are those who have sacrificed a broken heart and a contrite spirit, who come unto Christ, for they are the kings and queens, priests and priestesses in the Kingdom of God. At least, I think that is what it means.

    If I am correct, it squares well with the statement, “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor,” because ‘righteousness’ denotes the propriety of temple ordinances and covenants. Let me explain.

    The word “righteousness” is the English rendition of Zadok if it is a proper name, or zedek if it is an adjective as it is in words like Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”). The man Zadok was the High Priest who anointed Solomon to be king, and who later presided at Solomon’s Temple. After his death, according to tradition, all the legitimate High Priests who presided at the Temple (until sometime after the Babylonian captivity when the office of High Priest became a political appointment) were descendants of Zadok. Thus, to do something “in zedek-ness” or “with zedek-ness” means to do it correctly, in the manner of the High Priest. That is, to do it with the right authority, dressed the right way, in the correct manner, in the right place, and at the right time. Thus the words, ‘righteous’ and ‘righteousness’ have to do with the correctness of the rites of the ancient Israelite temples.

    “Judge” is also an important word which has both kingship and temple connotations. To judge can mean to condemn, but it can also mean to justify. It can mean to choose or select (as judging the best cake in a baking contest at a county fair) It can also mean to establish a standard of excellence by which one may conduct oneself, and to help one adhere to that standard.

    It seems to me that what Nephi’s “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor,” is saying this: the criteria with which the Lord will judge (justify, select, give directions to) those who have sacrificed a broken hart and contrite spirit, will be ‘Zadok-ness’ — that criteria which is established by the covenants and ordinances of the temple.

    Now let’s look at the next phrase, “and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth.” This statement seems to be similar in meaning the other one. Again we must go back to where we began before, with the understanding that the earth was prepared so the ‘poor’ and the ‘meek’ may inherit it. And, once again one must go to the Beatitudes to discover the meaning of the word “meek.”

    The Beatitude in question is “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” It says the same thing as D&C 88 and is lifted almost verbatim from the Psalms. In the scriptures, when those scriptures speak in a temple setting, the word “meek” seems always to mean the same thing – and that meaning is not “humble,” and it is not “timid.” Some people choose to interpret this Beatitude is if it said, “Only non-self- assertive people will inherit the earth,” with the implied, sometimes stated quip, “and they will have to inherit it, because that’s the only way they can get it.” Those folks miss the point. The scriptures suggest that the word “meek” is the very opposite of a lack of assertiveness, and that the meek do not inherit the earth by default, but it is theirs as a legal heritage – it belongs to them by right. (Again I refer you to D&C 88 where the words “poor” and “meek” are words which describe the people in this world who will ultimately become celestial persons.) – and for whom the celestial earth will be created.

    That use of “meek” is consistent with the way the word is used elsewhere in the scriptures. An example is in the coronation passages of Isaiah 61 we have already referred to. Isaiah wrote that the Lord was anointed “to preach good tidings to the meek.” Joseph F. Smith quotes that passage and also says that among those to whom the Lord preached were “the noble and great ones who were chosen in the beginning to be rulers in the Church of God.” (D&C 138: 42, 55) So, for those people at least, the quality of “noble and greatness” and the quality of “meekness” are apparently represented as being the same quality. This is also shown in the Bible where we learn, “the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth. (Numbers 12:3) Those who are “meek” are meek before the Lord. For example, in my view, Abinadi, standing defiantly before king Noah while delivering the Lord’s message to him and his fellows, is a splendid example of true meekness. Abinadi’s “meekness” is descriptive of his attitude toward God, but not of his attitude toward men.

    One is meek before the Lord, when he keeps the covenants he has made with the Lord, that is, when one obeys the instructions he receives from the Holy Ghost about what to do in order to keep those covenants. This idea is clearly taught in the scriptures.

    The Beatitude “Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth,” seems to be a composite of two Psalms, which, together, speak with amazing power. The Psalm from which the Saviour is actually quoting in the Beatitude is 37:11. It context in reads:

    7   Rest in the LORD, and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his [his own, rather than the Lord’s ] way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass .
    8   Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.
    9   For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.
    10   For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.
    11   But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace (Psalm 37:7-11) .

    To “wait” means to be to wait, liking siting at a bus stop and waiting for the bus to come. The implications of that are clarified in Psalm 25. I’ll show you when we get there. For the present let’s just observe that it is apparent from that scripture that to “wait on the Lord” means to be alert to keep the covenants which one made with him at the Council in Heaven and patiently wait for him to fulfill his part.

    Here in our present Psalm (37:11) the important relationship of the Psalms with the Beatitudes is shown in more than in the fact that the Lord quoted the Psalm almost verbatim. Verse 11 reads, “But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.”

    In the Beatitudes, the Saviour not only quotes the first part of that verse, but he quotes it in its own sequential context. Notice the sequence in the Beatitudes:

    5   And blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. ….
    8   And blessed are all the pure in heart, for they shall see God
    9   And blessed are all the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.

    The key to the meaning of “peacemakers,” is Mormon’s introductory statements on the first page of Moroni 7.

    In that sequence, verse 8 brings one into the presence of God, and verse 9 sits one on the royal throne of God as his legitimate heir. Please let me explain. The coronation setting of the Beatitudes was established in the first three verses, as we have already mentioned. In verse 9 the subject is given a new name or king name, which is “child of God” (“…for they shall be called ‘the children of God’.”). A “child” is a legitimate heir. If such a new-name, or king-name, is found, as this one is, in a coronation context, one can guess that the name “child” probably suggests that the person is being recognized as a legitimate heir to the throne. It appears that in the Beatitudes the king-name “child of God” occurs just as it does in the final anointing rites in the kingship sequence of the ancient New Year’s festival, as suggested in Psalm 2:7. Some scholars believe that in the ancient Israelite New Year’s festival, the final anointing of the king was apparently a dual ordinance, both of adoption and coronation. It had to be, they assert, because anyone who was anointed king, and who sat upon the throne, but who was not a legitimate child, would be a usurper. It is a question of legitimacy. Before one can sit upon the throne, one must be adopted as a legitimate heir. In the ancient coronation ceremony, the king-apparent had first to be acknowledged as a child of God, before he could set upon the throne of God. Thus the anointing ordinance answered both needs. The other Psalm which the Saviour’s Beatitude about meekness refers to is 25:9-14. Even though the direct quote is not there, in many ways this psalm is even more explicit than the other. Let me quote it all to you, then look at it more closely.

    9   The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way.
    10   All the paths of the LORD are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.
    11   For thy name’s sake, O LORD, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.
    12   What man is he that feareth the LORD? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.
    13   His soul shall dwell at ease; and his seed shall inherit the earth.
    14   The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant (Psalm 25:9-14).

    Lets begin by looking closely at the concluding verse, 14, then go back and examine the other verses in light of that conclusion. It reads, “The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.”

    The word “secret” is the same Hebrew word as in Amos 3:7, which reads “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” The word translated ‘secret’ is the Hebrew word SOD (“sode” in Strong). It means the secrets or the decisions of a council. In these and similar contexts, it refers to the decisions of the Council in Heaven. [Raymond E. Brown, The Semitic Background of the Term “Mystery” in the New Testament (Philadelphia, Fortress Press,  1968),  2-6.]

    What Amos says, then, is that the Lord will not do anything until after he recalls to the prophet the covenants and decisions made in Council. What our Psalm says is that the Lord will teach the decisions of the Council to those who fear (respect) him, and “will shew them his covenant.” I understand that to mean that God, by the power of the Spirit, will teach each individual the covenant he made in the pre-mortal existence, relative to that person’s expectations of the mission he would do while on the earth. The psalm introduces that idea by associating the word “meek” with those who remember and keep that covenant. The remembering comes as a gift from God; the keeping is a matter of one’s faith and integrity.

    Now lets re-read the portion of Psalm 25 which is quoted above. I’ll put the words of the Psalm in caps and my comments in lower case letters.

    The following verses are from Psalm 25:

    9    “THE MEEK [those who keep their eternal covenants ] WILL HE [the Lord ] GUIDE IN JUDGEMENT,” [To judge righteously, that is to be a righteous judge, is the first and most important function of a king. It is represented in verse 7 of the Beatitudes, immediately before one sees God, as “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.” If the meek are to be the kings and priests of a celestial world, they must learn how to judge righteously. To not learn to judge righteously, is to disqualify oneself. Those who keep their covenants can learn that requisite lesson, because the Lord will be their “guide in judgment.” ]

    9-b    “AND THE MEEK WILL HE TEACH IN HIS WAY.” [In a temple context, “way” is a code word which usually means the sequence of the ordinances and covenants. (The Beatitudes, especially as they are reported in the Book of Mormon, may thus be seen as a quick map of the “way.”) ]

    10    “ALL THE PATHS [same code meaning as “way” ] OF THE LORD ARE MERCY [Another reference to the primary responsibility of kingship ] AND TRUTH [ Truth is knowledge of reality – things as they were, are, and will be (D&C 93). So, the “path” of kingship includes learning judgement which is based on an understanding of reality.]

    10-b    UNTO SUCH AS KEEP HIS COVENANTS [ The covenants, in this context, would be the ones which one made at the Council and which one re-makes in this world. ] AND HIS TESTIMONIES. [Scholars aren’t sure what “testimonies” mean in this and similar contexts. Some believe it was something which was worn on the body, and that the wearing of it was a testimony of the covenants which one had made.]

    11    “FOR THY NAME’S SAKE, O LORD” [God has many names, just as covenant people have. New Names are always associated with covenants (For example, one takes upon oneself the name of Christ when one is baptized and takes the sacrament.) Therefore, in a temple context, one can almost always replace the word “name” with the word “covenant” in a scripture without changing the meaning of the scripture. In this instance that is true. The name is question is “LORD,” i.e. “Jehovah,” which the scriptures and our own Bible’s dictionary suggest is the Saviour’s king-name or covenant-name. In which case “Jehovah” is probably the new name given him when he was anointed King of Israel at the Council. (Our Bible Dictionary reads, “Jehovah. The covenant or proper name of the God of Israel.” p. 710). The phrase, “for thy name’s sake” would mean, “for the sake of the mutual covenant which we made at the Council, and which is represented by your king-name, Jehovah.”]

    11-b    “PARDON MINE INIQUITY; FOR IT IS GREAT.” [This is an obvious reference to the powers of the atonement. At the New Year’s festival, before one could be anointed king, the king- designate had to be ceremonially cleansed (washed and pardoned) before he could continue in the sequence of ordinances and covenants. In our case, the Saviour’s atonement must be applied for the same reason.]

    The next three verses of our Psalm are a reiteration of the blessings of those who receive the ordinances and covenants already referred to. These verses begin with the question,

    12    “WHAT MAN IS HE THAT FEARETH [love, respects, as being in “awe” of, gives honor to] THE LORD?” Then it answers its own question:

    12-b    “HIM [the man] SHALL HE [God] TEACH IN THE WAY [ I presume “in the way” means in the way. In other words, as one moves through the sequence called the “way,” God will teach him, not only the sequence, but also the meaning and significance of the steps.]

    12-c    HE SHALL CHOOSE.” [As I read it, these words mean God will teach the man “in” the “way” so the man may know which options he should choose in order for him to have both the means and the opportunity to keep the covenants he made in Council.]

    13   “HIS SOUL SHALL DWELL AT EASE; AND HIS SEED SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH.” [This is an enlargement of the promise we read in Psalm 37. Here the blessing that one’s soul will “dwell at ease” is tied to a further declaration that “his children shall inherit the earth.” Thus, the Beatitude, “Blessed are the meek,” carries with it all the promises of exaltation in the eternal bonds of family.

    14    “THE SECRET [ sode — decisions of the Council ]OF THE LORD IS WITH THEM [the meek ]THAT FEAR [ respect, honor ] HIM; AND HE [the Lord] WILL SHOW THEM [the meek ]HIS COVENANT.” [which, I presume, means: The Lord will show him the covenant assignments made at the Council – and also remind him of the covenant provisions made at the Council which would guarantee that one would be able to fulfil those assignments]

    As a review, let me get out of the way so you can read the scriptures as they are written, without all the stuff I put in between. They simply say,

    7   Rest in the LORD, and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass.
    8   Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.
    9   For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.
    10   For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.
    11 But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace (Psalm 37:7-11) .

    9 The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way.
    10 All the paths of the LORD are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.
    11 For thy name’s sake, O LORD, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.
    12 What man is he that feareth the LORD? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.
    13 His soul shall dwell at ease; and his seed shall inherit the earth.
    14 The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant ( Psalm 25:9-14).

    Jesus summed all that up by saying simply, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth..”

    If one adds to that, Albright and Mann’s statement that the classic Greek word translated “blessed” literally means “in the state of the gods,.” (Anchor Bible, Matthew, p. 45, fn 3.), what we hear the Saviour saying is this:

    “In the state of the gods are those who keep their eternal covenants, for it is they and their children who shall inherit the celestial earth.”

    Now let us return to our original Book of Mormon scripture where this discussion began, “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth.”

    The direct object of ‘judge’ is ‘the poor’, but the direct object of ‘reprove’ is not given. Presumably it is also the poor. In which case the words might be read, “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and reprove [the poor] with equity for [the sake of] the meek of the earth.”

    I think what that says is that the Lord will judge the poor by the covenants they have made and that he will direct the affairs of the meek so they may fulfill those covenants, in order that the Lords purposes on this earth may be fulfilled. That, you will recall, is what Ephesians chapter one is all about.

  • 3 Nephi 12 3, 5 — LeGrand Baker– Poor and Meek

    3 Nephi 12 3, 5 — LeGrand Baker– Poor and Meek

    This was written as a comment about 2 Nephi 30:7-18, but it is equally relevant to those two verses in the Beatitudes: “Blessed are the poor is spirit,” and “Blessed are the meek.”

    2 Nephi 30:7-18
    7   And it shall come to pass that the Jews which are scattered also shall begin to believe in Christ; and they shall begin to gather in upon the face of the land; and as many as shall believe in Christ shall also become a delightsome people.
    8   And it shall come to pass that the Lord God shall commence his work among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, to bring about the restoration of his people upon the earth.
    9   And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth. And he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth; and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.
    10   For the time speedily cometh that the Lord God shall cause a great division among the people, and the wicked will he destroy; and he will spare his people, yea, even if it so be that he must destroy the wicked by fire.
    11   And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.
    12   And then shall the wolf dwell with the lamb; and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, and the calf, and the young lion, and the fatling, together; and a little child shall lead them.
    13   And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
    14   And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall
    put his hand on the cockatrice’s den.
    15   They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.
    16   Wherefore, the things of all nations shall be made known; yea, all things shall be made known unto the children of men.
    17   There is nothing which is secret save it shall be revealed; there is no work of darkness save it shall be made manifest in the light; and there is nothing which is sealed upon the earth save it shall be loosed.
    18   Wherefore, all things which have been revealed unto the children of men shall at that day be revealed; and Satan shall have power over the hearts of the children of men no more, for a long time. And now, my beloved brethren, I make an end of my sayings.

    In these few short verses Nephi carries us from the time of the gathering of the Jews to the beginning of the millennium. He goes so quickly that it almost causes one to try to catch him and ask, “You have just skipped through the events of my lifetime, but where am I in your story.”

    I suppose, if we could do that, he would respond, “I have told you already, that’s why we have read so much of Isaiah together.” At least, I think that’s what he might say, because as I read the parts of these verses which speak specifically of the members of Christ’s church, my mind moves back to Nephi’s emphasis on Isaiah, then, almost with transition, forward to the Beatitudes (for it’s all the same story). Now, as I sit here, my mind replaying some of the things Nephi has taught, I just go “WOW,” and wonder what to write to make that “WOW” intelligible to my friends.

    It seems to me that in these passages Nephi does not write about our times as much as he writes about us – individually. The verse I have in mind is the one which he quoted from Isaiah before (Isaiah 11:4 quoted in 2 Nephi 21:4), and which he now pulls from its original context to paraphrase again here. In Isaiah’s code words (as I read the words) Nephi sums up our lives and our missions. He paraphrases Isaiah, “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth.”(2 Ne. 30: 9a )

    I think what I would like to write today, is a review of the meaning of the code words, especially “poor,” “meek,” and “judge.” In looking at the meaning of “meek” we will have to look at other code words, like “way,” “path,” “secrets (sode),” and a few others. For some of you who have been a part of our Book of Mormon Project for about as long as I have, what I am going to write may contain nothing new. Some of you will recognize parts of this as being lifted almost verbatim from other things I have written. To you, I apologize for the redundancy, and suggest you may want to stop reading now. But for others of you, some of these ideas may be new, and may even have some value. I believe it is important in order to understand our verses, to observe that the two major code words which are used here are the same ones which are used in D&C 88:17. “And the redemption of the soul is through him that quickeneth all things, in whose bosom it is decreed that the poor and the meek of the earth shall inherit it.” The earth, as I understand that passage in its full context, was created, and will be celestialized, for the express purpose of being inhabited by the “poor” and the “meek.” Those are the same words which describe the people in our Book of Mormon verse. So our quest to understand either verse needs to begin with our discussing the answers to the questions: “Who are the ‘poor?’ and Who are the ‘meek’?”

    First, Who are the poor?

    The place to begin to look is in the Beatitudes (I will quote the ones in 3 Nephi 12 rather than in Matthew 5.), where verse three reads, “Yea, blesed are the poor in spirit who come unto me, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”

    Non-LDS scholars don’t know (and most are honest enough that they say they really don’t know) what “poor” means in the Beatitude, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, who come unto me, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” (3 Nephi version rather than the one in Matthew) However these scholars do insist that “poor” has nothing to do with poverty, or a lack of spirituality. The Anchor Bible translation uses ‘pious’ or God-fearing as a substitute for poor. That substitution makes sense in the first part of the verse, but it does not account for why the Saviour used “poor” as the requisite condition of those who will ultimately own the Kingdom of Heaven (It says, “theirs is the kingdom” – It does not say, “they shall be citizens of the kingdom”) People to whom kingdoms belong are called “kings” and “queens,” or, if it is an ecclesiastical kingdom, “priests,” and “priestesses.”

    Some scholars have noted that the first three Beatitudes seem to be something of a paraphrase of Isaiah 61:1-3, which speaks of a coronation ceremony, of comforting those who mourn, and of the “meek.” In fact, Isaiah 1:3 is a review of the ancient royal and priestly coronation ceremonies. It mentions a washing (symbolized by exchanging ashes for a crown), anointing, clothing, and giving of a new name (“called”). (See: Margaret Dee Bratcher, “Salvation Achieved, Isaiah 61:1-7, 65: 17-66:2,” in Review and Expositor, Spring, 1991, Vol. 88, No. 2, p. 177-187; Paul D. Hanson, Isaiah 40 – 66, Interpretation, A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville, John Knox Press, 1995), p. 223-226; George A. Knight, The New Israel, A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 56–66 (Grand Rapids, Mich., Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1985) p. 50-57; Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40 – 66 (Philadelphia, Westminster Press, 1969), p. 364-367.)

    That coronation setting reenforces the idea that the “poor” to whom the kingdom of heaven belong, are its kings and queens rather than just its citizens, but it still doesn’t answer the question of why this adoptive royalty should be described by the word “poor.”

    I believe the Book of Mormon gives us the answer to that question by telling us the sequence of the Saviour’s teachings. Third Nephi reports that one of the first things he did was to instruct the people about a fundamental change in the law of sacrifice. He told them the only appropriate sacrifice would be their own broken hearts and contrite spirits. That was not a new teaching, it was also found in the Psalms. The thing which was new in the instruction was that the outward sacrifices were to be discontinued, where major importance would be placed on the inward sacrifices instead. Soon after giving these instructions he said, “Blessed are the poor in spirit….”

    (Other scriptures which suggest the same conclusion are: Psalms 34:18, Psalms 51:17, Isaiah 29:19, Isaiah 57:15, Isaiah 66:2, 2 Nephi 9:30, 2 Nephi 2:7, 2 Nephi 4:32, 2 Nephi 27:30, 2 Nephi 28:13, Helaman 8:15, 3 Nephi 9:20, 3 Nephi 12:19, Ether 4:15, Moroni 6:2, D&C 20:37, D&C 52:15, D&C 56:17-18, D&C 59:8, D&C 109:72 )

    It seems to me that one who has sacrificed a broken heart and contrite spirit can legitimately be called “poor” in the only sense which is perfectly consistent with the meaning of the first Beatitude. For that reason, I often read that Beatitude this way: Blessed are those who have sacrificed a broken heart and a contrite spirit, who come unto Christ, for they are the kings and queens, priests and priestesses in the Kingdom of God. At least, I think that is what it means.

    If I am correct, it squares well with the statement, “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor,” because ‘righteousness’ denotes the propriety of temple ordinances and covenants. Let me explain.

    The word “righteousness” is the English rendition of Zadok if it is a proper name, or zedek if it is an adjective as it is in words like Melchizedek (“king of righteousness” or “my king is righteous”). The man Zadok was the High Priest who anointed Solomon to be king, and who later presided at Solomon’s Temple. After his death, according to tradition, all the legitimate High Priests who presided at the Temple (until sometime after the Babylonian captivity when the office of High Priest became a political appointment) were descendants of Zadok. Thus, to do something “in zedek-ness” or “with zedek-ness” means to do it correctly, in the manner of the High Priest. That is, to do it with the right authority, dressed the right way, in the correct manner, in the right place, and at the right time. Thus the words, ‘righteous’ and ‘righteousness’ have to do with the correctness of the rites of the ancient Israelite temples.

    “Judge” is also an important word which has both kingship and temple connotations. To judge can mean to condemn, but it can also mean to justify. It can mean to choose or select (as judging the best cake in a baking contest at a county fair) It can also mean to establish a standard of excellence by which one may conduct oneself, and to help one adhere to that standard.

    It seems to me that what Nephi’s “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor,” is saying this: the criteria with which the Lord will judge (justify, select, give directions to) those who have sacrificed a broken hart and contrite spirit, will be ‘Zadok-ness’ — that criteria which is established by the covenants and ordinances of the temple.

    Now let’s look at the next phrase, “and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth.” This statement seems to be similar in meaning the other one. Again we must go back to where we began before, with the understanding that the earth was prepared so the ‘poor’ and the ‘meek’ may inherit it. And, once again one must go to the Beatitudes to discover the meaning of the word “meek.”

    The Beatitude in question is “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” It says the same thing as D&C 88 and is lifted almost verbatim from the Psalms. In the scriptures, when those scriptures speak in a temple setting, the word “meek” seems always to mean the same thing – and that meaning is not “humble,” and it is not “timid.” Some people choose to interpret this Beatitude is if it said, “Only non-self- assertive people will inherit the earth,” with the implied, sometimes stated quip, “and they will have to inherit it, because that’s the only way they can get it.” Those folks miss the point. The scriptures suggest that the word “meek” is the very opposite of a lack of assertiveness, and that the meek do not inherit the earth by default, but it is theirs as a legal heritage – it belongs to them by right. (Again I refer you to D&C 88 where the words “poor” and “meek” are words which describe the people in this world who will ultimately become celestial persons.) – and for whom the celestial earth will be created.

    That use of “meek” is consistent with the way the word is used elsewhere in the scriptures. An example is in the coronation passages of Isaiah 61 we have already referred to. Isaiah wrote that the Lord was anointed “to preach good tidings to the meek.” Joseph F. Smith quotes that passage and also says that among those to whom the Lord preached were “the noble and great ones who were chosen in the beginning to be rulers in the Church of God.” (D&C 138: 42, 55) So, for those people at least, the quality of “noble and greatness” and the quality of “meekness” are apparently represented as being the same quality. This is also shown in the Bible where we learn, “the man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth. (Numbers 12:3) Those who are “meek” are meek before the Lord. For example, in my view, Abinadi, standing defiantly before king Noah while delivering the Lord’s message to him and his fellows, is a splendid example of true meekness. Abinadi’s “meekness” is descriptive of his attitude toward God, but not of his attitude toward men.

    One is meek before the Lord, when he keeps the covenants he has made with the Lord, that is, when one obeys the instructions he receives from the Holy Ghost about what to do in order to keep those covenants. This idea is clearly taught in the scriptures.

    The Beatitude “Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth,” seems to be a composite of two Psalms, which, together, speak with amazing power. The Psalm from which the Saviour is actually quoting in the Beatitude is 37:11. It context in reads:

    7   Rest in the LORD, and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his [his own, rather than the Lord’s ] way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass .
    8   Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.
    9   For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.
    10   For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.
    11   But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace (Psalm 37:7-11) .

    To “wait” means to be to wait, liking siting at a bus stop and waiting for the bus to come. The implications of that are clarified in Psalm 25. I’ll show you when we get there. For the present let’s just observe that it is apparent from that scripture that to “wait on the Lord” means to be alert to keep the covenants which one made with him at the Council in Heaven and patiently wait for him to fulfill his part.

    Here in our present Psalm (37:11) the important relationship of the Psalms with the Beatitudes is shown in more than in the fact that the Lord quoted the Psalm almost verbatim. Verse 11 reads, “But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace.”

    In the Beatitudes, the Saviour not only quotes the first part of that verse, but he quotes it in its own sequential context. Notice the sequence in the Beatitudes:

    5   And blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. ….
    8   And blessed are all the pure in heart, for they shall see God
    9   And blessed are all the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.

    The key to the meaning of “peacemakers,” is Mormon’s introductory statements on the first page of Moroni 7.

    In that sequence, verse 8 brings one into the presence of God, and verse 9 sits one on the royal throne of God as his legitimate heir. Please let me explain. The coronation setting of the Beatitudes was established in the first three verses, as we have already mentioned. In verse 9 the subject is given a new name or king name, which is “child of God” (“…for they shall be called ‘the children of God’.”). A “child” is a legitimate heir. If such a new-name, or king-name, is found, as this one is, in a coronation context, one can guess that the name “child” probably suggests that the person is being recognized as a legitimate heir to the throne. It appears that in the Beatitudes the king-name “child of God” occurs just as it does in the final anointing rites in the kingship sequence of the ancient New Year’s festival, as suggested in Psalm 2:7. Some scholars believe that in the ancient Israelite New Year’s festival, the final anointing of the king was apparently a dual ordinance, both of adoption and coronation. It had to be, they assert, because anyone who was anointed king, and who sat upon the throne, but who was not a legitimate child, would be a usurper. It is a question of legitimacy. Before one can sit upon the throne, one must be adopted as a legitimate heir. In the ancient coronation ceremony, the king-apparent had first to be acknowledged as a child of God, before he could set upon the throne of God. Thus the anointing ordinance answered both needs. The other Psalm which the Saviour’s Beatitude about meekness refers to is 25:9-14. Even though the direct quote is not there, in many ways this psalm is even more explicit than the other. Let me quote it all to you, then look at it more closely.

    9   The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way.
    10   All the paths of the LORD are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.
    11   For thy name’s sake, O LORD, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.
    12   What man is he that feareth the LORD? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.
    13   His soul shall dwell at ease; and his seed shall inherit the earth.
    14   The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant (Psalm 25:9-14).

    Lets begin by looking closely at the concluding verse, 14, then go back and examine the other verses in light of that conclusion. It reads, “The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.”

    The word “secret” is the same Hebrew word as in Amos 3:7, which reads “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” The word translated ‘secret’ is the Hebrew word SOD (“sode” in Strong). It means the secrets or the decisions of a council. In these and similar contexts, it refers to the decisions of the Council in Heaven. [Raymond E. Brown, The Semitic Background of the Term “Mystery” in the New Testament (Philadelphia, Fortress Press,  1968),  2-6.]

    What Amos says, then, is that the Lord will not do anything until after he recalls to the prophet the covenants and decisions made in Council. What our Psalm says is that the Lord will teach the decisions of the Council to those who fear (respect) him, and “will shew them his covenant.” I understand that to mean that God, by the power of the Spirit, will teach each individual the covenant he made in the pre-mortal existence, relative to that person’s expectations of the mission he would do while on the earth. The psalm introduces that idea by associating the word “meek” with those who remember and keep that covenant. The remembering comes as a gift from God; the keeping is a matter of one’s faith and integrity.

    Now lets re-read the portion of Psalm 25 which is quoted above. I’ll put the words of the Psalm in caps and my comments in lower case letters.

    The following verses are from Psalm 25:

    9    “THE MEEK [those who keep their eternal covenants ] WILL HE [the Lord ] GUIDE IN JUDGEMENT,” [To judge righteously, that is to be a righteous judge, is the first and most important function of a king. It is represented in verse 7 of the Beatitudes, immediately before one sees God, as “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.” If the meek are to be the kings and priests of a celestial world, they must learn how to judge righteously. To not learn to judge righteously, is to disqualify oneself. Those who keep their covenants can learn that requisite lesson, because the Lord will be their “guide in judgment.” ]

    9-b    “AND THE MEEK WILL HE TEACH IN HIS WAY.” [In a temple context, “way” is a code word which usually means the sequence of the ordinances and covenants. (The Beatitudes, especially as they are reported in the Book of Mormon, may thus be seen as a quick map of the “way.”) ]

    10    “ALL THE PATHS [same code meaning as “way” ] OF THE LORD ARE MERCY [Another reference to the primary responsibility of kingship ] AND TRUTH [ Truth is knowledge of reality – things as they were, are, and will be (D&C 93). So, the “path” of kingship includes learning judgement which is based on an understanding of reality.]

    10-b    UNTO SUCH AS KEEP HIS COVENANTS [ The covenants, in this context, would be the ones which one made at the Council and which one re-makes in this world. ] AND HIS TESTIMONIES. [Scholars aren’t sure what “testimonies” mean in this and similar contexts. Some believe it was something which was worn on the body, and that the wearing of it was a testimony of the covenants which one had made.]

    11    “FOR THY NAME’S SAKE, O LORD” [God has many names, just as covenant people have. New Names are always associated with covenants (For example, one takes upon oneself the name of Christ when one is baptized and takes the sacrament.) Therefore, in a temple context, one can almost always replace the word “name” with the word “covenant” in a scripture without changing the meaning of the scripture. In this instance that is true. The name is question is “LORD,” i.e. “Jehovah,” which the scriptures and our own Bible’s dictionary suggest is the Saviour’s king-name or covenant-name. In which case “Jehovah” is probably the new name given him when he was anointed King of Israel at the Council. (Our Bible Dictionary reads, “Jehovah. The covenant or proper name of the God of Israel.” p. 710). The phrase, “for thy name’s sake” would mean, “for the sake of the mutual covenant which we made at the Council, and which is represented by your king-name, Jehovah.”]

    11-b    “PARDON MINE INIQUITY; FOR IT IS GREAT.” [This is an obvious reference to the powers of the atonement. At the New Year’s festival, before one could be anointed king, the king- designate had to be ceremonially cleansed (washed and pardoned) before he could continue in the sequence of ordinances and covenants. In our case, the Saviour’s atonement must be applied for the same reason.]

    The next three verses of our Psalm are a reiteration of the blessings of those who receive the ordinances and covenants already referred to. These verses begin with the question,

    12    “WHAT MAN IS HE THAT FEARETH [love, respects, as being in “awe” of, gives honor to] THE LORD?” Then it answers its own question:

    12-b    “HIM [the man] SHALL HE [God] TEACH IN THE WAY [ I presume “in the way” means in the way. In other words, as one moves through the sequence called the “way,” God will teach him, not only the sequence, but also the meaning and significance of the steps.]

    12-c    HE SHALL CHOOSE.” [As I read it, these words mean God will teach the man “in” the “way” so the man may know which options he should choose in order for him to have both the means and the opportunity to keep the covenants he made in Council.]

    13   “HIS SOUL SHALL DWELL AT EASE; AND HIS SEED SHALL INHERIT THE EARTH.” [This is an enlargement of the promise we read in Psalm 37. Here the blessing that one’s soul will “dwell at ease” is tied to a further declaration that “his children shall inherit the earth.” Thus, the Beatitude, “Blessed are the meek,” carries with it all the promises of exaltation in the eternal bonds of family.

    14    “THE SECRET [ sode — decisions of the Council ]OF THE LORD IS WITH THEM [the meek ]THAT FEAR [ respect, honor ] HIM; AND HE [the Lord] WILL SHOW THEM [the meek ]HIS COVENANT.” [which, I presume, means: The Lord will show him the covenant assignments made at the Council – and also remind him of the covenant provisions made at the Council which would guarantee that one would be able to fulfil those assignments]

    As a review, let me get out of the way so you can read the scriptures as they are written, without all the stuff I put in between. They simply say,

    7   Rest in the LORD, and wait patiently for him: fret not thyself because of him who prospereth in his way, because of the man who bringeth wicked devices to pass.
    8   Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.
    9   For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth.
    10   For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be: yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be.
    11 But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace (Psalm 37:7-11) .

    9 The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way.
    10 All the paths of the LORD are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies.
    11 For thy name’s sake, O LORD, pardon mine iniquity; for it is great.
    12 What man is he that feareth the LORD? him shall he teach in the way that he shall choose.
    13 His soul shall dwell at ease; and his seed shall inherit the earth.
    14 The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant ( Psalm 25:9-14).

    Jesus summed all that up by saying simply, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth..”

    If one adds to that, Albright and Mann’s statement that the classic Greek word translated “blessed” literally means “in the state of the gods,.” (Anchor Bible, Matthew, p. 45, fn 3.), what we hear the Saviour saying is this:

    “In the state of the gods are those who keep their eternal covenants, for it is they and their children who shall inherit the celestial earth.”

    Now let us return to our original Book of Mormon scripture where this discussion began, “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth.”

    The direct object of ‘judge’ is ‘the poor’, but the direct object of ‘reprove’ is not given. Presumably it is also the poor. In which case the words might be read, “And with righteousness shall the Lord God judge the poor, and reprove [the poor] with equity for [the sake of] the meek of the earth.”

    I think what that says is that the Lord will judge the poor by the covenants they have made and that he will direct the affairs of the meek so they may fulfill those covenants, in order that the Lords purposes on this earth may be fulfilled. That, you will recall, is what Ephesians chapter one is all about.

  • D&C 88:1-32 – LeGrand Baker – “that they might have joy”

    D&C 88:1-32 – LeGrand Baker – “that they might have joy”

    Lehi teaches us:

    25  Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy (2 Nephi 2:25).

    Probably more than any other passage in the Book of Mormon, this verse has become a cliché among Mormon people. I once heard someone say that the sentence was a bit awkward, and wondered why Lehi hadn’t just said “Adam fell so men could live happily.” His point was well taken: If one is going to trivialize ideas which are most profound and most sacred, one may as well do it in a way that makes perfect sense, even if the sense is only minimally associated with the intent of the original text.

    “To Be” and other forms of the present tense “be” verb (especially “am” and “is”) are the strongest words in the English language. Examples are the way God speaks of himself: “I Am,” and the way we speak of him: “He is.” It is in that context that one must understand Lehi’s “that man might BE.”

    “To be” is different from “to live.” “To live” is only to be alive and that only suggests one aspect of Being. Shakespeare, in Hamlet’s most famous soliloquy, struggles with the question of the difference between living and “being.”

    To be, or not to be – that is the question.
    Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
    The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
    Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
    And by opposing end them. To die, to sleep–
    No more, and by a sleep to say we end
    The heartache and the thousand natural shocks
    That flesh is heir to. ‘Tis a consummation
    Devoutly to be wished. To die, to sleep,
    To sleep – perchance to dream. Aye, there’s the rub,
    For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
    When we have shuffled off this mortal coil
    Must give us pause. There’s the respect
    That makes calamity of so long life.
    For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
    The oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely
    The pangs of de’spised love, the law’s delay,
    The insolence of office and the spurns
    That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
    When he himself might his quietus make
    With a bare bodkin? Who would farde1s bear,
    To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
    But that the dread of something after death,
    The undiscovered country from whose bourn
    No traveler returns, puzzles the will,
    And makes us rather bear those ills we have
    Than fly to others that we know not of?
    Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,
    And thus the native hue of resolution
    Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought
    And enterprises of great pitch and moment
    With this regard their currents turn awry
    And lose the name of action (Hamlet, Act 3, scene 1).

    Lehi answers Hamlet’s “unanswerable” question. Hamlet has projected his question into the darkened realms of future uncertainly, where “to be” lurks like a fearsome dream; but Lehi’s answer is projected into realms of light, where to be is to know boundless joy. Hamlet’s question is the focal point of Shakespear’s most brilliant play. Lehi’s answer is a summing up of all the aged prophet knew. To understand what Lehi meant, would require understanding what he knew. That is beyond the scope, not only of my knowledge, but even of my imagination. Yet there are scriptures which can help.

    So far as I know, one of the best commentaries on the relationship of life and being is in the first few pages of section 88. I would like to do a somewhat superficial review of only the first 32 verses, and thereby try to discover the beginnings of the answer to two related questions, “What is life that one might be?” and, “If to be is to have joy, how, in this life, can one establish his being, and taste its joy?”

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

    I have often wondered why it did not say “the words of your prayers” or simply “your prayers.” What does “alms” have to do with it? OED helps a little. Its first definition of alms is “Christian relief of the poor.” That might be relevant to our question, but the second definition might help more: “A meritorious action.” Perhaps it may have had to do with the way they prayed.

    3  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;

    I have also wondered about the word “Comforter,” as it is used here. “Comfort” is a code word in Isaiah 61:2-3. There, “to comfort all that mourn” means the same as performing the ancient kingship coronation rites:

    1.  To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion [That is, to make them a part of Zion], ‘
    2.  to give unto them beauty for ashes [Isaiah commentators say that represents a ceremonial washing–one washes to remove the ashes.]
    3.  the oil of joy for mourning [an anointing],
    4.  the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness;
    5.  that they might be called [new name] trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified. [That new name represents the tree of life and the principle of eternal increase.]

    If that is what to comfort means; and the Holy Ghost is the “Comforter;” and the Saviour is the “Second Comforter;” then I leave it to you to discover the implications as the word is used here.

    5  Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son–
    6  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;

    These verses, even though they are couched in different words, place the ideas of this revelation in the same context as Lehi placed his words. That is, the meaning of “to be” and “joy” must be understood within the contextual meaning of the atonement of Christ. And the atonement of Christ must be understood in terms which reach from “the beginning,” to Gethsemane, to “the end.”

    7  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.
    8  As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made;
    9  As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made;
    10  And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand.
    11  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;
    12  Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space–
    13  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: 7-13).

    John expressed the same idea when he wrote that in the beginning, “All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of man. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. (1:3-4)” Paul brings the idea back to Lehi’s statement by saying, “For in him we live, and move, and have our being;… (Acts 17:28)” And the Saviour pulls it back again, to the beginning, where it was with John. “…give ear to him who laid the foundation of the earth, who made the heavens and all the hosts thereof, and by whom all things were made which live, and move, and have a being. (D&C 45:1)” But in our section 88, the Saviour says the light was not only the life of man

    in the beginning, but also in the resurrection. The revelation continues:

    14  Now, verily I say unto you, that through the redemption which is made for you is brought to pass the resurrection from the dead.
    15  And the spirit and the body are the soul of man.
    16  And the resurrection from the dead is the redemption of the soul
    17  And the redemption of the soul is through him that quickeneth all things, in whose bosom it is decreed that the poor and the meek of the earth shall inherit it(D&C 88: 7-13).

    As far a I can tell, in the Beatitudes the “poor” are those who have sacrificed a broken heart and contrite spirit, and the “meek” are those who keep the covenants they made at the Council in Heaven. It is they, our revelation says, for whom the earth was created, and, the Beatitudes adds, who will inherit the earth. Thus, the nature of the fullness of “life,” even in one’s distant future, is a “this earth” reality. Implicitly, that suggests that the joys also are a “this earth” reality.

    18  Therefore, it [the earth] must needs be sanctified [future tense] from all unrighteousness [from everything which is not Zadok, temple oriented.], that it [the earth] may be prepared [future tense] for the celestial glory;
    19  For after it [the earth] hath [future tense] filled the measure of its [the earth’s] creation, it shall be crowned [future tense] with glory, even with the presence of God the Father (D&C 88: 18-19-13);

    I suspect that may also be said of us. If one is to be sanctified from all unrighteousness, one must fill the measure of one’s creation, and be crowned with glory, even with the presence of God the Father;

    20  That bodies [ the physical bodies of individual people] who are [present tense] of the celestial kingdom may [future tense] possess it [the earth] forever and ever; for, for this intent was [past tense] it [the earth] made and created, and for this intent are they [the individual children of God] sanctified [“Are sanctified” is in present tense. Throughout this part of the scripture the Lord moves back and forth from the present to the future, acknowledging the binding power between that which is present and that which is to come.].
    21  And they who are [present tense] not sanctified through the law which I have given unto you, even the law of Christ, must inherit [future tense] another kingdom, even that of a terrestrial kingdom, or that of a telestial kingdom.
    22  For he who is not able to abide [present tense] the law of a celestial kingdom cannot [present tense] abide a celestial glory.
    23  And he who cannot abide [present tense] the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot [present tense] abide a terrestrial glory.
    24  And he who cannot abide [present tense] the law of a telestial kingdom cannot [present tense] abide a telestial glory; therefore he is not meet [present tense] for a kingdom of glory. Therefore he must abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory.
    25  And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth [present tense] the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth [present tense] the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not [present tense] the law—
    26  Wherefore, it shall be sanctified [future tense]; yea, notwithstanding it shall die [future tense], it shall be quickened [future tense] again, and shall abide [future tense] the power by which it is [present tense] quickened, and the righteous shall inherit [future tense] it.
    27  For notwithstanding they die, they also shall rise [future tense] again, a spiritual body.
    28  They who are [present tense] of a celestial spirit shall receive [future tense] the same body which was [past tense] a natural body; even ye shall receive [future tense] your bodies, and your glory shall be [future tense] that glory by which your bodies are [present tense] quickened.
    29  Ye who are quickened [present tense] by a portion of the celestial glory shall then receive [future tense] of the same, even a fulness.

    If you have questioned whether the present tense verbs have really been in the present, or whether they have referred to the future as though it were the present, this verse should answer that question. Notice the word “then.” It clarifies the problem by clearly distinguishing the present “are quickened” from the future “shall then receive.”].

    30  And they who are quickened [present tense] by a portion of the terrestrial glory shall then receive [future tense] of the same, even a fulness.
    31  And also they who are quickened [present tense] by a portion of the telestial glory shall then receive [future tense] of the same, even a fulness.
    32  And they who remain shall also be quickened [future tense]; nevertheless, they shall return [future tense] again to their own place, to enjoy that which they are willing to receive, because they were not willing to enjoy that which they might have received (D&C 88: 7-13).

    What all that says to me is that the glory by which one’s person is now partially quickened, will be the same glory with which one is fully quickened in the resurrection. I don’t think that is just talking about an accumulation of the good things one does. I think it is describing what one IS — the nature of his BEing. It has to do with what one IS within the context of the atonement. It has to do with the peace and charity one translates to joy, and with the peace and joy one helps others to achieve. It has to do with BEing a peacemaker within the context of this fallen world, without losing sight of the present reality of the future celestial earth. Thus, Adam fell that each individual might BE. And each IS that he might have JOY.

  • Psalm 82, LeGrand Baker, the law of consecration

    Psalm 82, LeGrand Baker, the law of consecration

    The law of consecration is taught in the Book of Mormon

    This was originally written as a commentary on Alma 34:28-29

    28      And now behold, my beloved brethren, I say unto you, do not suppose that this is all; for after ye have done all these things, if ye turn away the needy, and the naked, and visit not the sick and afflicted, and impart of your substance, if ye have, to those who stand in need—I say unto you, if ye do not any of these things, behold, your prayer is vain, and availeth you nothing, and ye are as hypocrites who do deny the faith.
    29      Therefore, if ye do not remember to be charitable, ye are as dross, which the refiners do cast out, (it being of no worth) and is trodden under foot of men  (Alma 34:28-29).

    In these two verses we have the short version of the ultimate prerequisites necessary for one to become a celestial person. The law of consecration is described in verse 28, and charity in verse 29. In the Doctrine and Covenants, the most important commandment is that we live the law of consecration. In the Book of Mormon, the most important commandment is that we be charity. They are two sides of the same coin. The law of consecration is what we do when charity is what we are.

    The law of consecration was first introduced into the Church in Missouri as a way to help the poor saints. The problems were two. First, the law was structured as a system much like the united order. However, whereas in the united order, property was held in common, in the Missouri law of consecration small farms held as private property, but the farm came from a large piece of property that was first owned in trust by the church leaders. Individual jealousies and frustrations got in the way of its success. The second problem was expressed by the covetousness. The law of consecration was introduced into a non-consecrated people, rather than the other way around.

    The law of consecration is still a covenant based commandment, but now Zion is a subset of the Church, or perhaps the Church is a subset of Zion. Zion is the society of those who ARE charity, and who LIVE the law of consecration. The difference between ourselves and the Saints in Missouri is that now we are expected to live the law of consecration as individuals and families rather than as an organized community. The law of consecration is, as Amulek said, “[to] impart of your substance, if ye have, to those who stand in need.”

    My favorite example is this: A single mother needs a car— a member of the ward who has the means buys her one (nothing too fancy, because that would be more than she needs) and he may, or may not, give it to her through the bishop, that is, he may or may not let her know who bought it for her. The mother has a son who mows the lawn of an old widow who lives near by. The old lady frequently sits in the park where she watches the children play. When one is hurt, picked on, or sad, she makes a point of bring him to her park bench, giving him a cookie and a hug until he feels better. The point is this: there is no difference. The car, the lawn mowing, and the hug are all perfect examples of one’s living the law of consecration. One gives according to one’s ability, and according to the needs of the recipient. It is just as Amulek said:

    . . . for after ye have done all these things, if ye turn away the needy, and the naked, and visit not the sick and afflicted, and impart of your substance, if ye have, to those who stand in need—I say unto you, if ye do not any of these things, behold, your prayer is vain, and availeth you nothing, and ye are as hypocrites who do deny the faith.

    In the ancient Israelite temple drama, the members of the Council in Heaven— while they still in the presence of their Father in Heaven— make a covenant that they will live the law of consecration when they come to this world to this world. (The following is a review of Psalm 82 taken from Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, p. 233-42. I have left the footnotes out of the quote.)

    Psalm 82: Instruction and Covenant

    A narrator introduces the scene

    1. God standeth in the congregation of the mighty;
    he judgeth among the gods.

    These words are clearly spoken by a narrator, or a chorus as in a Greek play, explaining what is happening on the stage.

    Here, and in the next verses, to “judge” means the same thing in Hebrew as it does in English. When pronouncing judgment, a judge may condemn or exonerate; or a judge is also one who selects, chooses, or assigns. In an ancient court of law, a judge would sit as an evidence of his superior status. In this psalm he was standing, as one did when making a covenant. Thus, a more explicit translation might be: “God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he chooses among the gods.” During ceremonies like the one depicted in Psalm 82, the congregation also stood to make covenants, and in doing so they spoke in unison, as with one voice.

    The gods among whom Elohim was choosing were the members of the Council in Heaven. That situation immediately calls one’s attention to Abraham 3:22-23, where “God saw these souls [the noble and great ones] that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers.” There he was standing and judging or choosing. These appear to be two versions of the same story:

    ELOHIM SPEAKS TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

    2. How long will ye judge unjustly,
    and accept the persons of the wicked?

    The Hebrew reads simply “the wicked.” The Tanakh, which is the official Jewish translation of the Old Testament, renders this verse as “How long will you judge perversely, showing favor to the wicked?” That is the pivotal question upon which everyone’s salvation ultimately turns. It is about prejudice, bigotry, and intolerance. As soon as we arrive in this world, no matter what human culture we arrive in, that culture teaches us that some people are better than others, so favor should be shown to those with political prestige, money, education, expensive toys, “correct” cultural preferences, and “appropriate” lifestyle. It does not matter whether they are better because they have ten cows rather than just two, or whether they have a huge house rather than a simple one. The principle is the same—and that idea that some people are better than others—says God in these instructions to his children, is the misconception they must first correct in themselves, and then reject altogether. One does not judge people by their appearances or by their prestige. In the festival temple drama, that message was relevant far beyond its presentation on the stage. Its purpose was to remind the people in the audience about the covenants they had made before they came to this world, and to give them the opportunity to re-make those same covenants in this world, and to receive instructions about how those covenants should be fulfilled. There could have been no question about the implications of that command. The Law was explicit:

    5    And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might (Deuteronomy 6:5).

    18    Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord (Leviticus 19:18).

    At the Council, the Father’s first instructions to his children was that when they come to this earth, they must obey what James called the “royal law:”

    8      If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:
    9      But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors (James 2:8-9).

    THE FATHER GIVES INSTRUCTIONS ABOUT WHAT ONE MUST DO WHILE IN THIS TEMPORAL WORLD:

    3. Defend the poor and fatherless:
    do justice to the afflicted and needy.

    “Defend” and “do justice” suggest the power, authority, and responsibilities of kingship to defend those who have no political or military power, or who are impoverished:

    4. Deliver the poor and needy:
    rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

    “Deliver” from “the wicked” seems to represent the power, authority, and responsibilities of priesthood. The denotation of the word translated “poor” is weak or feeble, but the connotation seems to have spiritual rather than physical overtones. The wicked are those who are morally wrong, who neither know nor wish to know the truth. Thus, these instructions pertain to the way every man in the congregation must execute the duties of priesthood and sacral kingship.

    In relation to one’s kingship duties, the poor and the needy are impoverished as to things of this world. With regard to priesthood duties, they are, as in the Beatitudes those who make he sacrifice of a broken heart and contrite spirit, as also in Psalm 86.

    1 Bow down thine ear, O Lord, hear me:
    for I am poor and needy.
    2 Preserve my soul; for I am holy:
    O thou my God, save thy servant that trusteth in thee.
    3 Be merciful unto me,
    O Lord: for I cry unto thee daily.
    4 Rejoice the soul of thy servant: for unto thee,
    O Lord, do I lift up my soul.
    5 For thou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive;
    and plenteous in mercy unto all them that call upon thee.
    (Psalm 86:1-5)

    In that psalm, being poor and needy has nothing to do with worldly impoverishment; rather, it has to do with being holy and completely dependent upon the Lord. That same interpretation is probably equally valid in Psalm 82, in regard to these instructions received by the members of the Council about how they were to perform their earthly priesthood duties. In noting that, one also identifies an almost invisible line dividing the responsibilities of those to whom God was speaking. They were reasonable to protect, defend, and support the physically impoverished as well as the spiritually pure:

    5. They know not, neither will they understand;
    they walk on in darkness:
    all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

    “They” of verse 5 appear to be those who are called “wicked,” yet, their wickedness seems to be a consequence of a widespread chaos, rather than of their individual rebelliousness. If that is correct, then “they,” as well as the poor and needy, are those whom the members of the Council were sent to the earth to serve. These verses describe a situation in which chaos reigns supreme—lack of knowledge, walking in darkness, the earth out of course. It is the same imagery we find in the “valley of the shadow of death” in Psalm 23, and in the dark and dreary waste at the beginning of Lehi’s tree of life vision. It represents the condition of mortality where all persons must experience disorder, and choose from among its myriads of possibilities. The instructions were imperatives in which the members of the Council were commanded to work to overcome the darkness. The assignment that the Father gave to the members of the Council was that they go to the earth and help others walk in the light of truth—to help them transcend and overcome the chaos. However, the Father warned, it would not be all that easy. “They”—the people who most need the help—will not understand, and many, perhaps most, will reject the message. The Father further warns:

    6 I have said, Ye are gods;
    and all of you are children of the Most High.
    7 But ye shall die like men,
    and fall like one of the princes.

    With those words, God outlined the consequences of mortality for the members of the Council. An equally valid meaning of the word translated “but” is “surely,” which would simply be the assurance that death was a natural part of the assignment they were undertaking. In that case the verse would read, “and all of you are children of the Most High, surely you will die like men, and fall [as a hero in battle] like one of the princes.”

    The warning was that when the members of the Council come to the earth they would no longer be identifiable as “the gods.” They would simply be ordinary humans like everybody else. They would feel sorrow and pain, until death would eventually consume their earthly bodies. Some would use up their lives in God’s service, while others would fall like princes in battle, sealing their testimonies with their own blood—like Abinadi and Joseph Smith, or like the “ordinary” men and women who would be killed during the Roman persecutions, or at the hands of a Missouri mob, or who would expire while trudging in the mountainous snow pulling a handcart toward Zion.

    HAVING GIVEN THOSE INSTRUCTIONS, THE FATHER INVITES THE CONGREGATION TO RISE AND MAKE A COVENANT THAT THEY WILL OBEY HIS WORDS:

    8 Arise, O God [or, “O gods”], judge the earth:
    for thou shalt inherit all the Nations. (Psalm 82:1-8).

    Verse 8 is commonly understood to be an adoration of Elohim offered by the members of the Council who invite him to rise. The problem with that interpretation is that in verse one, God was already standing, and it doesn’t make a great deal of sense to have the members of the Council ask God to stand up. The word ‘God’ is translated from the Hebrew word “Elohim.” Elohim is the plural for “gods”—“the gods” in the ordinary sense. It is also the name of the Father of the gods. This is clearly shown in verse one that is translated, “God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.” Both the first and the last words in that verse are “elohim.” So we have, “Elohim standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the elohim.” Similarly, verse 8 begins, “Arise, O elohim.” The translators of the King James Version chose to have it read, “Arise, O God.” However, an equally valid translation would be “Arise, O gods,” making that last verse read as the conclusion of the Father’s instructions, and his invitation to them to stand and make a covenant. While this translation seems more internally consistent to the psalm, there is a grammatical problem. The verb is singular so elohim must also be singular. Therefore, if the verse is the conclusion of God’s instructions to the Council, it must be understood that he was addressing each of them individually, and inviting each one to stand and covenant with him. With that covenant comes God’s guarantee of their success: “for thou shalt inherit all the nations”—a promise of eternal life and of their ultimate restoration to their former status.

    During the performance of this psalm, the members of the Israelite audience probably understand themselves to represent the members of the Council in Heaven. If that were so, then it was they who stood to the covenant. Their watching the play was an opportunity for them to review the covenants they had made in the premortal world, and their participation in the drama became a new covenant-making reality. As they spoke the words in unison, each individual covenanted to fulfill his own assignment in order that the Father’s purposes might be accomplished. If those assumptions are correct, then, as in the story of King Benjamin, even though the words were spoken in unison, making of the covenant was the personal act of each individual in the congregation.

    Because the congregation’s participation in the drama was, for each of them, a present and personal act, the words of the psalm and the enactment of the story were, as Mowinckel and Nibley suggested, not just a remembering of the myth and a re-enactment of the ritual, but a new actualization of the event and a new covenant. For each member of the congregation who participated in the drama, their making the covenant anew was a reaffirmation of an everlasting covenant, but it was also a new covenant, affirming one’s present relationship with God.

  • Alma 56-58, Pistis in Helaman’s epistle to Moroni, LeGrand Baker, August 1996

    Alma 56-58, Pistis in Helaman’s epistle to Moroni, LeGrand Baker,

    The key to understanding Helaman’s epistle to Moroni (Alma 56-58) is the translator’s very precise use of the words “trust” and “faith.” In the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith used the word and concept of “trust” in the same way it is used in the Old Testament (having to do with one’s appreciation of God’s integrity in keeping his covenants; knowing that he is a God of truth who cannot lie); and he used the word “faith” in the same way that it is used in the New Testament (having to do with the personal relationship between God and the one with whom he has made covenants).

    Today, most definitions of “faith” incorporate neither of those concepts. To many Christians, “faith” means something like: an academic or emotional belief that God needs to be pleased, so if one is especially obedient just now, or if one says prayers and wishes really hard, God can be bribed or persuaded to do what one wants Him to do. This is not a concept which can be found in either the Hebrew or the Greek portions of the Bible, but one which has evolved through medieval and Reformation Christianity.

            Faith is a peculiarly Christian concept. While other religious traditions have aspects of what the churches have come to name “faith,” none has the specific quality of intellectual assent that distinguishes faith from fidelity. The problem of faith and the central discussion of it arises in the context of the medieval attempts to codify and integrate the Christian experience into the emerging philosophical language of the scholastics. (David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Doubleday, New York, 1992, vol. 2 p. 744-745)

    The word, “Faith,” is hardly found in the Old Testament. The word which is otherwise always translated “trust” is translated “faith” in two instances, but otherwise “faith” does not appear in the Old Testament. “Trust” is the word which denotes one’s relationship with God. It is translated from a Hebrew word which has many of the same connotations as the New Testament “faith,” and has nothing whatever to do with the idea of persistently wishing hard.

            The Hebrew Bible [Old Testament], in fact, does not really have a word for faith….The Hebrew Bible uses the root (mn to express what we are calling “faith.” … In the Qal form it never means “belief,” but expresses the basic sense of the root “to sustain, support, carry.” … The general sense of the word in the Hip(il form is “to be firmly set in/on something.” (David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Doubleday, New York, 1992, vol. 2 p. 744-745)

            [In the Old Testament] The meaning of faith [“trust”] must be seen in relation to the covenant…. The covenant implied a mutuality of obligation (Deut. 26:16-19). Yahweh can be relied on to keep his part of the contract, to “keep the covenant and the steadfast love” (Deut. 7-9); this is his “faith” or faithfulness. Faith on the side of his earthly partner is to be shown by keeping the “commandment and the statutes and the ordinances” (6:17;7:11)….In addition to this obligation to keep the commandments, the following words of Deuteronomy may be noted: man is to heed (lit. “hear”) the statutes (4:1; 7:12); to cleave or hold fast to Yahweh (4:4; 10:20); to seek and turn to him (4:29-30); to turn, in the sense of “repent,” after apostasy (30:2-10); to obey his voice (4:30); to love him “with all your heart,” etc. (6:5); to fear [respect] him (6:2, 13; 10:20); to remember him (7:18-19; 8:2-3, 18-20; 9:7). (The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, Abingdon Press, New York, 1962, vol. 2 p. 225-226)

            Both forms of that Hebrew root (mn are translated “trust,” so the meaning of the Old Testament’s “trust” is the stability of knowing that the covenants are mutually binding–that the Lord will keep his part of the covenant if people will keep their part.
    In the New Testament, the word which is translated “faith” is pistis. Before the Christians adopted it, the word pistis was not associated with religion. (Christians chose not to use words whose meanings were already defined in terms of the old religions), but instead pistis was a diplomatic term. It meant the binding nature of a covenant or treaty:
    1. That which causes trust and faith — faithfulness, reliability
    2. Solemn promise, oath
    3. Proof, pledge (William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich translation of Walter Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, University of Chicago Press, 1979, p. 662)

    This usage of “faith” still exists in the colloquial “kept in good faith” expression applied to rural handshake contracts. Similarly, the phrase “faithful friend” means one who will do and say what he promised he would do or say. In the first instance, the pistis is the handshake, in the second, it is the thing which the friend does or says. So we still use “faith” in its original sense, even though we often change its meaning when we apply it to the scriptures. The New Testament writers used the word pistis (“faith”) to represent the covenants between God and individual persons. In the fulfillment of this covenant, the human’s pistis (faith) is doing the ordinances, taking upon oneself the name of Christ, forgiving, repenting, obeying, sacrificing a broken heart and contrite spirit, loving God’s children (consecration is functional charity), and doing whatever God instructs one to do. On God’s part, the pistis is the symbolism of ordinances and the fullness of the blessings of the atonement.

    For many Latter-day Saints, “faith” begins as one presents God with one’s evening shopping lists, and then wishes harder for some things than he wishes for others. But with time and experience, that faith matures into something quite different. The following autobiographical statement by Stella Oaks is about her experience soon after her husband died, leaving her with three young children to rear. Her phrase, “I relaxed in my faith,” is an important key to understanding the maturation process which moves “faith” in God from a state of wishing hard, to an embrace and walk with a true and faithful Friend.

            One June night I knelt alone in prayer, utterly spent, wondering at that midnight hour how humble one had to be to receive an answer to one’s pleading. It was just at that moment that I felt an envelopment of the spirit of peace, a profound assurance that God is over all and that it was his will that was in command and not mine. I could finally say, “Thy will be done,” and feel the peace instead of guilt. I relaxed in my faith and discovered that I had a new trust in the Lord. … I was given to know that the Lord loved me and that I would be made equal to my mission. I felt an encircling love that has sustained me ever since that great moment of change in my life. I have had continual hardships and challenges but always the sure knowledge that Jesus is the Christ, our Redeemer, and that he sustains us through the opposition that must arise in all things. (Stella H. Oaks, “Thy Will Be Done,” in Leon R. Hartshorn, Remarkable Stories from the Lives of Latter-day Saint Women, Salt Lake City, Deseret Book, 1975, vol. 2. p 183-5 quoted in Stella, by Her Children and Grandchildren, p. 156)

    The marvelous thing about the scriptures is that “trust” and “faith” have a relevant and personal meaning, no matter where one is along the way. However, some passages can best be understood in light of the covenant relationship which is the original meaning of pistis.

  • Alma 43 – LeGrand Baker – Covenant Names

    Alma 43 – LeGrand Baker – Covenant Names

    I did not send an email last week because I didn’t have one to send. We have come to the war chapters in Alma and I was not at all sure how I could deal with them. I finally concluded that I couldn’t. The author of these chapters understood war tactics far better than I do, so there is no point in my commenting on what he explained to us. So I have decided to just skip them.

    However, there is one part that cannot be passed over lightly.

    The thousand year history that is the Book of Mormon is replete with wars, but only this one is described in much detail. There seems to be three reasons for Mormon’s choosing this one.

    First, in the overall temple pattern of the Book of Mormon these war chapters map perfectly to the lonely, dreary part of the ancient temple drama.

    Second, this war is clearly defined as a “holy war.” The key to understanding that is the series of covenants and new names in the accounts of the “title of liberty” and of the “sons of Helaman.”

    Third, the story, as Mormon tells it, is a perfect example of the value of making and keeping covenants—-which is the only way we can navigate through the obstacles of this lonely world

    In the scriptures and in the ordinances, whenever there is a new covenant there is also a new name. The new name is a way of identifying both the covenant and the covenant maker. For example, when we are baptized or take the sacrament we also take upon ourselves the name of the Savior, as did the Nephite Christians in this narrative.

    A name is an identity. We use name-titles all the time to identify who people are: father, mother, bishop, elder, mayor. president. Each of these is a name-title that identifies us beyond the name one received at birth. That is also true with covenant new names it is with covenant new names.

    The overriding message of these war chapters is that those who were true to their covenants and honored the names (that is, true to their covenant identity) are empowered to fulfill their covenants.

    The story begins back when the Lamanites who were converted to the gospel “called their names Anti-Nephi-Lehies; and they were called by this name and were no more called Lamanites” (Alma 23:17). They covenanted that they would never again take up arms against their brethren and escaped to the Nephite territory where they were given refuge.

    There are many wars in Book of Mormon history as the people struggle to overcome the aloneness of this dark and dreary world. But Mormon chooses to give the most detail about one, which he identifies as a sacred war between good and evil. He introduces it with a whole series of covenants and covenant names (There are always new names associated with new covenants).

    Captain Moroni “rent his coat” (after that it is called “garment” so it is the outer of t he two—there are always two). He wrote a chiastic poem on it and he gives it the title of “Liberty,” and he made a covenant. “He bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land (Alma46:12-13)

    At this point Mormon interrupts his narrative to insert the information that those who believe in Christ “took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ,” and are called Christians (Alma 46:14-18).

    Captain Moroni then identified the land in terms of its geographical boundaries (measuring it and defining it as sacred space) and gave it the same name as the poem—“the land of liberty.” “And he said: Surely God shall not suffer that we, who are despised because we take upon us the name of Christ, shall be trodden down and destroyed, until we bring it upon us by our own transgressions (Alma 46:17-18).”

    The people come and join in the covenant that they will keep the Lord’s commandments and he will preserve them in their Liberty (Alma 46:19-22).

    Shortly thereafter we are told that the sons of Helaman “entered into a covenant to fight for the liberty of the Nephites,” and “they called themselves Nephites” (Alma 53:16-17).

    The boys’ strength was a result of the teachings and examples of their parents who had been the original Anti-Nephi-Lehies. They had been taught by their mothers, that if they did not doubt, God would deliver them (Alma 56:47).” And their fathers, who could not participate in the war because of the covenant they had made, brought “many provisions” into the warzone for their sons (Alma 56:27).

    The object of the story is to teach that because the fathers, the mothers, and their sons kept their covenants, all the boys were protected—-some were badly hurt, but they all survived.

    “The Lord had supported them, yea, and kept them from falling by the sword, insomuch that even one soul has not been slain (Alma 58:39).

    As I observed earlier, the lonely dreary world of the Book of Mormon’s ancient Israelite temple drama maps to these war chapters. That being so, these war stories are a metaphor of the way we should live our lives in this world. The message is singular: If we are true to the Savior and to the covenants we have made, then there will be empowered to keep our covenants—-there is no promise that we will not be hurt, but there is an absolute certainty that we will be triumphant in the end.

  • Alma 42:6, LeGrand Baker, “appointed unto man to die”

    Alma 42:6, LeGrand Baker, “appointed unto man to die”

    6 But behold, it was appointed unto man to die

    Death always gets a bad press in human culture. The reasons are quite obvious. What is left over after the spirit is gone may be down right gruesome, or if it isn’t, it soon begins to stink and having it around becomes macabre. So we get it stowed away as soon as it is practicable. But that’s just the point: all we get to see is the left overs.

    Like to country preacher said: “We shouldn’t be mournin’ fer good ole Sadie. Its only the shell that’s here in the casket. The nut still lives on.”

    We are appointed to die, and however we may think of it, the fact remains: the assurance that we can die is one of the greatest blessings of the Atonement.

    A much beloved and frequently repeated scripture is this one about Adam and Eve. It reads,

    15 And I, the Lord God, took the man, and put him into the Garden of Eden, to dress it, and to keep it.
    16 And I, the Lord God, commanded the man, saying: Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat,
    17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Moses 3:15-17)

    Every word in that scripture is important.

    And I, the Lord God, commanded the man, saying…But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it.

    God had to forbid it. The laws of justice and mercy insist that he do so. God could not have commanded them to eat that fruit, or even tell them that it would be OK, because if he had, then he would have been responsible for their expulsion from the Garden and into this world. If he had been responsible for putting us here, he also would have been equally responsible for getting us back. Had that happened, it would have left us without responsibility, without agency, purpose, or the freedom to be our Selves. We would have come, not to act, but to be acted upon. So his instructions were:

    “nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee.”

    What was true of Adam and Eve was equally true of ourselves. We did not leave the premortal spirit world because we were forced to come to this earth, but we left because we understood our Heavenly Father’s plan and trusted in the Saviour’s atonement. We came here because we chose to come. And now, having made that decision, we are free to make the decisions about what we will do while we are here. And that is what this experience is all about.

    In those same verses, we read the words of the very first covenant that our Father in Heaven made with his earthly children.

    “for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

    Because, from our this-world perspective, death is sometimes a fearful thing, those words are usually read as a curse rather than as a blessing. But they are not a curse, they are the words of the covenant that evoke one of our greatest blessings.

    It is the promise that if God’s children chose to come to this earth, he guarantees that there will be a way to get out again. Being here forever—-living in this world’s tensions between good and evil forever—-would be a perpetual hell. We needed the experience of knowing and choosing, but there also had to be a promise that we wouldn’t have to be here forever. So Adam and Eve left the Garden with the knowledge that they could also leave this world, and that when that time came, the Atonement would make it possible that they take no baggage with them, except the products of their own choices.

    The covenant to each of us is: “If you choose to go down into that dark and dreary world, then, after you have learned what you are supposed to learn, you may return home again. We are not compelled to stay there in this world because the Lord has provided a way for us to return to him. The fulfillment of that covenant is in the words: “thou shalt surely die.”

  • Alma 42:1-4, LeGrand Baker, symbolism of the tree of life

    Alma 42:1-4, LeGrand Baker, symbolism of the tree of life.

    Alma 42:1-41
    And now, my son, I perceive there is somewhat more which doth worry your mind, which ye cannot understand—which is concerning the justice of God in the punishment of the sinner; for ye do try to suppose that it is injustice that the sinner should be consigned to a state of misery.
    2 Now behold, my son, I will explain this thing unto thee. For behold, after the Lord God sent our first parents forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground, from whence they were taken—yea, he drew out the man, and he placed at the east end of the garden of Eden, cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the tree of life—
    3 Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed cherubim and the flaming sword, that he should not partake of the fruit—
    4 And thus we see, that there was a time granted unto man to repent, yea, a probationary time, a time to repent and serve God.

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

    The ancient Hebrew temple rituals at the time of Solomon’s Temple were a dramatic presentation of the cosmic myth and the plan of redemption. In that presentation, the sense of aloneness and longing for home that we find in the Hymn of the Pearl is shown to be a consequence of the fall of Adam and Eve, when they were expelled from the Garden of Eden. There they had walked and talked with God, and had unrestricted access to the fruit of the tree of life and to the waters of life. Jewish tradition holds that they had been clothed in a garment of light, which Nibley suggests was the Shechinah. (Hugh Nibley, Abraham in Egypt (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1981, 2000), 373; Nibley, Abraham in Egypt, in CWHN 14:373. See “Shechinah” in LDS Bible dictionary.) Their loss of all of these things their—their personal relationship with God, the clothing that defined them as sacred space, and the food and drink that kept their bodies forever young—the loss of those things left humankind naked, vulnerable, hungry, and increasingly feeble until only death could release them from their infirmities.

    Yearning to return home again was the foundation principle of the ancient Israelite religion and of their temple service. It was an expression of hope that somehow they might regain access to the paradisiacal world, partake of the fruit, and participate in the society of the gods. (Essentially it was the same hope whose fulfillment is described in the last three chapters of the Book of Revelation.) That hope was most vividly expressed on the last day of their eight-day temple festival. For mankind, the wish to return to the presence of God is the wish to return to sacred time in sacred space.

    According to ancient tradition, when Adam left the Garden of Eden, he took two things with him. One was the garment of skins that replaced his garment of light, representing his priesthood, and would be his protection from the things of this world. The other was a branch of the tree of life. This branch became his kingly scepter. Adam was thus the world’s first high priest and its first king.

    In his book about of the menorah, Yarden suggests that at the time of the Exodus, the symbol of the tree of life was the almond tree. He reports that the “almond is the first tree of spring in the Near East” and “the last to shed its leaves.” It has large white blossoms that were chosen by the Lord to be the pattern for the bowls of the lamps at the end of each arm of the menorah (Exodus 25:33-34). When Aaron’s staff blossomed and bore fruit, it “yielded almonds” (Numbers 17:8).

    There are many kinds of trees and other plants that have been used to represent the tree of life—the olive tree, date palm, and grape vines. Wheat might also represent the tree of life. The bread that is made from wheat is one of the most important symbols of the fruit of the tree of life. The Savior used it when he spoke of his body as the bread of life.

    In the New Testament, the Savior also spoke of himself as a grape vine, and that it was symbolic of the tree of life (John 15:1-9). It appears that when the Savior described himself as a vine, he was citing an ancient prophecy that we do not now have in our scriptures. Apparently, from that same ancient source both Nephi and Alma used the same simile, suggesting there may have been a prophecy on the brass plates with which the people were familiar (Alma 16:17).

    Nephi wrote of the “true vine” and the “true olive tree” as though they were the same representation of the tree of life (1 Nephi 15:15-16, 21-22).

    Of the variety of trees that represented the tree of life, the one that is most frequently associated with it is the olive tree. Its fruit is edible; its oil was one of the most precious commodities in the ancient Near East. The oil was used for many things, most notably for cooking, for light, for healing the body, and for ceremonial anointing. Its fruit represented the fruit of the tree of life, while its oil represented the waters of life. In an excellent paper, Stephen Ricks cited a number of ancient sources to show that the olive tree was most commonly associated with the tree of life.Stephen Ricks cited a number of ancient sources to show that the olive tree was most commonly associated with the tree of life. { 1 }

    In an incomplete Serbian version of the Secrets of Enoch, the tree of life is described as being “in that place where God rests.” Enoch saw the Garden and wrote:

    Every tree sweet-flowering, every fruit ripe, all manner of food perpetually bubbling with all pleasant smells, and four rivers flowing by with quiet course, and every [thing that] growth is good, bearing fruit for food, and the tree of life is at that place, at which God rests when he goes up into Paradise, and that tree is ineffable for the goodness of its sweet scent, and another olive tree alongside was always discharging the oil of its fruit. { 2 }

    The phrase, “another olive tree alongside,” suggests that the tree of life was an olive tree. In the Revelation of John, he says “the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Revelation 22:2). It is likely that Joseph Smith had that scripture in mind when he sent a copy of the revolution that is now section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants to W. W. Phelps. Joseph wrote,

    I send you the “olive leaf” which we have plucked from the tree of Paradise, the Lord’s message of peace to us.

    According to ancient tradition, when Adam left the Garden of Eden, he took two things with him. One was the garment of skins that represented his priesthood and would be his protection. The other was a branch of the tree of life. This branch became his kingly scepter. { 3 } Adam was thus the world’s first high priest and its first king.{ 4 }

    Tradition also holds that the branch of the tree of life that Adam took from the garden was passed down through the generations until it became Moses’s “rod of God” (Exodus 4:20,17:9). Moses gave it to his brother Aaron, { 5 } for whom it blossomed as an evidence of his priesthood authority. Thereafter, it was kept in the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle.

    As one would expect, in other ancient cultures, where the king had no legitimate claim to priesthood supported kingship, the kings adopted the forms and titles of legitimacy. Thus the tradition of a tree of life as a source of power and goodness is found in Mesopotamia, Egypt, Palestine, Greece, { 6 } and in ancient America. { 7 }

    Almond represented the tree of life.

    In his book about of the menorah, Yarden suggests that at the time of the Exodus, the symbol of the tree of life was the almond tree. He reports that in the Near East, the “almond is the first tree of spring in the Near East” and “the last to shed its leaves.” { 8 } It has large white blossoms that were chosen by the Lord to be the pattern for the bowls of the lamps at the end of each arm of the menorah (Exodus 25:33-34). When Aaron’s staff blossomed and bore fruit, it “yielded almonds” (Numbers 17:8).{ 9 }

    There are many kinds of trees and other plants that have been used to represent the tree of life—the olive tree, date palm, { 10 } and grape vines. { 11 } Wheat might also represent the tree of life. The bread that is made from wheat is one of the most important symbols of the fruit of the tree of life.

    Grape vine represented the tree of life.

    In the New Testament, the Savior spoke of himself as a grape vine, and that it was symbolic of the tree of life (John 15:1-9). It appears that when the Savior described himself as a vine, he was citing an ancient prophecy that we do not now have in our scriptures. Apparently, from that same ancient source both Nephi and Alma used the same simile, suggesting there may have been a prophecy on the brass plates with which the people were familiar (Alma 16:17).

    Olive tree represented the tree of life.

    Nephi wrote of the “true vine” and the “true olive tree” as though they were the same representation of the tree of life (1 Nephi 15:15-16, 21-22).

    Of the variety of trees that represented the tree of life, the one that is most frequently associated with it is the olive tree. Its fruit is edible; its oil was one of the most precious commodities in the ancient near East. The oil was used for many things, most notably for cooking, for light, for healing the body, and for ceremonial anointing. Its fruit represented the fruit of the tree of life, while its oil represented the waters of life. In an excellent paper, Stephen Ricks cited a number of ancient sources to show that the olive tree was most commonly associated with the tree of life. { 12 }

    In an incomplete Serbian version of the Secrets of Enoch, the tree of life is described as being “in that place where God rests.” Enoch saw the Garden and wrote:

    Every tree sweet-flowering, every fruit ripe, all manner of food perpetually bubbling with all pleasant smells, and four rivers flowing by with quiet course, and every [thing that] growth is good, bearing fruit for food, and the tree of life is at that place, at which God rests when he goes up into Paradise, and that tree is ineffable for the goodness of its sweet scent, and another olive tree alongside was always discharging the oil of its fruit. { 13 }

    The phrase, “another olive tree alongside,” suggests that the tree of life was an olive tree. In the Revelation of John, he says “the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Revelation 22:2). It is likely that Joseph Smith had that scripture in mind when he sent a copy of the revolution that is now section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants to W. W. Phelps. Joseph wrote,

    I send you the “olive leaf” which we have plucked from the tree of Paradise, the Lord’s message of peace to us. { 14 }

    – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
    ENDNOTES

    1} Stephen D. Ricks, “Olive Culture in the Second Temple Era and Early Rabbinic Period,” in Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch, eds., The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5 (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book and FARMS, 464-65.

    2} The Secrets of Enoch, MSS B, 8:1-3, in R.H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1913), 2:434.

    3} Geo Widengren, “King and Covenant,” in Journal of Semitic Studies, Vol. II, No. I, 1957.

    4} Geo Widengren, The King and the Tree of Life in Ancient Near Eastern Religion (Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift, 1951), 10-59.

    5} Geo Widengren, The King and the Tree of Life in Ancient Near Eastern Religion, Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift, 1951. 38-41.

    6} Rachel Hachlili, The Menorah, the Ancient Seven-armed Candelabrum, Origin, Form and Significance (Leiden, Brill, 2001), 36-39. C. Wilfred Griggs, “The Book of Mormon as an Ancient Book,” in Noel B. Reynolds, ed., Book of Mormon Authorship (Provo, Utah, Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1982), 75-102. Also his “The Tree of Life in Ancient Cultures,” in Ensign, June 198, 26-31.

    7} See, M. Wells Jakeman, Stela 5, Izapa, Chiapas, Mexico; a Major Archaeological Discovery of the New World (University Archaeological Society, Special Publication No. 2, Provo, 1958); V. Garth Norman, “Izapa Sculpture,” Part 2, Brigham Young University, New World Archaeological Foundation Papers, No. 30 (1976):165–235. Irene Briggs, “The Tree of Life in Ancient America: Its Representations and Significance,” Bulletin, University Archaeological Society, No. 4 (March 1953):1–18.

    8} Leon Yarden, The Tree of Light, A Study of the Menorah, The Seven-branched Lampstand, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1971, 40.

    9} Geo Widengren, The King and the Tree of Life in Ancient Near Eastern Religion, Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift, 1951, 38-41.

    10} For discussions of the widespread use of the symbol of the tree of life see C. Wilfred Griggs, “The Tree of Life in Ancient Cultures,” in Ensign, June, 1988, 26-31; and Griggs’s, “The Book of Mormon as an Ancient Book,” in Noel B. Reynolds, ed., Book of Mormon Authorship (Provo, Utah, Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1982), 75-101.

    11} Ad de Vries, Dictionary of Symbols and Imagery (London, North-Holland, 1974), 474.

    Stephen D. Ricks, “Olive Culture in the Second Temple Era and Early Rabbinic Period,” in Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch, eds., The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5 (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book and FARMS, 1994), 464-66.

    12} Stephen D. Ricks, “Olive Culture in the Second Temple Era and Early Rabbinic Period,” in Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch, eds., The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5 (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book and FARMS, 464-65.

    13} The Secrets of Enoch, MSS B, 8:1-3, in R.H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1913), 2:434.

    14} Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected and arranged by Joseph Fielding Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1976), 18.

  • Alma 41:7-15 – LeGrand Baker – “Eternal Punishment”

    Alma 41:7-15 – LeGrand Baker – “Eternal Punishment”

    7 they are their own judges, whether to do good or do evil.
    8 Now, the decrees of God are unalterable; therefore, the way is prepared that whosoever will may walk therein and be saved.
    10 …Behold, I say unto you, wickedness never was happiness.
    11 …they have gone contrary to the nature of God; therefore, they are in a state contrary to the nature of happiness.
    15 For that which ye do send out shall return unto you again, and be restored; therefore, the word restoration more fully condemneth the sinner, and justifieth him not at all.

    – – – – – – – – – – – –

    It is my carefully considered opinion that in our Father in Heaven’s entire existence he has never punished anybody for anything. Now before you take that out of context let me explain. Our Heavenly Father is a tender, loving parent who will do, and who has done, everything possible for the salvation of his children. He is a God of absolute mercy. Now, we have our entire existence in linear time to determine whether we will accept all or only part of his merciful love. He is also a God of absolute justice, guaranteeing to each one of us all of the blessings we are WILLING to accept. He cannot force us to be happy as he is happy, just as he cannot force us to learn to be free from sin. So he blesses us, loves us and teaches us through the Holy Ghost how to listen and love him in return. If we are slow to listen, then he warns and even threatens us. But he does not punish us, he only tries to let us understand the consequences of our own bullheadedness.

    I think that is what Alma is trying to explain that to his own wayward son, and that is also what the Lord explained to the Prophet Joseph and his friends.

    5 Wherefore, I revoke not the judgments which I shall pass, but woes shall go forth, weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth, yea, to those who are found on my left hand.
    6 Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment.
    7 Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory.
    8 Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery, for it is meet unto you to know even as mine apostles.
    9 I speak unto you that are chosen in this thing, even as one, that you may enter into my rest.
    10 For, behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore—
    11 Eternal punishment is God’s punishment.
    12 Endless punishment is God’s punishment.
    13 Wherefore, I command you to repent, and keep the commandments which you have received by the hand of my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., in my name;

    After I sent the above to our friends, I received the following from a very dear friend:

    February 3, 2012
    From Chauncey C. Riddle

    Legrand: Just read your message of 11/27/11 about punishment. I completely agree with you that Father only blesses. Every so-called cursing is actually a blessing intended to help the recipient. God is love and his love extends to all. It is conditional, depending on the capacity of the recipient to receive. I find the pervasive comments about the importances of unconditional love to be very tiring because they reveal so little thought.

    Best to you, CCRiddle