Category: Chauncey Riddle

  • Lesson Three: Systems (Philosophy 110)

    A concept analysis of systems:

    1. Symbol variants: System, systemic, systematic, systematize, unsystematic.
    2. Base: Scientific/humanistic origin, 20th century, but applied here to a Restored Gospel (LDS) setting.
    3. Etymology: L. systema, fr. Gr. synistanae, to place together; fr. Gr. ~, with, and histanai, to place.
    4. Dictionary: Webster’s New Collegiate
      1. Definition: an assemblage of objects united in some form of regular interaction or interdependence; an organized whole.
    5. Examples in base: The solar system. The human nervous system. The American system of government. Systematic theology. The double-entry accounting system.
    6. Correlative concepts:
      1. Genus:                   Relationships
      2. Constituents:       Environment, boundaries, structure, function, input, output
      3. Prerequisites:      Two or more existing things.
      4. Consequences:     n/a
      5. Similar:                 Organization, group, complex, machine, layout, scheme, plan
      6. Contrary:              Chaos, jumble, collection, random
      7. Perfection:           Closed system
      8. Opposite:             Unorganized
      9. Complement:      Disorganized
      10. Counterfeit:         Facade (The appearance of being a well-organized system.)
      11. Levels:
        1. Celestial:        Being in an order presided over by our Father.
        2. Terrestrial:     Presiding: The Son.
        3. Telestial:         Presiding: The Holy Ghost.
        4. Perdition:       Presiding: Satan.
    7. Key Questions:
      1. How are systems created? They are the result of intelligent action.
      2. How are systems destroyed? By entropy and evil, the “natural” forces.
      3. What is a closed system? A system that has or needs no environment.
      4. What is a system “in control”? One which does all and only that which its agent- steward commands it to do.
      5. Is there a closed system? The universe (including God) may be one.
    8. Formulated concept: A system is some set of objects related in some manner which makes it convenient to consider the set as a whole. All of the systems humans deal with are imaginary systems. Humans believe that some of their systems represent reality, such as the solar system, and some do not, such as the story of Alice in Wonderland.
    1. Positive example: The human body is a system composed of numerous subsystems.
    2. Negative example: (There are no negative examples. Everything which can be thought of can be construed as a system or part of a system, for everything which exists is related to everything else which exists. But a ticking clock is a better example of a well-organized whole, or system, than is a pile of sand, though the latter is also a system.)
    3. What difference should a knowledge of systems thinking make to my life?
      1. Heart: It could encourage me to be true to my covenants and principles, because I could see all of my decisions as needing to be systematic (intelligent).
      2. Mind: I could master the techniques of systems thinking.
      3. Strength: I could be more systematic in the way I treat and use my body.
      4. Might: I could create a celestial order in my stewardship.

    What kinds of systems do humans use to think about the universe?

    An initial taxonomy relates to the input of the environment.

    1. Open systems are those which have some input from or output to an environment.
    2. Closed systems are those which have no exchange with their environment. (Some systems which have very little exchange are analyzed as closed systems by simplification for purposes of convenience.)

    Another taxonomy of systems is created by emphasizing change.

    1. Systems that do not change appreciably over a given time period are known as static systems. Example: A map is a static system.
    2. Systems which do change or function are known as dynamic systems. Example: A living orchid plant is a dynamic system.
    3. Systems in which the changes are at least in part due to intelligent (goal setting and seeking) behavior are known as agent systems. Example: A human being is an agent system.

    All systems have a static aspect (a structure). All agent systems have static structure and a dynamic system in addition to the agent aspect.

    A third taxonomy of systems is created by emphasizing subject matter.

    1. Mechanical systems are those being analyzed according to structure and force applications. They can be analyzed as closed systems with considerable success. Their principal opposition is change of structure (wear and tear). Example: A bicycle.
    2. Biological systems are those systems which have as their main feature the ability of units to reproduce their own kind. They are best analyzed as open systems which achieve homeostasis (steady state) with their environment. Their principal opposition is anything which destroys that homeostasis to bring death.
    3. Intellectual systems are concept systems in a human mind as represented in some symbolic form for communication purposes. The symbolic manifestations of such systems tend to be used as closed systems. The opposition to such systems is that they tend to be ignored or lost.
    4. Social systems are organizations of people who cooperate to operate and perpetuate the system. These systems tend to be open, with the principal opposition to each being rival social systems. Example: The LDS Church.

    A final dichotomy relates to how men view the systems they create.

    1. Real systems are those which the person creating or using them believes actually characterize the universe.
    2. Imaginary systems are those which the person creating or using them understands to be a creative expression of his own mind and not necessarily to be characteristic of the real universe.

    There is but one real system known to man: the universe. Man can only vaguely characterize the universe in its entirety, which is its reality. So we spend our time analyzing and characterizing subsystems of the universe to attempt to shed light on the nature of the whole.

    Thus all of the subsystems men deal with are fictional abstractions (constructs) by which we attempt to guess at reality.

    And thus the line between real and imaginary systems is very thin, often non-existent. One mark of intelligence is to be able to draw that line accurately.

    Thus reality is really imaginary and all imaginary systems really exist in someone’s mind.

    What are the types of systems thinking?

    There are four basic types of systems thinking: systems analysis, systems design, systems operation, systems evaluation.

    1. Systems analysis is the description of some real subsystem of the universe in systems thinking categories. Example: Analysis of an automobile.
    2. Systems design is the specification of the system parameters of some new thing which a person has imagined. Example: The design of a home one hopes to build.
    3. Systems operation is the functional use of some real system paying special attention to the system parameters. Example: Driving an automobile.
    4. Systems evaluation is the comparison of one system either with some ideal system or with some other real system, comparing them as to some standard such as effectiveness or efficiency. Example: Is it better to use a typewriter or a computer to write a paper?

    What are the basic parameters of systems thinking?

    Parameters of static systems:

    1. System boundaries are the edges of the subsystem selected for analysis.
    2. System environment is everything outside the system boundaries.
    3. System parts are all things within the system boundaries.

    Example:    An automobile has boundaries, which are its tangible surfaces. It has an environment, which is everything outside its tangible surfaces but including the air which freely circulates among its parts. And it has parts, which are all the pieces of material out of which it was built.

    Parameters of dynamic systems in addition to the static parameters:

    1. System function is the internal operations of the static parts.
    2. System input is the input of the environment to the system.
    3. System output is the output of the system to the environment.
    4. System opposition is whatever causes the functioning of the system to break down, to deteriorate.

    Example:    An automobile functions by burning fuel to produce power to turn the wheels to provide locomotion. The system input (in part) is fuel and air. The system output (in part) is exhaust fumes and noise, and power turning of the wheels. The opposition is (in part) bad roads and bad driving, which produce wear and tear.

    Parameters of agent systems in addition to those of static and dynamic systems.

    1. Agent goals are the desires, the objectives of, the agent.
    2. Agent resources are the wherewith by which the agent could achieve goals.
    3. Agent strategy is the overall plan of the agent to achieve a goal.
    4. Agent tactics are the specific actions to be taken to implement the agent strategy.
    5. Agent work is the actions of the agent in implementing strategy and tactics.
    6. Agent assessment is the observations of the agent to see if and when the goal has been reached.
    7. Agent evaluation is the decision of the agent as to whether or not attaining the goal was worthwhile or not, once having attained it.

    (Note: Agent goals is an example of systems analysis: What do I with it? Agent resources, strategy and tactics are examples of systems design. Agent work and assessment are examples of systems operation. And of course Agent evaluation is an example of systems evaluation.

    Example:    A young man desires to gain the hand of a young lady in marriage (goal). He decides to impress her (strategy) by an unusual date (tactic). He arranges and executes the date (work), gains her acceptance and marries her (assessment), then tries to decide if he did the right thing (evaluation). (In a Restored Gospel frame the answer to the evaluation is not determined by the eventual outcome but by how he performed steps 8 through

    What is it essential to know about systems analysis?

    Reality is usually too complex to deal with, so we simplify it. We try to retain all the essential features of our subject and eliminate only unnecessary aspects, but we don’t always succeed in doing that. The parameters of systems thinking listed above are an attempt to provide a standard for the minimum essential features which must be specified to describe a system successfully.

    Systems analysis is the attempt to capture the essential features of some existing (real) object of attention and curiosity in this world in order better to understand and/or control it.

    There is usually one key factor in any systems analysis. As one answers the questions to find the basic parameters, one should ask also, what is the real key to control, to using this system successfully.

    Examples: What is the key factor in systems analysis of an automobile?

    • Of a political system?
    • Of a person?
    • Of a theology?

    Question: What advantage does systems analysis have over ordinary attempts to understand?

    What is it essential to know about systems design?

    Reality sometimes does not have all of the “things” we feel we need. We may desire houses, automobiles, fruits and vegetables, clothing, honors, social organizations, and works of art, all of a sort which do not exist. So we wax creative and design new things.

    Systems design is the planning of new things to meet our human desires and needs.

    The key factor in systems design is effectiveness. Will the thing created fill the need for which it was created? The second factor is efficiency. Was this creation done with a minimum of cost? Is there a better way?

    Most systems design is a slight modification on an old pattern. Most changes proceed in small increments. Few are cataclysmic.

    Systems design and creativity are the same thing. Systems design is an artistic undertaking. One can increase his skill at systems design by:

    1. Thinking of alternatives to every human creation one observes.
    2. Experiencing a wide range of cultures and achievements within cultures.
    3. Constantly looking for new ways to apply old ideas.
    4. Designing and implementing new systems, then evaluating them and seeking for better solutions.

    Creativity or artistic design is essentially a spiritual matter.

    Question: What distinguishes systems design from ordinary planning?

    What is it essential to know about systems operation?

    Reality usually needs some minor rearranging to fill our human needs. These rearrangements we achieve by using the structures and powers in our control. Thus we use our legs to change our location, we use a broom to sweep the floor, we use a pair of scissors to cut hair, we use a lathe to reduce the diameter of a spindle, etc.

    Systems operation is intelligent human action. All goal-oriented action is systems operation, for in all of such doing, we are systems using other systems to implement desired systems.

    The keys to systems operation are again effectiveness and efficiency, in that order.

    Systems operation is the skill of doing anything that is consciously and deliberately pursued.

    Systems analysis is a helpful preface to successful systems operation. One can drive an automobile without understanding how it works, but one will do better if one does understand the intricacies of the machine.

    Question:   Why is self-control necessary to systems control?

    What is it important to know about systems evaluation?

    Some persons pretend there is no good and bad, no righteousness or sin. But without such judgments, no person could attain to his or her desires. We must distinguish between good and bad (that which will lead to our goal or will take us away from it) and some persons want to and can distinguish between good and evil (that which makes the doer righteous or that which makes the doer evil). Not to make such evaluations is to step backwards from being human and intelligent.

    Systems evaluation is always a comparison of one system (the one being evaluated) with another system (the one being used as a standard), real or ideal, and judging the system being evaluated to be adequate or not, m comparison with the system being used as a standard, according to the desires of the evaluator.

    Example of evaluation: One has a desire to have a piece of wood of just the right dimensions to fill a hole. So one measures the dimensions of the hole (this sets up the standard to be met). Then one uses those dimensions to measure pieces of wood until one finds one that either fits those dimensions or can be shaped to those dimensions to satisfy the need. The wood is evaluated as adequate if it either fits the dimensions or fills the hole adequately.

    The key to evaluation is the standard of value being used. Human beings compare ideal standards against each other, then pick the one that they believe most suits their desires. Then they use the ideal standard to judge real systems.

    Evaluation is not measurement (assessment). Measurement is the determination that a desired quantity exists or not. Evaluation is the determination that a desired quality exists or not.

    Example: One measures to see if his gas tank is full.

    One evaluates to see if the gasoline performs as it should.

    The ultimate evaluation is comparison of how one thing actually works in the real world as compared with another. Ideal systems can only be evaluated theoretically, for they are only theoretical systems.

    Every evaluation measures the evaluator as much as the thing being evaluated. This is because the evaluator must select the standard of evaluation, thereby revealing or evaluating himself.

    Question:   Why is snap judgment usually a bad form of evaluation?

    Living the Restored Gospel successfully is an application of good systems thinking.

    Systems analysis reveals to the honest observer that his own life is in need of repair.

    Systems design leads one to form a hypothesis as to how to do better.

    Systems operation is the process of implementing the new plan to try to do better.

    Systems evaluation is the opportunity of an intelligent person to see if his new plan is actually any better than the old one.

    Where does the Restored Gospel come in? Any person who is already engaged in this process of trying to do better will welcome the Restored Gospel opportunity to receive divine assistance to analyze, plan, operate and evaluate. As the Holy Spirit touches a mortal’s life, it tells him that he needs to repent, and that only as he puts his trust in Jesus Christ unto baptism by proper authority can he fulfill his potential as a son of God. Repentance, baptism, and the receiving and obeying of the Holy Ghost are the systems operations or work he must do. Having been faithful, he can then compare his new self with his former self by systems evaluation to see if he is really any better off.

    Does understanding systems thinking help a person to live the Gospel any better than one could without that understanding? No, for the Holy Spirit brings one all one needs to live the Gospel. But systems thinking will help one to understand and to explain the process of living the Gospel better than one can without it. If a person is humble and desires understanding of the ways of the Lord, systems thinking will help him to form those questions he must ask about the ways of God which must be answered for understanding to grow.

    Question: Is systems thinking of equal value to evil as well as to good persons?

    What are the laws/rules of systems?

    The following laws and rules apply to all systems and are therefore useful in every context:

    1. Causation: There is a cause (input) for every change in a system. There is an explanation for everything.

    Application: There are no “accidents.”

    1. Sufficient reason: Every change is caused by something great enough to have the effect observed.

    Application: For every output there must be a larger input. There is no free lunch.

    1. Entropy: Energy concentrations in a physical system tend to dissipate.

    Application: Things of this world tend to cool down, wear out, break up.

    1. Prediction in a system is sure only if the system is in complete control.

    Application: The only things we humans completely control and therefore can completely predict are our own personal choices.

    1. Law of social systems: No open social system of this world can be perfected.

    Application: If you take in everyone or admit all comers, your system will always be evil because there are always people who will choose evil. A marriage can be perfected because it can become a closed system (so far as input is concerned) in the New and Everlasting Covenant.

    1. Focus of energy at the right time and place is the key to power in dynamic systems.

    Application: The spark must jump at just the right time in an internal combustion engine. There is a tide in the affairs of men that taken at the crest leads on to victory…” “Strike while the iron is hot.”

    Systems Analysis Format

    Target system: [Focus of concern for an analysis]
    Example:    An automobile

    Static analysis: [System seen as a spatial configuration only)
    Example:    Automobile sitting still, engine off.

    System boundaries: [What are the edges of the system?]
    Example:    Tangible boundaries of body, engine, etc.

    System environment: [What other subsystems are close by?]
    Example:    Air, highway, rainstorm, countryside.

    System parts: [What are the important internal parts?]
    Example:    Body parts, seats, controls, drive train.

    Dynamic: [Target system seen as temporal (moving, functioning)]
    Example:    Automobile being driven down a highway.

    System function: [How the system parts work together.]
    Example:    Explosions in engine turn shaft, gears, rear wheels, propel automobile.

    System input: [What the environment feeds into the system.]
    Example:    Air, gasoline, heat.

    System output: [What the system puts out into the environment.]
    Example:    Motion of automobile, exhaust, dripping oil.

    System opposition: [Factors which destroy the system and its functioning.]
    Example:    Deep water on highway, collision with another automobile, etc.

    Agent:      [Target system seen as an agent or controlled by an agent.]
    Example:    You

    Agent goal(s): [What the agent desires at the moment.]
    Example:    You wish to go downtown.

    Agent resources: [What can the agent call upon or use to achieve the desired goal?]
    Example:    You have permission to use the family automobile, but it is out of gasoline. But you have money and put gasoline in.

    Agent strategy: [What is the agent’s overall plan to achieve the goal?]
    Example:    You plan to use the freeway.

    Agent tactics: [What specific things will the agent do to   carry out the strategy?]
    Example:    You plan to drive very carefully and to avoid rush hour.

    Agent work [How much energy, ability, intelligence and persistence does the agent apply in employing the chosen strategy and tactics?]
    Example:    You do drive carefully, and pay attention to where you are at all times.

    Agent assessment: [How close is the agent to attaining the goal?]
    Example:    You see the store which you wish to patronize [and park close by].

    Agent evaluation: [What did attaining the goal cost the agent? Was the attainment worth the cost?]
    Example:    They are out of what you wanted, so the trip was wasted. Ouel dommage!

    Key Factor: [Which system factor is the most influential one, the one which gives the operator of the system the greatest power and control?]
    Example:      Ignition key.

    (Note: To do a systems analysis, copy the section below from this page.)

    Systems Analysis Format

    Target system:

    Static analysis:
    System boundaries:
    System environment:
    System parts:

    Dynamic analysis:
    System function:
    System input:
    System output:
    System opposition:

    Agent analysis:
    Agent goal(s):
    Agent resources:
    Agent strategy:
    Agent tactics:
    Agent work:
    Agent assessment:
    Agent evaluation:

    Key Factor:

  • Lesson Two: Thinking (Philosophy 110)

    1. Theories of thinking:
      1. Concept theory: Thinking is the development and use of concepts. (This is the theory in use in this course.)
      2. Behaviorist theory: Thinking is the name for unknown functions in an organism which intervene between a stimulus and the response to that stimulus by an organism.
      3. Verbal theory: Thinking is the internal aspects of action patterns stimulated by the acculturation of an individual by linguistic interaction with a social group.
    2. Concept theory of thinking: The concept theory of thinking sees the imagination as the arena of human thinking. In response to experience (arising both from internal and external sources) an individual develops patterns of thinking which are called “concepts.” Concepts may be unitary, such as a certain shade of red, or very complex, such as the planetary system of which the earth is a part. These patterns can be unique or somewhat standardized; whichever they are depends upon the desires of the individual who creates them. All conceptual patterns are created by individuals, and no two individuals have identical concept patterns. A degree of commonality of concept patterns is essential for communication and cooperation, however.

    Thinking is pairing concepts to produce new concepts.

    1. Kinds of concept thinking:
      1. Concept formulation and identification: The development of concepts on the basis of external and/or internal information sources, or, comparing a concept with an information source to see if that is the concept in question. (This is the attempt to establish conocer, connaitre, kennen knowledge.)
        1. Example of formulation: Examining a machine again and again until one has built a concept which contains all of the physical parts and functioning of the machine being observed.
        2. Example of identification: Examining a machine again and again until one is certain that it is of the exact type of which one already has a complete concept.
      2. Concept relating: Establishment of larger concepts in which any two given concepts are seen as related parts of a whole. (This is the attempt to establish saber, savoir, or wissen knowledge.)
        1. Example: Understanding how an electric motor relates to the generator which supplies it with electrical input.
      3. Concept evaluation: Differential holding of concepts wherein some are seen to be more important than others, more “good” than others, etc, according to whatever values are important to the person who is thinking about the concepts.
        1. Example: Understanding that a three phase electric motor is better than a two phase motor for certain purposes.
        2. Example: Understanding that the most important thing about a human being is the person’s desires.
      4. Concept choosing: Selecting a concept pattern for some use, such as one to be remembered, one to be put into action, etc.
        1. Example: After contemplating a number of hypotheses, selecting one of them to be one’s characterization of another person.
        2. Example: Choosing the cherry pie instead of chocolate pudding for dessert.
        3. Question:   How is each of the above kinds of concept thinking an exemplification of the principle of pairing.
    2. Tactics of thinking: Thinking can be done with various degrees of complexity:
      1. Linear thinking: Single track concept manipulation.
        1. Example:    Imagining a way to pick an apple which is growing ten feet off the ground in an apple tree.
      2. Lateral thinking: Multiple track concept manipulation.
        1. Example:   Imagining six ways by which to retrieve an apple which is growing ten feet off the ground in an apple tree.
      3. Systems thinking: Searching out and understanding all of the essential parts of any object of study, how those parts relate to each other statically and dynamically, and how that object affects and is affected by its environment.
        1. Example:    Imagining as many of the costs and consequences of picking an apple which is ten feet off the ground in an apple tree.
      4. Lateral systems thinking: Doing systems thinking for many possibilities.
        1. Example:    Imagining as many of the costs and consequences as one can for each different means of retrieving and apple which is growing ten feet off the ground in an apple tree, by all of the means known to the thinker.
      5. Holistic thinking. Seeing things as they really are, were, and will be, and simultaneously understanding the importance, and the value, and the goodness or evilness of each thing. (This kind of thinking is done only by divine beings or those who are under the influence of the power of divine beings.) This is the goal towards which the best human thinking aspires.
    3. Characteristics of good (effective) thinking:
      1. Clear: Precise and articulated pattern formulation and manipulation.
      2. Accurate: Sufficiently representative of the real or imaginary world being considered.
      3. Moral: Explicit recognition of good (righteousness) and evil in what is being thought about.
      4. Complete: Recognition of all factors important to a given systemic thinking.
    4. Definition of an Agent: An agent is an intelligent being which chooses among alternatives for action on the basis of knowledge of the situation, desire to attain specific goals, and ability to act to attain those goals.
      1. Kinds of agentive thinking/acting: Two kinds of acting are here envisioned, following the ancient dichotomy popularized by Aristotle: a. Knowing: Aristotle’s contemplation (which produces concepts which become knowledge or belief. b. Planning: Aristotle’s practical thinking: to prepare for acting to produce some result.

    (Note: It is important to see that agentive thinking and acting cannot be entirely separated. Thinking is acting physically (things mental are also physical) and physically acting involves thinking.)

    1. Characteristics of good (effective) acting:
      1. Effective: Action which attains the envisioned result.
      2. Efficient: Action which attains the envisioned result with relatively low expenditure of resources.
      3. Righteous: Action which attains the envisioned result and which makes everyone affected by the action to be happier than they were before.

  • Lesson One: Course Mechanics (Philosophy 110)

    1. The nature of this course: This course is a workshop in skill development. Each class period will be devoted to discussion of skills and of exercises which develop those skills. Text material is to be studied ad learned outside of class. There will be at least one written assignment designed to enhance your skill development due each time the class meets. Each day’s assignment must be completed and handed in on time to receive full credit.
    2. The place of this course in your life this semester: This course should be your principal academic focus for the semester. You should plan on two to four hours outside of class for every hour spent in class.
    3. Religion: Religion and theology will be frequent topics of discussion, but you will not be held for any religious knowledge or commitment. We will begin each day’s class with prayer.
    4. Seating: Please sit where you like, but be found in that same seat each day thereafter.
    5. Learning this material:
      1. The best way to learn this material is to teach it to someone else on a daily basis.
      2. Next best is to form a study group of members of your class to review the skills and concepts.
      3. Regular private review is indispensable. A careful review the next day, then the next week, followed by a careful review after one month will enable you to fix these matters in your mind more or less permanently.
    6. Grading: You will be graded on a point system, your final grade being determined by your cumulative point total. Notice that the grading is weighted to balance personal discipline with competence. Points are assigned on the following basis:

    Out of this world:                                                     12 points
    Superlative:                                                               11 points
    High A                                                                        10 points
    Low A                                                                          9 points
    B                                                                                   8 points
    C                                                                                   7 points
    D                                                                                   6 points
    Failing grades                                                            0-5 points
    Papers turned in late during class:                        -1 point
    Papers turned in after class within one week:     Half credit
    Papers turned in after one week or not at all:      -5 points

    The Target Skills of this Course

    1. Key Questions: The careful formulation, asking and answering of questions which elicit key information about a subject in order to facilitate effective and efficient learning.
    2. Concept formulation: The precise shaping and reshaping of important ideas.
    3. Assertion formulation: The translation, classification and analysis of communication situations, usually focusing on sentences used in a specific context.
    4. Capture: Asking and answering the questions which adequately summarize the essence of a message.
    5. Systems formulation: Seeing things one wishes to understand as related functioning parts of a larger functioning context of related parts.
    6. Presupposition formulation: Making explicit the epistemological, metaphysical and ethical commitments which are assumed by the deliverer of a given message.
    7. Expansion: Adding to a body of knowledge through one’s own investigative efforts.
    8. Evaluation: Establishing the comparative value of an idea, deed or message by comparison of it with some accepted standard.
    9. Oral communication: Thoughtful use of spoken language to facilitate learning and cooperation by fitting deftly into a given oral/aural context.
    10. Written communication: Creation of a written representation of a message in such a form that the message is clearly and powerfully represented. Written messages generally create their own immediate context but must also fit into a larger cultural context.

    Question: The word “formulation” has or could have been used in the description of each of the skills mentioned above; why is this appropriate?

    Question: What is formulation?

    Question: What is the relationship between formulation and information?

  • Philosophy 110 (BYU)

    Content Summary Page

    This Introductory Philosophy course was taught by Dr. Chancey C. Riddle while at BYU until 1992. It is taught from an LDS perspective or what Dr. Riddle calls a Restored Gospel perspective.

    Lesson 1 – Course Mechanics
    Lesson 2 – Thinking
    Lesson 3 – Systems
    Lesson 4 – Success
    Lesson 5 – Concepts
    Lesson 6 – Communication
    Lesson 7 – Strategies
    Lesson 8 – Epistemology
    [[No course materials provided for the final 3 lessons]]
    Lesson 9 – Metaphysics
    Lesson 10 – Ethics
    Lesson 11 – Worldviews

    Appendix
    Epistemologies
    Humanist Manifesto
    Joseph Smith and the Ways of Knowing – Dr. Truman G. Madsen
    Self-Love – 1983
    The Choice – Elder Boyd K. Packer
    The Marks of a Saint
    We Mr. Taylor I Can Tell You Nothing

  • Code Language in the Book of Mormon

    Chauncey C. Riddle

    Brigham Young University

    (c) 1992 Chauncey C. Riddle

    Caveat: This paper has been created to demonstrate that the Book of Mormon is a text worthy of careful pondering and solemn thought. No reader should take anything said herein as Gospel truth. What is said is an invitation to every person to turn to the Book of Mormon and through prayer and meditation about what is contained therein to establish a living link with heaven through the person al manifestations of the Holy Spirit. It is what the Holy Spirit teaches an individual as the person ponders the text that is the important thing about the book of Mormon. Commentaries on the text, such as the following paper, do more harm than good if someone believes them without further inquiring of Father in the name of Jesus Christ as to exactly what he or she should believe about such matters. Now to the commentary.

    The title of this work is a bit misleading. All human mother tongues are code languages. To become an adult in any culture is to learn well the language of that culture. This involves being able to interpret to oneself the meanings of various other persons who use the same coding and to express meaning to them. This is always done within a cultural worldview and a common physical environment which provide limiting and enabling parameters for “meaning” something using a given language. So all of the language of the Book of Mormon is code language.

    The actual import of the title is to point out that there are special codes or usages in the Book of Mormon which are not culturally transparent to the user of ordinary English (whatever ordinary English might be taken to be). These codings are not those of the sort of “King James style” of English which Joseph Smith employed in translating the text. This paper will focus on four major kinds of hidden meaning which the ordinary contemporary reader of the Book of Mormon might miss even though he or she might be fluent in King James as well as contemporary English usage.

    The stated purposes of the Book of Mormon, given on the title page are: “To show unto the remnant of the house of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they might know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever — And also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting himself unto all nations.” These purposes are achieved in a narrative that is primarily a historical record of a people interspersed with commentary, sermons and admonitions, scriptural quotations, and allegorical allusions.

    The four major kinds of hidden meanings with which we shall concern ourselves in this paper are as follows: 1. Obscure usages. 2. Technical usages. 3. Metaphorical/allegorical usages. 4. Double entendres.

    1. Example of text having obscure meaning: Jacob’s mark.

    An obscure meaning is the usage of ordinary words of language in such a way that the reader has to puzzle out what the author means by a given coding. For instance, in Jacob 4:14 we read: But behold, the Jews were a stiff-necked people; and despised the words of plainness, and sought for things that they could not understand, Wherefore, because of their blindness, which came by looking beyond the mark, they must needs fall; for God hath taken his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand,because they desired it. And because they desired it God hath done it, that they may stumble. The question arises, what is the mark? A good deal of speculation about this topic is observed in LDS scriptural discussions. But the issue is interesting, because Jacob has taken pains to lay a ground work for his remark, which groundwork, if ignored, leads the reader of the Book of Mormon into the same trap as he describes for the ancient Jews: the modern reader can also easily look beyond the mark by misinterpreting “the mark.”

    The context of Jacob’s allusion to the mark is a discussion of Christ. In the preceding verse 4 Jacob mentions that he and others took the pains to make a record on metal plates so that their children would not lose that most precious of all knowledge, and understanding of Christ and his mission. He mentions that they (those who wrote upon the plates) worshipped in the name of Christ and kept the law of Moses because it pointed to Christ. In verse six he points out that the message of Christ has not been lost on them; through their knowledge of Christ, they have obtained a hope in Christ, and their unshaken faith has enabled them to do great miracles. But notwithstanding the greatness of those miracles, they knew their weaknesses, and they knew that only in the grace of Christ could they do those things. In verse eight, Jacob extols the world of Christ, the Lord, his mysteries and his mighty works. In verse eleven, he asks all his readers to be reconciled to Father through the Atonement of Christ. In verse twelve he asks why not attain to a perfect knowledge of Christ? In verse thirteen he points out that we can attain this knowledge through the Holy Spirit, and that all the prophets have testified of these things.

    Then, in verse fourteen, he speaks of the mark. With that preceding context could the mark reasonable be anything or anybody but Christ himself? Jacob seems to be saying that our life has one point and one point only: to come unto Christ, to be redeemed, saved, and reconciled to Father. To pursue any other goal is to miss the mark or the point of living a mortal life.

    The Jews missed the mark by seeking after knowledge of distant things. They seemed to have delighted in mysteries and metaphysics. Their quest to align themselves with a recondite and mythological truth was a way of ever laboring and never coming to the goal. They seemed not to realize that the point of life is to become a little child in establishing a very personal relationship with the most important person, Christ, and that through becoming his child they could gain all other good things as well, including truth. Jacob seems to be saying that not to see that the mark, the goal of human life held highest by the scriptures, is to know Christ face to face in mortality, is to look beyond the mark in any time and age.

    2. Example of a term in technical usage: Innocent blood.

    Technical usage in a language is opposed to common-sense usage. Common-sense usage is a fuzzy, family relationship type of meaning where the purpose is to approximate, not to be precise. When there is a need to be precise in order not to be misunderstood, technical language is introduced. Technical language has an essence, a specifiable and precise core content of meaning, which common-sense language does not have.

    A good example of coding which represents technical usage is found in the Book of Mormon usage of the phrase “innocent blood.” After preaching his second witnessing to the wicked King Noah and his court, Abinadi warns the king that though he is willing to die, should the king choose to kill him the king will shed innocent blood. (Mosiah 17:10) Examination of the scriptures shows that the word “innocent” means having no sin to one’s charge. Thus we read in the Doctrine and Covenants: “Every spirit of man was innocent in the beginning; and God having redeemed men from the fall, men became again, in their infant state, innocent before God.” (D&C 93:38) I take this to mean that though every spirit was innocent in the beginning, having no sin to its charge. Being born under the curse of the fall of Adam would have caused little children born into this life to be under the curse of sin were it not that the Savior prepared a redemption from the fall and thus every person is innocent or guilty according to his or her own sins and not because of Adam’s transgression.

    But being innocent, either not having sinned or having been forgiven of one’s sins, does not of itself create the technical matter know as “innocent blood.” The repentant people of Ammonihah were burned by the wicked inhabitants of that city. Alma notes that in burning them the people of Ammonihah were bringing upon themselves the “blood of the innocent.” Those who burned others were guilty of murder, and would have to answer for that. But there is no suggestion that they were shedding innocent blood.

    It is in D&C 132 that the key is given to know how and why Abinadi’s blood was innocent blood whereas the blood of the repentant women and children of Ammonihah was the blood of the innocent. The phrase is used repeatedly which says: “if ye abide in my covenant and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood.” (D&C 132:19) This introduces the idea that the shedding of innocent blood pertains to the New and Everlasting Covenant and to it only. A later verse then clarifies the matter. “The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood, and assent unto my death, after ye have received my new and everlasting covenant, saith the Lord God.” (D&C 132:27)

    The sum of the matter is then that innocent blood is the blood of Christ or his personal priesthood representative who has been sent to other covenant servants of Christ. Abinadi was sent by God to call Noah and his courtiers to repentance. In slaying him, they in effect slew the Savior himself, and that after having partaken of the New and Everlasting Covenant and pretending to administer and to teach it. For this there can be no forgiveness of sins, either in this world or the next. The case of the wicked people of Ammonihah was different. They had explicitly rejected the New and Everlasting Covenant and were not bound by it. The murders they committed were indeed laid to their charge, but they were not charged with deliberate murder of the Savior. There is murder, and then there is murder whereby one sheds innocent blood.

    In another passage of the Book of Mormon, the father of King Lamoni uses the term innocent blood mistakenly. Ammon has just warned the old king that should he slay his son, he would be killing an innocent man, for Lamoni had repented and had been forgiven of his sins. The old king replies: “I know that if I should slay my son I should shed innocent blood; for it is thou that has sought to destroy him.” This usage is understandable, but does not qualify as a technical usage of the term innocent blood, for the king had not yet received the New and everlasting Covenant, nor did his son preside over him in priesthood authority. Therefore had the old king killed his son he also would have been shedding the blood of the innocent.

    3. Example of metaphorical/allegorical meaning: Alma’s tree of life.

    The Book of Mormon contains a significant number of references to plants and trees, used in a metaphorical sense to represent persons. One of these references is puzzling because no interpretation is given as it was by Nephi telling his brothers about father Lehi’s tree of life vision. The reference in question is Alma’s reference to another tree of life in Alma 32. The question is, who is the person represented by the tree of life? Is it God as the tree of life, as it was in Lehi’s vision? Or is it some other person? Again, close reading of the text provides our clues for interpretation.

    In Alma 32:28 the word is compared to a see, and is specifically identified as the Spirit of the Lord. A message from the Lord is received through the spirit and is to be planted in the heart of the hearer. The test that the seed is good is that it swells, sprouts and begins to grow. (Verse 30) By that the hearer may know that the seed is good. Further confirmation of the goodness of the seed comes in the fact that the soul also begins to expand, the understanding is enlightened and the mind doth begin to expand.(Verse 34) Alma says that it is the hearer’s heart and mind which are growing and expanding. So, what is the tree?

    Alma further warns the hearer that the tree must be nourished with great care, lest the sun come and scorch it because it has no root. He tells us that we do this by not laying aside our faith, but by continuing to exercise our faith. (Verse 36) But if one nourishes the tree with faith unto great diligence, the tree will take root and will be a tree springing up unto everlasting life. (Verse 41) Alma concludes by saying that “Because of your diligence and your faith and your patience with the word in nourishing it, that it may take root in you, behold, by and by ye shall pluck the fruit thereof, which is most precious, which is sweet above all that is sweet, and which is white above all that is white, yea, and pure above all that is pure; and ye shall feast upon this fruit until ye are filled, even that ye hunger not, neither shall ye thirst.”(Verse 42)

    Now it seems plain that the hearer is the tree of life. It was in his heart that the seed was planted, being the spirit of the Lord. It is he that is transformed in heart and mind, swelling and expanding as the seed grows. It is he that must continue to nourish the seed by continuing in faith to hearken to the spirit of the Lord. And it is his own self that is the tree of life, bringing forth the pure fruit of Christ in the deeds of pure love done for others.

    One might be confused by Alma’s wording that the hearer himself feasts upon this fruit, thinking that perhaps the tree might be another person by whom the hearer is blessed. But that does not fit the analogy. It is not in another’s heart that the seed is planted, nor is it another person’s heart and mind which swell and expand. Indeed, the hearer becomes the tree of life, for the only way to attain everlasting life is to be a tree of life, doing good for others in the pure love of Christ. Then indeed one never hungers nor thirsts again, for one has then the most satisfying opportunity in the universe, that of doing all that is possible in righteousness to bless others.

    The final clincher to this is the factor of testimony, of knowledge, which was the purpose of Alma’s rehearsing this allegory. The original purpose was to know “whether the word be in the Son of God, or whether there shall be no Christ.” (Alma 34:5) Alma has been explaining to the Zoramites how to know if what they were preaching of Christ were indeed the true word of God. Alma tells them that the way to know for sure is to plant the seed, the word of God as it came to them by the Spirit of the Lord, that they might know for themselves. The swelling and sprouting would tell them that the seed was live and good; but only when the tree was mature could they know exactly what that seed would lead to. Only when one lives the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the end and produces the fruits of love and peace himself or herself does that person know for sure that this is the seed which is pure above all that is pure and produces a fruit that is white above all that is white. “By their fruits shall ye know them.” The person who does the will of God unto producing that fruit knows the truth of the Gospel in a way that one who is only blessed by the love of God through the labors of others can never know.

    4. Examples of double entendre.

    The double entendre type we are concerned with here is language use where there is a plain, straight-forward and legitimate ordinary interpretation of a language usage which is underlayed by a second, more significant but abstruse meaning. Punning is another type of double entendre with which we are not here concerned.

    a. “Prosper in the land.”

    The Book of Mormon abounds in references to the fact that if the children of Lehi keep the commandments of God they will prosper in their land of promise. (1 Nephi 4:14) The obvious and straight forward meaning is that they will do well as to the things of this world in the land which is choice above all other lands, which land abounds in natural resources. And the children of Lehi certainly did prosper in this land of promise. They produces abundance in flocks and herds, grain and fruit, gold and other metals, until they were rich as to the things of this world.

    The second and more significant meaning of prosper is uncovered by reflection on the negative reward which is the complement of the prospering. “Inasmuch as ye shall keep my commandments ye shall prosper in the land; but inasmuch as ye will not keep my commandments ye shall be cut off from my presence.” (2 Nephi 1:20) This passage reveals that the cursing for not keeping the commandments of the Lord is to not have the opportunity to enter into his rest, which is the fullness of his glory. (D&C 84:24) Jacob says: “Wherefore we labored diligently among our people, that we might persuade them to come unto Christ, and partake of the goodness of God, that they might enter into his rest, lest by any means he should swear in his wrath they should not enter in, as in the provocation in the days of temptation while the children of Israel were in the wilderness.” (Jacob 1:7) To keep the commandments of God is the only way to come unto Christ. And the reward for that is to be with Christ, to enjoy the glory of his presence. But those who will not keep the commandments cut themselves off from that strait and narrow path which leads to his presence and cannot enjoy that presence in mortality.

    The meaning of the phrase “land of promise” figures in this double meaning. A land of promise is a special place where one goes to meet the Lord, which is to prosper in the land. The Savior told his disciples in Jerusalem: “After I am risen, I will go before you unto Galilee.” Why should the disciples go to Galilee? Because there they would meet the Savior. Likewise, when the Savior gives anyone a promised land, he goes before them to that land. That land is then the place where they can and will meet the Savior, if in that land they keep his commandments. Abraham was given a promised land, and there kept the commandments and knew the Lord face to face. (Genesis 12:1-3; 17:1) Moses tried to get the children of Israel to keep the commandments so that they could prosper in the land, but they would not. (D&C 84:19-25) And among the Nephites, many kept the commandments and were thus prospered. (Alma 13:10-13)

    b. The seed of Abraham.

    In 1 Nephi 22:8-9 we read: And after our seed is scattered the Lord God will proceed to do a marvelous work among the Gentiles, which shall be of great worth unto our seed; wherefore it is likened unto their being nourished by the Gentiles and being carried in their arms and upon their shoulders. and it shall be of great worth unto the Gentiles; and not only unto the Gentiles but unto all the house of Israel, unto the making known of the covenants of the Father of heaven unto Abraham, saying: In the seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. The question arises: What does the text mean in alluding to the seed of Abraham?

    The surface meaning of seed is plain in the passage mentioned. Nephi speaks of the children of his brothers and himself as “our seed,” a common usage in the Old Testament and Book of Mormon, So the plain interpretation of the seed of Abraham is his physical posterity. Through the children of Abraham will all nations eventually be blessed.

    The deeper meaning of this usage relates to the fact that “Abraham” is the new name given unto Abram. Abraham had a son named Ishmael when he was as yet Abram. Will all the nations of the earth be blessed through Ishmael? It appears not, though great blessings are given to Ishmael and his seed: And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. (Genesis 17:20) But the greater blessings were reserved to Isaac, who was conceived and born after Abram’s name was changed to Abraham: Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him. (Genesis 17:19)

    Now the question is, Are all of the children of Isaac the seed of Abraham through which the nations of the earth will be blessed? Again the answer seems to be “No”. The matter is explained in the Book of Abraham: My name is Jehovah, and I know the end from the beginning; therefore my hand shall be over thee. And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations; And I will bless them through thy name; for as many as receive this Gospel shall be called after thy name, and shall be accounted thy seed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their father; And I will bless them that bless thee; and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood) for I give unto thee a promise that this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal. (Abraham 2:8-11)

    Now it is plain from this passage that the blessings which Abraham’s seed give to the nations come through the holy priesthood. It is true that the seed of Abraham according to the flesh have first rights to the priesthood because of the righteousness of Abraham, but they will receive the priesthood only upon their own righteousness. If they come into the New and Everlasting and receive the holy priesthood, then indeed they can and will be ministers of the blessings of Jehovah to all nations. But if they will not come into the covenant, they will be replaced by Gentiles who are not the literal seed of Abraham’s body, but who are adopted unto Abraham, and thus counted as his seed in the priesthood, in their acceptance of the New and Everlasting Covenant.

    But the matter does not rest, even there. The new name which Abram received, Abraham, literally means “father of many people.” While it is true that Abram/Abraham is the father of many people, the title Abraham is rightfully the name of the great Jehovah, the true father of many people. In putting the name Abraham upon Abram, Jehovah (that is to say, Christ) is putting his own name upon his faithful servant. thus the seed of Abraham, speaking of that portion of his seed who will bless the nations, is actually a designation of the children of Christ. The blessing that is given to the nations is that the children of Christ invite all others to become the children of Christ, and administer that opportunity through the holy priesthood which has been put upon them by Christ. But the Savior chooses to honor his faithful servant Abram by putting upon Abram his own name, his own covenant, his own priesthood,m and by calling his own seed the seed of Abraham.

    c. The house of Israel.

    One of the most common references in the Book of Mormon is Israel and the house of Israel. The surface meaning of the name “Israel” is that it is a reference to Jacob, the son of Isaac, the grandson of Abraham, and the father of the twelve tribes. A principal concern of the writers of the Book of Mormon is what has happened, what was happening and what would happen to the house of Israel, and particularly to their won family, a branch of the house of Israel, In general, Israel is important as a people in the history of the world because it is through Israel that the blessing of all nations by the seed of Abraham will be administered.

    The tie to the seed of Abraham gives us a clue to the deeper, more important meaning of the name Israel. First we know that the name is again a new name given to one who was a faithful servant of Jehovah. As a new name, it is given of Jehovah, or Christ, as a reward, and to signify a new relationship of the recipient to Christ. If we look at the name “Israel” etymologically, we see that it is purported to come from two roots. One of the roots means, mighty, a prince, one who rules. The other root is the Hebrew name for God. The standard references tell us that the name Israel mans “he will rule as God,” or “he rules as God.”

    Now it is plain that he who rules or will rule as God is Jehovah, himself, or Jesus Christ. The new name for Jacob is also a name of God himself, even as was Abram’s new name. The conclusion is that the house of Israel is the house or family of Jehovah, the house of Christ. The children of Israel are thus of two kinds: the seed of the flesh, the literal descendants of Jacob; and the children of the new and everlasting covenant, who are the children of men who have come unto Christ and have become his sons and daughters, his seed. Thus does Abinadi explain: When his soul has been made an offering for sin, he shall see his seed. And now what say ye? Who shall be his seed? Behold I say unto you, that whosoever has heard the words of the prophets, yea, all the holy prophets who have prophesied concerning the coming of the Lord–I say unto you, that all those who have harkened unto their words and believed that the Lord would redeem his people, and have looked forward to that day for a remission of their sins, I say unto you, that these are his seed, or they are the heirs of the kingdom of God. (Mosiah 15:10-11_

    Now we might push the matter a bit further. Pointing, or the designation of vowels in the Hebrew language and script is a rather late invention. For this reason, we can call into question the pointing that is given to the name “Israel.” Without pointing we can see that the roots can be taken to be yasher and El. Israel could thus mean the just God, the righteous God. Pushing it a bit further, it could be Ja, the prince of God. Ja is the shortened version of what we call “Jehovah” or “jahvah”. These interpretations give meaning to the statement that every prophet who has prophesied since the beginning has testified of Christ. Perhaps the testimonies did not use the name “Christ,” but every prophet has used one of the names of Christ, one of which is Israel.

    d. The name of God.

    In reading the Book of Mormon we encounter passages such as the following: Behold, my soul abhorreth sin, and my heart delighteth in righteousness; and I will praise the holy name of my god.(2 Nephi 9:49)

    Behold, my beloved brethren, remember the words of your God; pray unto him continually by day, and give thanks unto his holy name by night. (2 Nephi 9:52)

    Behold, they will crucify him; and after he is laid in a sepulchre for the space of three days he shall rise from the dead, with healing in his wings; and all those who believe on his name shall be saved in the kingdom of God. Wherefore, my soul delighteth to prophesy concerning him, for I have seen his day, and my heart doth magnify his holy name. (2 Nephi 25:13)

    And under this head ye are made free, and there is no other head whereby ye can be made free. There is no other name given whereby salvation cometh; therefore, I would that ye should take upon you the name of Christ, all you that have entered into the covenant with God that ye should be obedient unto the end of your lives. (Mosiah 5:8)

    After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. (3 Nephi 13:9)

    . . . that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him, and keep the commandments which he hath given them, that they may always have his spirit to be with them. (Moroni 4:3)

    Careful inspection of those passages reveals that something unusual is going on. The surface meaning of praising the name of God and taking that name upon us is to praise the words “Jesus Christ” and being known as servants of Jesus Christ. The surface meaning is good and true. But it is plain that there is more. For salvation comes by this name. Being know by the name of Christ does not bring salvation; so there must be something more.

    That something more, the deeper level of interpretations, is alluded to in other scriptures:
    And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying, On this wise shall ye bless the children of Israel, saying unto them, The Lord bless thee, and keep thee: The Lord make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them. (Numbers 6:22-27)

    Ye shall utterly destroy all the places, wherein the nations which ye shall possess served their gods, upon the high mountains and upon the hills, and under every green tree: And ye shall overthrow their altars, and break down their pillars, and burn their groves with fire; and ye shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy the names of them out of that place. Ye shall not do so unto the Lord your God. But unto the place which the Lord your God shall choose out of all your tribes to put his name there, even unto his habitation shall ye see, and thither shall ye come. (Deuteronomy 12:2-5)

    And when thy days by fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy father, I will set up they seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. (II Samuel 7:12-13)

    I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father . . . Let the hearts of your brethren rejoice, and let the hearts of all my people rejoice, who have, with their might, built this house to my name. For behold, I have accepted this house, and my name shall be here; and I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house. (D&C 110:4-7)

    These references show us that indeed there is something more referred to than the bare mention of the name of Jesus Christ. What seems to be alluded to by the words “the name of the Lord” is the ordinances of salvation, specifically the temple ordinances. To take upon ourselves the name of the Lord is to take the covenants of the Lord upon us. In ancient times this apparently was the ordinance of the Law of Moses as fulfilled in the temple. In the latter-days this is to receive all the ordinances of his holy house.

    So when the prophets say: Blessed be the name of the Lord: that saying has a double meaning. Indeed blessed is the sacred name of Jesus Christ. But also blessed be the ordinances of salvation by which we by further degrees take more and more of the name of Jesus christ upon ourselves.

    The importance of this double entendre may be seen when one uses the name of the Lord to do his work. If one has taken little of the name of the Lord upon himself, he probably has little power to cast out devils or to bless. But if one has fully received the ordinances, both in the sense of having made the covenants and having honored them, then when one acts in the name of the Lord, he acts in great power unto fulfilling the works that the Savior would have him do.

    So “the name of the Lord” has a precious double meaning. It is both a literal designation of the name by which we know our God, but is also in most places also a representation of the power and authority from God which we may receive in the ordinances of the holy temple. Hopefully we will not take the name of the Lord in vain.

    f. Amen.

    The final item in this discussion of double entendres is a concern with the word “Amen.” The surface meaning is the one usually given, the “So be it” of the tradition or the idea of an ending. The Book of Mormon is replete with instances of the use of the word. In most places where it is used it comes at the end of a commentary, a sermon, or a doctrinal discourse. In each of those settings the surface meaning is appropriate and useful.

    It is my hypothesis that the underlying meaning is that the word designates one of the special names of Jesus Christ. Each usage of it therefore might also be interpreted to say “in the name of Jesus Christ.” There is only one place in all of the scriptures where such an underlying meaning seems inappropriate, and that is in the discussion of the priesthood in D&C 121:37. Let us now recount some evidences for this hypothesis of underlying meaning.

    In Revelation 3:14 we read: “These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works . . .” This plainly is a reference to the Savior, the Firstborn.

    In the New Testament there are over seventy references where the Savior uses the construction “amen lego” in the Greek. These are translated in the English version to say “verily, I”, but that is an interpretation as much as it is a translation. It is my opinion that the correct interpretation is to see that the Savior is saying “Amen, I say unto you” or “I, Amen, say unto you.” No one else uses that construction in the New Testament. If it meanly only “verily, I say unto you” it seems likely that it would have been used by the apostles as well.

    One of the special names of the Savior as designated in latter-day scripture is the name Ahman. “Wherefore, do the things which I have commanded you, saith your Redeemer, even the Son Ahman.” (D&C 78:20)” Again we read: “And let the higher part of the inner court be dedicated uno me for the school of mine apostles, saith Son Ahman; or in other words Alphus; or, in other words, Omegus; even Jesus Christ your Lord.” (D&C 95:17) Ahman is an appropriate vocalization of the Amen of the greek or Hebrew. Ahman is the vocalization given for the word in at least one Hebrew concordance.

    The word “amen” in its unpointed Hebrew form means just or righteous, a very appropriate name for the Savior. The Egyptians took that name for their god Ammon.

    Finally, we note that in giving the manner of prayer both to the Jews and to the Nephites the Savior specified that a prayer should end in the word “Amen.” On the theory that he would not have given his faithful followers a deficient pattern, we see another reason for seeing that the word “Amen” is a name of Jesus Christ. To say “Amen” at the conclusion of a prayer, either as mouth or as hearer could thus be to affirm our own witness that the order of the prayer was correct; that the prayer was inspired of God and thus is appropriately closed in the name of Jesus Christ. While it certainly is true that no one can mean by a word in a prayer anything but what is in their own heart and mind, it is also plain to see that for those who understand the possibility, they could be saying at the conclusion of their prayer: “I say this prayer in that special name of Jesus Christ which is Amen.”

    5. Conclusion

    If the work of this paper has been done well, the conclusion should be obvious at this point. The conclusion I draw is that the code language of the Book of Mormon points toward Jesus Christ. It points to him so many ways that one has no trouble seeing that what the Nephites said of themselves is true: “For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved after all we can do . . . And we talk of Christ, we rejoice in Christ, we prophesy of Christ, and we write according to our prophecies, that our children may know to what source they may look for a remission of their sins.” (2 Nephi 25:22-26)

    Our Savior has several hundred names, some of which have figured prominently in this discussion. Many of his names are code words in the scriptures. It is as though it was known from the beginning that men would not properly use and would try to lose the name of God, so his name was spread out among many names to that his names would never be entirely lost. Some names were never pronounced, and thus became unknown in their true form, as in Jehovah as a representation of the tetregrammaton. Some were made common words of the vocabulary, such as Amen. Some were given to others so that they would not go out of use, such as Abraham, Israel, and Melchizedek. All of this so that the trace of the true Savior would not become lost among the children of Israel, try as they might to avoid it.

    Understanding these code usages also gives understanding to the words of Jacob: “We have written these things that they may know that we knew of Christ, and we had a hope of his glory many hundred years before his coming; and not only we ourselves had a hope of his glory, but also all the holy prophets which were before us. Behold, they believed in Christ and worshipped the Father in his name, and also we worship the Father in his name.” And may the day soon come when all mankind will worship the Father in his name.

  • Theory of Communication, 1991

    December 1991

    1.   Definition: Communication: The effect or relationship one being has on or with another.

    Kinds: Static: One thing contiguous with another.
    Dynamic: One thing affecting another.

    Static communication is always reciprocal. Dynamic communication may or may not be reciprocal.

    Intentional communication = agentive communication.

    2.   Definition: Human communication: One human being affecting the body of another human being.

    Static human communication: One human body being contiguous to another. Dynamic human communication: Acting with one’s body to change the body of another human being.

    Kinds of active human communication:

    • a.   Visual affect
    • b.   Auditory affect
    • c.   Substance affect
    •            1)   Taste
    •            2)   Smell
    •            3)   Chemical
    •            4)   Solid object
    •            5)   Addition or deprivation of heat
    • d.   Kinetic communication (hitting, pushing, etc.)

    Prominent myth about communication: Human communication is the exchange of ideas.

    3.   Spiritual communication: One (at least partly spiritual) being affecting another (at least partly spiritual) being by non-physical means.

    Principle kinds:

    • a.   Good: Radiating the good spirit, thus influencing other beings to do godly (righteous)      things.
    • b.   Evil: Radiating the evil spirit, thus influencing other beings to do evil (selfish) things.

    Postulate: Human beings are always spiritual beings and always under the influence of at least one other spirit, either the spirit of God or the spirit of Satan, or both, plus the possible spiritual influence of other persons.

    4.   Communication between human beings is always a combination of human communication and spiritual communication. (The effect of spiritual communication gives rise to the myth of transfer of ideas.)

    5.   Agent communication always has specific parts:

    • a1. Sender intention: what the sender desires to accomplish.
    • b1. Sender main idea: the mental image which prompts the sender’s action.
    • c1. Sender assertion: the physical action launched by the sender to affect the target of communication.
    • d1. Sender affect: the net result of what the sender accomplished in asserting.
    • a2. Receiver intention: what the receiver desires to achieve as a response to what the receiver believes the sender intends.
    • b2. Receiver main idea: what the receiver thinks as a result of what the receiver thinks the sender had as a main idea.
    • c2. Receiver assessment: the urgency or importance or strength which the receiver places on the communication from the sender in light of what he or she knows and imagines.
    • d2. Receiver affect: the specific response of the receiver to the sender’s communication.

    6.   Postulates of communication:

    • a.   To exist is to communicate. Not to affect anything nor to be affected by anything is not to exist. All real beings communicate with something other than themselves. Reality is the sum of all communications.
    • b.   How a being communicates defines its being, since anything exists only in communicating.
    • c.   In a given situation, one being may not act, but only be acted upon by another. But to be a being, it must be potentially able to act. If it is never able to act for itself, it is not a separate being but only a part of the being which acts upon it.
    • d.   The effects of communication upon agents are effects only of accident. Ordinary human communication never does or can change an agent’s essence. Only God can change a being’s essence.
    • e.   An agent being has two potentials, one good, the other evil. The choices and actions (the communications) of the agent fix upon that agent one of the two potentials. Thus the agent partly creates himself or herself.
    • f.    Salvation is communication from the Savior to an agent who has consistently chosen good over evil, inasmuch as he or she was able to do so, to make the person wholly good (holy).
    • g.   Agentive communication, sending or receiving is always good or evil. (There are no value-neutral actions.)
    • h.   Communication is always an entropic process. More is sent than is ever received.

    7.   Total communication: Two beings interact so completely that they become as one being.

    • Satan attempts total communication, but cannot succeed long run.
    • God never attempts total communication, but honors the agency of the other person.
    • Humans who follow Satan attempt to control, mold, shape other persons or things.
    • Humans who follow God always respect the individuality and agency of every person and thing with which they cooperate.

    8.   Ways to improve communication:

    • a.   Communicate in more ways than before.
    • b.   Communicate about more things.
    • c.   Communicate in more and different environments.
    • d.   Be redundant.
    • e.   Communicate only good (unselfishness).

    Exercises for communication:

    1.   Why is no human communication intelligible?

    2.   When is there too much communication? Give examples.

    3.   When is there too little communication? Give examples.

    4.   What is the connection between communication and reality?

    5.   What is the connection between communication and morality?

    6.   What is the connection between communication and epistemology?

    7.   What are examples of total communication?

    8.   How does one communicate love?

    9.   Devise a strategy for communicating to any other person your concept of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Implement your strategy. Test and evaluate your strategy. Learn something from the process.

    • a.   Your strategy:
    • b.   Your implementation:
    • c.   Your test and evaluation:
    • d.   What you learned about communication.
  • Persuasion, 1991

    November 1991

    Part I. The Place of Argument.

    1. What is an argument?

    Argument-1: A conclusion accompanied by supporting ideas.

    Argument-2: An antagonistic conversation between two people.

    This work will deal only with Argument-1 and will use the word “argument” to refer to Argument-1.

    2. Why would anyone want to produce an argument?

    The purpose of argument is the attempt of one person to persuade another person (or persons) to believe or to do something.

    3. What is there about this world that makes arguments important?

    Human beings are often in doubt as to what to believe or what to do. Arguments are the attempts of one person to persuade someone (including oneself) as to what to believe or what to do.

    4. Why is this world that way?

    Father designed the world and his children so that they could come to truth (knowing what to believe) and wisdom (knowing what to do) on their own only with difficulty. He has prepared means by which each of His children may gain a fullness of truth and wisdom through our Savior. But many humans would rather stumble in the dark rather than to go to Father through His Son to learn truth and wisdom.

    5. When we try to find truth and wisdom using only human resources, we find that some matters are easy, some are very difficult.

    Learning what to believe about what is immediately and physically around us is truth that is fairly easy to come by. Learning how to deal wisely with the physical things around us is also at the easy end of the scale. But even at this easy end of the scale, human beings make mistakes which can cost them their physical and spiritual lives when they rely on human means to gain truth and wisdom.

    Learning what to believe and what to do to satisfy our immediate needs for nourishment and protection is also at the easy end of the scale.

    Learning what to believe and what to do to be successful and happy in this life is mid-range in difficulty.

    Learning what to believe and what to do to claim our full eternal inheritance as children of God is at the very difficult end of the scale of learning truth and wisdom.

    6. What are the options human beings have for learning what to believe and what to do?

    Human beings have two basic options:

    • a.   Accept the opinions of other human beings, or
    • b.   Make contact with God and learn from Him.

    7. Why do most human beings learn mostly from human beings?

    Because:

    • a.   God asks men to be obedient when He teaches them. Some men do not want to be moral (obedient to God), so they do not seek to learn from God.
    • b.   There are always plenty of human beings ready to tell others what to believe. And to communicate with human beings is easier, at first, than communicating with God. But communicating with human beings is not a hundredth part as profitable as is communicating with God if one is willing to be moral.

    8. Where does argument fit into this picture?

    Human beings have noticed that some human beings are better sources of ideas about things to do and to believe than others are. The ones who are better sources usually can explain why they say what they say. These explanations are arguments.

    The human being who says to others, “You believe and do what I say without questioning!” are pretending to be gods, but following any of them around for a day proves they aren’t up to much as gods.

    Human beings who try to persuade others to believe and do as they say by argumentation are honoring the intelligence and the agency of their hearers.

    Argument appeals to the minds of men and is meaningful to those who try to approach life using their minds to help themselves.

    9. How does argumentation fit in with being skeptical?

    To demand and argument (support for an idea) is the essence of skepticism. Skepticism is the unwillingness to believe or do anything where there is insufficient evidence to support the correctness of the belief or the action.

    We are under instruction from the Lord to be skeptical of the sayings of every human being. But we are also under instruction to pay special attention to those whom we know are called of God and preside over us in His priesthood authority, but to believe and do only that which the Holy Spirit confirms to us is the mind and will of the Lord.

    If we do not know the Holy Spirit (cannot tell when it is speaking to us), then we are trapped in the opinions of men.

    10. Does God also present arguments to human beings?

    God does honor men with arguments. He sends His missionaries out armed with arguments such as the continuity of the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ with the Biblical account of that gospel, as opposed to other current “Christian” versions of the gospel. The purpose of such arguments is to provide an occasion for the missionary to commend the hearer to pray to Father in the name of Jesus Christ in the attempt to establish a personal communication relationship with God. When one has come to know that he is truly communicating with God, the human being must then be willing on some occasions to accept what God says for him or her to believe and to do without demanding proof (argument) that what God says is correct. To act on the word of God which results from having prayed earnestly in the name of Jesus Christ, without demanding antecedent proof of truth or wisdom from God is what constitutes faith in Jesus Christ. Only in faith in Jesus Christ can any human being be saved (brought back into Father’s presence to share with Father and our Savior all that they have).

    11. What is Father’s purpose in this freedom of choice which men have?

    Father wishes to prove who can be trusted with great knowledge and power and who cannot. Thus He leaves His children free to choose between His truth and wisdom and the so-called truth and wisdom of men.

    When human beings accept Father’s truth and wisdom, they also accept His righteousness. When a human being has become fully righteous, then Father can then bestow a fullness of light (wisdom) and truth (correct belief) upon that person.

    But if men do not desire Father’s righteousness, He leaves them the option to accept whatever they can get by way of beliefs and wisdom from other human beings and from Satan.

    12. Are there other alternatives for getting things done with human beings other than those of accepting the arguments of men or having faith in Jesus Christ?

    A favorite human alternative for “getting things done” is brute force. War, police, law and personal assault are force alternatives to persuasion.

    13. Is there a counterfeit to persuasion?

    Genuine persuasion (presenting of an argument) is done in love, kindness, and pure knowledge of the truth. The counterfeit to this honorable persuasion is to use lies, half-truths and threats of brute force to get people to agree.

    14. What is the best use to which human arguments can be put?

    The best use of human arguments is to persuade all men to come to Christ. For in Christ come all good things: all light, all truth, and the only way back to Father. For a person who is full of light and truth from Christ has no further need to receive the arguments of men except to counter such arguments with better arguments from Christ by which to lead his hearers also to put their faith in Jesus Christ.

    The goal of all honorable presentation of arguments is to bring other human beings to light and truth. But the best way to bring human beings to light and truth is to encourage them to come unto Christ, the earthly source of all light and truth.

    15. Should all human arguments which do not persuade men to come to Christ be rejected by those who are servants of Christ?

    The scriptures bear plain witness: Whatsoever does not promote good (Father’s righteousness) and testify of Christ is not of Christ (and therefore is not good).

    Any servant of Christ who wishes not to be misled will take every idea to Father, in the name of Christ, to find our whether to believe and to do it or not. This is part of the strait and narrow path of which the scriptures speak.

    The arguments of men are mixtures of truth and error, good and evil. To accept any human argument at face value without going to Father to discern the true worth of that message is folly. For thus the blind lead the blind.

    Through the power of Christ His servants may select what is true and righteous from every human message and leave that which is dross (false and evil) behind.

    16. Why then learn to argue?

    Argument is the “coin of the realm” in the academic world. The academic measure of any contribution is judged by the arguments which men produce to persuade their fellowmen.

    If you wish to succeed in the academic world, you must learn to judge well the arguments of others and to argue well yourself.

    The greatest single help to learn to judge the arguments of others and to learn to argue well is to have the Holy Spirit to be one’s guide, which can only come to covenant (baptized) servants of Christ.

    And if you learn to argue well, you can use that power to persuade other human beings to come to Christ. But one must remember that no human argument can “prove” Christ. What our human arguments do is catch the attention of other persons and get them to pray to Father in the name of Christ to see if He has any message for them. It is Father, and our Savior, and the Holy Ghost who are the ultimate persuaders. Their persuasion will eventually win the assent and love of all humans, even if not so right now.

    17. How does Satan work upon human beings?

    Satan’s only direct access to human beings is to persuade them. But his persuasion is never honorable. For though he teaches some truth, he also uses lies whenever it suits his purpose, and thus is an unreliable witness; and he never encourages good, but strictly and carefully pursues an undeviating course to persuade men to do evil.

    Satan’s only real leverage is to whisper to men encouragement to believe what is pleasing to them and to do what pleases them. Satan can only tempt or try to persuade us through our own lusts.

    Any human being who tries to persuade others to believe something which is not true or to do something which is not righteous is in the service of Satan, whether he or she knows it or not.

    The only way to avoid being a servant to Satan is to come unto Christ. One cannot serve two masters. The only way to completely stop serving Satan is to come unto Christ through the New and Everlasting Covenant and through it to be perfected in Him. Then one’s faith and one’s arguments of persuasion will be pure and holy, even as the person is holy, even as Christ is holy.

    18. What then is to conclusion of this conversation?

    The conclusion is that argumentation is a very important human academic skill which all persons in academia must master. All of the technical professions employ this methodology. Using this skill one can either do evil or righteously apply it to eternal purposes.

    Part II: The Kinds of Argumentation

    1. There are five kinds of arguments (to use one taxonomy):

    Arguments are used to:

    • a.   Clarify (interpret)
    • b.   Verify (establish the truth or probability of truth)
    • c.   Understand (tell how something works)
    • d.   Evaluate (establish the worth of some belief or action)
    • e.   Apply (this is how you do X)

    2. Example of an argument of clarification:

    Question: What does it mean to be “pure in heart?”

    Argument:

                Conclusion: To be pure in heart means to have the pure love of Christ in our hearts for all others.

    Premises:

    1. To be “pure” means to be unmixed.
    2. The business of hearts is choosing.
    3. To be “pure in heart” means that with our hearts we choose only one kind of thing (choosing is unmixed).
    4. Hearts choose between good and evil.
    5. Pure hearts choose only good.
    6. The only good thing is to love Father and our neighbor with all of our heart, might, mind and strength.
    7. To love Father and our neighbor with all of our heart, might, mind and strength is to have the gift of charity, which is the pure love of Christ.
    8. To love Father and our neighbor is to love all others.

    Therefore: To be pure in heart means to have the pure love of Christ in our hearts for all others.

    3. Example of an argument of verification:

    Question: Is it true that this earth is the most wicked of all the earths Father has created?

    Clarification: Earths are not wicked. Only children of God on His earths can be wicked.

    Conclusion: The most wicked of all of God’s children who had ever been given mortality up to the time of the life of Enoch upon this earth were human beings living on this earth at that time.

    Premises:

    • a.   Moses 7:35–36 says: Behold, I am God; Man of Holiness is my name; Man of Counsel is my name; and Endless and Eternal is my name, also. Wherefore, I can stretch forth mind hands and hold all the creations which I have made; and mine eye can pierce them also, and among all the workmanship of mine hands there has not been such great wickedness as among thy brethren.
    • b.   The scriptures of the Pearl of Great Price reveal the truth.

    Therefore: It is the truth that the most wicked of all of God’s children who had ever been given morality up to the time of the life of Enoch upon this earth were human beings living upon this earth at that time.

    4. Example of an argument of understanding:

    Question: How does one become a son or daughter of Jesus Christ?

    Conclusion: One becomes a son or daughter of Jesus Christ by obeying His instruction to believe in Him and His gospel, to repent of one’s sins, and to be born again of water and Spirit through authorized servants of Christ.

    Premises:

    • a.   To become a son or daughter of Jesus Christ is to become an authorized inheritor of what Christ is and has.
    • b.   To become an authorized inheritor of what Christ is and has, one must hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ taught by the power of the Holy Ghost, and one must believe that divine witness.
    • c.   If one believes that divine witness, he or she will repent of sinning (which is to say, one will confess one’s sins and forsake them).
    • d.   If one believes in Christ as explained in the gospel of Christ, and has repented, one is prepared to take the covenant of baptism.
    • e.   If one is prepared to take the covenant of baptism, an authorized servant of Jesus Christ (bearing the Holy Priesthood) will interview the person to ascertain the fulness of that preparation, and when satisfied that one is prepared, will administer the ordinance of baptism by water.
    • f.    In accepting baptism by water under the power of an authorized servant of Christ one promises to: 1) Be willing to take upon them the name of Christ; 2) To always remember Him; and 3) Keep every commandment which He (Christ) gives unto them.
    • g.   Baptized persons who have actually made the promises specified above are ready to be confirmed members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
    • h.   An authorized servant lays his hands upon the head of the one who is ready to be confirmed and commands them in the name of Christ to receive the Holy Ghost and announces that they are now members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
    • i.    If the person confirmed does not receive the companionship of the Holy Ghost at the moment of confirmation, they should pray and seek for it until they receive it.
    • j.    When the person actually receives the companionship of the Holy Ghost after confirmation they have then been baptized with fire.
    • k.   Every person who is truly born of the water and of the Spirit has kept the commandment of God and is now a son or daughter of Jesus Christ and will remain so as long as they keep the promises they made in receiving the covenant of baptism.

    Conclusion: One becomes a son or daughter of Jesus Christ by obeying his instruction to believe in Him and His gospel, to repent of one’s sins, and to be born again of water and Spirit through authorized servants of Christ.

    Note that this argument of understanding does not consist of proofs of the correctness of individual steps: that would make argument one of verification. An argument of understanding is a careful explanation as to how to do something. If one applies the formula and gains the desired result, then the explanation has worked. In this example, one knows that one has become a son or daughter of Jesus Christ if he or she fulfills the understanding given and thereafter enjoys the companionship of the Holy Spirit.

    5. Example of an argument of evaluation:

    Question: What is the worth of a human soul?

    Conclusion: A saved human soul is worth more that the life time of labor of an ordinary human being.

    Premises:

    • a.   The lifetime labor of an ordinary human being is not worth a great deal, because of themselves, no human being can do any fully good thing. If human beings do fully good things, it is because they have come unto Christ and do His good (righteousness).
    • b.   No human soul can be saved by a lifetime of unaided human labor, because that labor is not good (not worth saving).
    • c.   A saved human soul will do the work of Christ. This work is eternally worthwhile, and the fruits of this work will last into all eternity. And this soul will go on in eternity doing good to all eternity.
    • d.   A single mortal work of a saved soul which will have eternal good consequences is worth more than a whole mortal lifetime of human work which will be destroyed at death and not be remembered any more.

    Therefore: A saved human soul is worth more than the life time labor of an ordinary human being.

    Note that arguments of evaluation are all comparative. Something is established as a standard or as better, and a judgment is then made about value or worth.

    6. Example of an argument of application:

    Question: What should one do with love?

    Conclusion: One should learn to love better and better until that love is pure and complete, as is Father’s love. Then one can help wayward souls.

    Premises:

    • a.   Every person on earth once did what was right because they felt Father’s love for them.
    • b.   Some persons on earth now do not do what is right because they no longer feel Father’s love for them.
    • c.   The best thing one can do for a neighbor is to gain Father’s kind of love and then love our neighbor.

    Therefore: One should learn to love better and better until that love is pure and complete, as is Father’s love. Then one can help wayward souls.

    Part III. What Makes a Quality Argument?

    1. A quality argument is complete.

    All must be explicit. There should be no suppressed premises.

    2. A quality argument must be valid.

    The argument must be formally correct. The premises must make the conclusion to be warranted.

    3. A quality argument must be based in truth.

    The premises must be true, and known to be true. Plausible premises only allow plausible conclusions.

    4. A quality argument is audience centered.

    The language, figures of speech, clarity and tone must be appropriate to the intended hearers of the argument.

    5. A quality argument must be delivered in suitable rhetorical device.

    If delivered by an essay, a poem, or a play, they must be well written lest they mask their message. If delivered by the actions of a person, they must be consistent and competent.

    Connotations are also important. A hymn loses its spiritual force when sung in nightclub style. The vehicle must not be too long (to lose the audience) nor too short (to fail to convey the full weight of the message).

  • Conversation and Sanity, 1991

    October 1991

    1.   Human being consists of doing: Be-ing.

    2.   Human beings assert themselves to fulfill desire.
          Assertion: Any deliberate action (doing: Be-ing)

    3.   Assertion results in conversations.
          Conversation: A series of interactive assertions and receiving of assertions with a partner.

    4.   The more and better conversations one has, the more be-ing one has.

    5.   Human beings have four different kinds of partners in conversation:

    • a.   Other human beings (who tend to be unpredictable).
    • b.   Nature: Everything physical which is not human. (Tend to be predictable.)
    • c.   God: Predictable, the source of all good and all truth.
                  Good is that which increases the long-term happiness of any individual.
    • d.   Satan: Source of all evil, many lies and some truth. (Tends to be unpredictable.)
                  Evil is anything which is not as good as it could and should be.

    6.   No human being can escape conversing with all four kinds of partners.

    7.   Conversational competence: Ability to converse with a partner to satisfy one’s desires.

    • One must converse competently with other humans to satisfy social desires.
    • One must converse competently with nature to satisfy desires for food, clothing, shelter, location, etc.
    • One must converse competently with God to satisfy desires for truth and good.
    • One must converse competently with Satan to avoid doing evil.

    8.   Sanity is conversing to increase one’s quotient of be-ing.

    • Insanity is self-destruction: conversing to reduce one’s quotient of be-ing.
    • Quotient of being =     One’s present ability to converse
      One’s potential ability to converse.

    9.   Good conversation is sane conversation because in doing so, one advantages one’s partner, enhancing the being of one’s partner. But as the be-ing of one’s partner is enhanced, the opportunity for one to converse is enhanced. So as one enhances one’s partner, one enhances one’s own being as well.

    10. Evil conversation is insane conversation because in doing so, one disadvantages one’s partner in conversation, thus diminishing the be-ing of one’s partner and their conversational ability. So as one diminishes one’s partner in conversation, one diminishes oneself, because one has diminished the conversations one may have with that partner.

    11. Fostering conversation with God is the best way to foster conversational competence and sanity, for all good comes from God.

    Lack of sufficient competent conversation with God automatically forces one to be incompetent and insane in conversing in with other people, nature and Satan.

    12. Conclusions:

    • a.   Those who wish to be fully sane and fulfilled will do all in their power to foster more and more conversation with God, which will enable them to grow in conversational competence and good. Then they can converse with every kind of partner correctly and competently to fulfill every desire, which is to have a fullness of Be-ing. (Which is Eternal Life.)
    • b.   Goodness is conversational competence which advantages and enlarges one’s partners.
    • c.   Evil is built on the insane untruth that disadvantaging one’s partners in conversation will somehow enhance and enlarge one’s self.
  • Thinking, 1991

    September 1991

    1.   What human beings do: They

    • a.   Choose. They prefer one thing over another in order to fulfill their desires according to their understanding and ability.
    • b.   Understand. They taxonomize a mental universe to represent the “real” universe.
    • c.   Act. Using whatever skills and abilities they have, human beings do things. This is conversation with other beings.
    • d.   Enjoy. The universe causes in human beings sensations and emotions which we call experience. These are sorrow and joy, pleasure and pain, satisfaction and dissatisfaction.

    These four things constitute the bulk of what human beings do.

    But there is one more important activity. Human beings also:

    • e.   Argue. To argue is to present a case that:
    •            1)   One choice is better than another (ethics), or that
    •            2)   One taxonomizing is better than another (science, common sense, and metaphysics), or that
    •            3)   One skill development or application is better than another (strategy and tactics, “how to”), or that
    •            4)   One enjoyment is better than another (persuasion, advertising).

    2.   Thinking is done by human beings in all of the things which they do. But thinking focuses in argument.

    3.   Every argument has at least four elements:

    • a.   A conclusion. What it is you are trying to assert, to establish, to prove. (A choice.)
    • b.   A support structure. This is the evidence or basis for your thinking that the conclusion you foster is preferable to some other position. (A representation.)
    • c.   A rhetoric. This is the delivery vehicle in which the argument is communicated to others. (A doing.)
    • d.   An effect. This is what happens when your argument is communicated to some target. (An enjoyment.)

    4.   An example of an argument.

    • a.   Conclusion: You cannot make the world safe for human beings, but you can make human beings safe for the world.
    • b.   Support structure: Evil is endemic in the world; it cannot be eradicated. Therefore, the world cannot be transformed into a safe place for human beings.
                  Support structure: Human beings can be taught to defend themselves against the evils of the world. When they are taught and if they use what they are taught, they can defend themselves against the evils of this world, and therefore become safe for the world.
    • c.   Rhetoric: (Not given here: this would be a paper, or a poem, or a play, or some other vehicle by which to communicate this thought structure.)
    • d.   Effect: (Can only be hypothesized: If the target person(s) accept the argument you might enjoy that.)

    5.   Factors which affect thinking:

    • a.   Desires: If persons want to think, they will. If they want to think better, they will learn how to do so. If their thinking is good rather than evil, they will do prosper in thinking.
    • b.   Knowledge: The greater conceptual development and the greater the knowledge of the person, the better they can think.
    • c.   Skills: The more things a person can do well, the greater their ability to think about doing well.
    • d.   Effort: Time and energy are essential to sustained production in thinking.
    • e.   Wiring: Some persons are genetically constituted to be able to think faster and better than others.
    • f.    Environment: Some environments are rich in stimulation to think, whereas others are not.
  • Language of the Spirit

    Chauncey C. Riddle

    We talked yesterday about language. The topic today is how this applies to our living our lives in the world, in the gospel. I would like to pose a problem for you, something to investigate. That is, the very interesting story we have of the fall.

    Language before the fall very possibly was different. I’ve tried to understand exactly how they communicated before the fall and what difference the fall made. It’s possible that before the fall communication was simply concept communication the way it will be in the Celestial Kingdom. Adam and Eve were Celestial people, they had Celestial bodies, they had their spiritual eyes opened and they could see the Father and the Son and very possibly they simply communicated by thought.

    And that Satan was given the privilege of coming and speaking to them in the same way, I don’t know. The thing I think that is the key to the puzzle is three things that we learn in the story of the fall. When we understand what it means when it says their eyes were opened and they knew they were naked and they were ashamed. I think those pieces were put in there as clues to the puzzle to help us understand something about communication.

    Now my understanding further is that before they fell they did not know good and evil except in one particular that the Father had told them of. The evil was to partake of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, they knew they shouldn’t do that but everything else was just neutral. It was neither a good nor evil because they didn’t know an evil to correspond with it. Now, I think that we have to concede that part of that was the fact that they were very perceptive. That they simply looked around and saw things and took them for what they were without having anything with which to contrast that.

    It’s possible that what the fall was, was giving them the kind of language that we now have. And the kind of language we now have enables us to conceive and hold in our minds varies possibilities about things. Which enables us then to contrast a good with an evil. And it is just possible that the tree of knowledge of good and evil was the giving of language. The kind of language we have as opposed to the concept language that they communicated with before.

    At least, I think we can say this much. Language is the great facilitator of our knowledge of good and evil. Because through language rather than showing us exactly what to do or being something, the Savior can say to us, be kind to your neighbor, Satan can say to us, take advantage of your neighbor. Because we have language we can conceive those two possibilities in our minds.

    Now, what I’m saying, I’ll try to make it a little clearer. I don’t think animals in their looking at the world can see good and evil the same way we can. They can see things that may be dangerous to them, they can see things they want to avoid but I don’t think they can see good and evil and have the same ability to choose between good and evil that we do. Because we can suit whatever is good or evil to our own desires.

    We have this interesting ability because we get presented with good and evil alternatives but they don’t come labeled. No voice, no label, no power says to us, this is the good and this is the evil, we just get these two opposing things. We have to put the label on them. And we have to, we do choose which is the good and which is the evil according to our own desires. And so you find people in the world going around pasting the label good on all kinds of evil and what are they doing? They’re simply carrying out their agency. This is part of why they were put down here and on the day of judgment what will they be rewarded with?  They’ll simply will be given over to those things that they wanted. As they judged so shall they be judged. If they judged these things to be good to them so they will get them for eternity. Now, that isn’t to say that they will get all of their desires but if they wish to be selfish and they call selfishness good then they can be selfish for as long as they want to be selfish. If they like to be carnal, fleshly, they will be carnal and fleshly forever. If they wish to be kind or honor the truth do good for others this will be rewarded unto them forever. Because the judgment simply fixes upon us that which we have chosen.

    But language is the great facilitator of that choosing. It is the thing that exposes us to all kinds of opportunities the range of variables that make great freedom possible.

    Now, when Adam was put in the garden we know that God gave him a language both oral and written. Language is a gift of God and a great and wonderful blessing. As I said yesterday, no greater technology has ever been given to man. And by this we receive the commandments of God. He speaks to us in our own language in our own concepts so that there is no confusion. We will not be able to say I didn’t understand when he speaks to us. When men speak to us there is a real possibility that we won’t be able to understand. But when God speaks to us he always gives us at least two witnesses. Sometimes there are two persons, sometimes there’s one person and the Holy Ghost, sometimes there is a written message in the scripture and then a spiritual message through the Holy Spirit directed to our concepts.

    My guess is that the Holy Ghost always communicates to us in our own concepts and if we want to put that into a language we have to translate it. I’ve often asked one who knows two languages which one they pray in? They tell me one or the other and I say which one does the answer come in? How many of you know two languages? You know which one you pray in, which one does the answer come in? It doesn’t come in a language, you have to put it in the language of your choice. And that’s the answer that almost everyone gives. Which I think is a good indication that the language of the spirit is a concept language not a verbal language. And that’s why the Holy Ghost can communicate with us perfectly because it uses our concepts. He touches our mind, our heart in the way that we will understand exactly what he wants us to say. Which we human beings don’t have the power to do as we talk to each other.

    So when the angel came and commanded Adam to offer sacrifice Adam knew exactly what he meant. I would guess that when the Father gave commandment to Adam to offer sacrifice Satan also said don’t bother to do that, that’s a waste of time or some such. Because now that Adam was fallen Satan had full access to Adam to communicate with him. Apparently in that same concept language. And thus here’s Adam, he has these two forces working upon him now in everything that he does and he has to decide where does his heart lie? Does his heart lie with this the voice of God? Or this with the voice of Satan?

    Adam did have an advantage, he had known God and Satan before he fell and it was probably easier to recognize their voices. But his children, you see, never had that advantage, perhaps that is why so many of them fell away and worshiped Satan and called him the good instead of God. The angel came and asked Adam why he was offering sacrifice. Without language of course he wouldn’t have understood the question nor would have been able to answer. But, he gave an answer, and the answer was because he had faith. He believed the commandment of God and then the angel explained why he had given that commandment to him. To teach him that in all things he must look to Christ who’s the author of all good things and the beginning and end, the author and finisher of his faith.

    Now, what does righteousness consist of? If someone chooses to serve Jesus Christ to keep the new and everlasting covenant, the facilitation of the keeping of that covenant is through language: Through the reading of the scriptures, through listening in church meetings, by receiving instruction of priesthood authorities, by bearing our witness to non- members, by teaching the gospel, hearing the gospel.

    Now we do all of those things but we have to remember that in doing all of those things that there is a good and there is an evil. The fall made it so that in every choice that every human being has there is, we must always choose between a good and an evil. So whenever we open our mouths to speak we have the choice. The important thing to know is how do you find the good and what is the evil? In general, in my understanding, the evil is what we want to say (selfishness) choosing our own desires over those of God. If we wish to do the good we are going to have to inquire of God and find out what he would have us say. Now you have to have the gospel of Jesus Christ before this is a meaningful thing to say. To those outside the church they aren’t going to have that possibility but we who have accepted the new and everlasting covenant know something more.

    We know that we shall be held accountable for every idle word that we speak. An idle word is a word that we speak having chosen to do it evilly. Whereas a non-idle word is a word given to us having chosen to speak the good, meaning the right thing to say, the righteous thing to say. So I conceive that the Father has devised for us a program, a plan, whereby he will teach us how to speak truly, how to speak righteously. He speaks only light and truth, he never lies, he never gives bad advice.

    I take it in our apprenticeship to become as he is that’s probably one of the most important things we need to do is to learn to speak only light, his light and only truth, his truth. So how do we do that? I think the key to it is prayer. Now, there is a correct way to pray and there’s a false way to pray. The false way to pray is to say whatever we want to say. But the scriptures are plain, when we pray correctly it is given to us what we shall ask. And so if you have learned about how to pray correctly you come to realize, prayer is a thing that must be done by revelation. That is to say, our use and abuse of language is what condemns or saves us for one thing.

    And there’s probably no more important thing that we do than to use language. If we use it for evil then we cannot be saved and one of the greatest things we can do is to learn to speak only light and truth through Jesus Christ. Which we do by first learning to pray, how do you do that? Well, we have to first ask the Father to help us to pray, that has to come from us. But he has commanded us to do it so it is a good thing to do. And then we wait and we think and we try to open our hearts, to be as humble, as pliable, as susceptible as we can to the enticings of the spirit.

    And then sooner or later something comes to us and we have to discern whether that is a good spirit or an evil spirit. Whenever we invite the good spirit in the evil spirit also comes around and has it’s say and that because of the fall. We’re subject to Satan in that respect and so God does not speak to us except there is an evil counterpart to that so that we always have a choice. So if we will choose the good then our prayers begin to be holy prayers, prayers of light and truth. Now should we ever get so good at this that we can say a whole prayer simply by saying what we are prompted to say by the Holy Spirit we’ll be beginning to be in good shape.

    Imagine what it would be then, if each of us took that clue and then used it in our daily conversations with each other. And we did not say anything to anybody except that it was good in the spirit of the Lord to say so. So that we only spoke light and truth to each other. Wouldn’t that be a marvelous change in our society. We would never again get angry and tell somebody off. We would never again say something to hurt someone deliberately. We might say something that would hurt someone but it would only be because the Lord prompted us to and we say it in love with the intention of helping them. And then show forth an increase of love after so they will know we did not say it in anger, did not say it to hurt them.

    Now, if you get a great big sliver, if it’s deep somebody may have to cut your flesh to get it out, that’s going to hurt. And that’s what the Lord has to sometimes do with us, he has to hurt to help us get rid of the evil that’s in us. But the hurt is always beneficial in the long run when it comes by the Holy Spirit. If it’s light and truth the hurt is but a short hurt and brings great blessings in its consequence. But we have to judge these things by their fruits. We have to tell the difference between good and evil by seeing what the results are.

    So it’s given to us to judge and if we don’t like the way our life is going, that’s a clue to us that we are not listening to the right spirit, we’re not getting the clues that we want and need. If our hearts are evil, of course, then it’s very difficult for us to tell. The great key is to get a pure heart so that we will be able to tell the difference between good fruits and evil fruits.

    Which leads us to tell the difference between good spirits and evil spirits, which enables us then to choose the good and never to choose the evil. If we learn to speak righteously to one another, that is the key to learning to use the priesthood.

    What is the priesthood? The priesthood is the power of God, but it is not given to any man to say of his own mind and desires what he will do with that priesthood. I learned that one the hard way. Years ago I was an Elders quorum president in Manhattan, we were visiting members of our quorum on Statten Island. We came to the home of one brother, he had just had a heart attack and they had taken him to the hospital. His wife asked us to go to the hospital and give him a blessing. So we went, we slipped through the oxygen tent and gave him a blessing and told him that he would be all right, that he soon would be well. Ten minutes later he died. That’s a bit disconcerting if you’re a young elder quorum president. And so, we went to the high counselor over our quorum and said, tell us what happened? He was also the stake patriarch and understood this problem very well. He said, did the spirit tell you to say that? We said, no. We just thought that would be a nice thing to say.

    That’s not how the priesthood of god works. Man does not know what is good or righteous. Righteousness is of Christ and many times the things we ask for in our prayers are simply evil. The scriptures says, if you ask for evil it will be accounted unto you for evil. We have to learn to speak correctly. And so, we get this opportunity to practice and we’re promised that the Holy Ghost will be our constant companion and will communicate with us through this concept language exactly what it is we should pray for. And then what we should say to one another and then what we should say when we’re hoping to represent him, using the priesthood. Now there is two sides to that, sometimes when you’re laying your hands on someone’s head and the Holy Ghost is speaking through you, what the Holy Ghost tells you to say is so scary that you don’t dare say it. We have to be brave enough to say it and humble enough to get what to say.

    What are we supposed to do, we lay our hands upon somebody’s head and nothing comes? We’re not to say anything by way of blessing. We’re simply supposed to pray for the person. We admit defeat at that point and say, I’m sorry I can’t give you a blessing but I will pray for you. And I’ll pray for you the best I can but I don’t really know how to bless you. I had the experience a few years ago of laying my hands on a sister’s head. And I was told that there was a blessing for her, she was to be healed but because I hadn’t repented of my sins I couldn’t do it. It’s called a come up’ins. The Lord brings you up short once in a while, he lets you know where you stand. Twenty- four hours later another man laid his hands on her head, she was healed instantly. Because he had lived for that opportunity, he was able to heal her she was able to go on with her work. It’s the Lord’s desire that all of us be able to heal, by being righteous. I’ll tell you the man’s name, his name is Nathan Eldon Tanner.

    But you see, how much good can we do if we would repent of our sins and learn to speak nothing but light and truth. Oh, then we would have power in the priesthood. Which does not come from man, it comes from God. But it’s learning to use language, use this great technology that the Lord has given us correctly. So that we can use the greater technology. Priesthood is greater than language. But learning to use language correctly is the key to using the priesthood correctly. So he gives us a lesser power to see if we can learn to do well with it so then we can see if we can use the greater power.

    Now, if we can, not only do we have to speak by the power of the Holy Ghost we have to read and understand by the power of the Holy Ghost. And so he gives us the scriptures. The scriptures were not written to be understood, they were written to be a puzzle. They were written to help those who have the spirit and to blind those who don’t have the spirit, lest they be condemned. Here again, we get to practice. We have these beautiful words and if we are faithful we will sit and look at those black marks on the white pages and try to hold back our own interpretation which is private interpretation, until we get the Holy Spirit coming to us in our minds and telling us what the Lord wants us to think in connection with those black marks. Thus we have a chance to learn to interpret by the Spirit of the Lord.

    We get to sit in conference, we get to listen to the prophet of God and the question is: Are we in tune? If, as he is speaking, the spirit rings and our hearts swell within us and our minds are enlarged and enlightened and we know this is light and truth then we know we are on the beam. If we’re faithful the Lord is rewarding us with that resonance that comes when we are in tune. Should we find that we are beginning to wonder, is President Benson getting a little old? Is he saying things that really aren’t quite square? Has one of his helpers put this into his mind? He really wouldn’t say that if he were about to be — These are things that people say. And they are the temptations of Satan as it were. But, if you and I will go to the conference humbly in the attitude of prayer and fasting, ready to receive the word of the Lord. Having done what we were instructed to do the last conference. That’s our key to getting the Holy Spirit to understand this next conference and then the Holy spirit will just flood our minds with this beautiful feeling, will fill our heart with this warmth and we won’t have to ask further if this is the will of the Lord we will just know it, with every sentence he says, will just march into our heart and fill our being with light and truth. We will know that he is the prophet of God, that he loves us as the Savior loves us. And that he’s trying to do the thing that we need.

    What does he want us to do? He wants us to read the Book Of Mormon. The Church has neglected the Book of Mormon and he knows the church is suffering under a curse because of that. The curse was pronounced way back in 1832. It’s never come out of the curse because we as a people have never paid enough attention to the book yet. He’s trying to lift that curse, he loves us, so he’s gone to the Lord to find what we need to do to start being Zion. The first thing we need to do to start being Zion is to get ourselves wrapped around that book. It’s concepts, it’s ideas, it’s a chance for us to have the most perfect instrument in the world perhaps, to teach us how to live by the spirit that there is. There’s no better way to do that than to read the Book of Mormon.

    Maybe prayer is the only other thing that comes close to it. Now reading the Book of Mormon is probably the best help there is to learn how to pray. They go hand in hand. But if we learn to interpret by the spirit so that we interpret the scriptures, then we interpret the words of the brethren in conference, then we interpret the words of our Stake President, we interpret the words of our Bishop, we interpret the words of our Father. And then we begin to interpret every word we read and hear everywhere it comes. Discerning whether it’s good or evil, treasuring, collecting, remembering, living by all the good that we meet from any source. Putting on the shelf holding in abeyance everything we hear that’s evil.

    Now, if we can do those two things, learn to speak and interpret by the power of the Holy Ghost then we’re really benefiting from this marvelous thing of language which God has given us to raise us up. Why does he give us language? Because only through language can he give us the freedom to choose both good and evil. This freedom is the whole key to our salvation. If by our own free will and choice we will choose the good when it comes to us, then he can give us every good thing. We have to make that basic choice. So, what is our mission in life? It is to perfect our relationships with one another by first perfecting our relationship with God. If we can love him and hear his voice and interpret him without error then we can learn to love one another.

    We transact most of our business with one another through language. If we have learned to interpret language to separate the good from the evil then our language transactions with each other will begin to be holy. We will not speak anything that is evil and we will not allow ourselves to believe anything that is evil and thus we begin to bring our relationships to perfection. One place I think this needs to be focused, can be focused is in the relationships between husband and wife. The place to practice good communication is in prayer, that’s the first place, the second place is between husband and wife. Because husband and wife love each other they will want to communicate and my thought is, where is a better place to learn to communicate through spiritual means than between husband and wife?

    To use the physical words of the English language that we usually use as a key to begin to communicate by feeling and by ideas through the spirit of the Lord. If you have been married a while and your marriage is good you probably have experienced some of that. What a beautiful thing to have, that’s really wonderful when you begin to see eye to eye and you begin to know exactly how your spouse will react to something. That’s great communication and if they both choose the good, you see, there’s no limit to how close they can become, because each will become enclosed to the Savior all the time. Becoming closer and closer to the Savior enables them to become closer and closer to each other. Till finally they come to have one mind and one heart. How is Zion established? I think Zion is established by getting husbands and wives to love each other, so they come to have one mind and one heart. We’re surely not going to have one heart and one mind with anyone else if we can’t do it with our own wife or husband.

    Charity begins at home. If we can’t love the person we’re closest to, our closest neighbor in all this world which is our spouse, we’re surely not going to do much for anyone else. There’s the place to perfect our language. To work with one another, talk with one another, think, pray, hope, compare notes until we can do this just the right way. Now what do we do with language? With language then we participate in our own creation. Our creation is not over, it’s on going every day. Our Savior has given us a body but the body is changing constantly, it’s being recreated every day. Our minds are being recreated every day, as our hearts also and our might. Every time some new influence comes into our life, and we react to it we are a different person.

    So by making these choices that come to us through language we are choosing either the good or the evil; thus building ourselves into a better person or an evil person. Thus by the end of our lives we will have created a god through the help of God or a devil through the help of Satan, according to our own desires. We can’t do either without help from those sources. But with the help of those sources we can do either. Thus our final blessings then come by the pronouncement of either God of Satan. God has certain words which he says which seal us to him. Satan has certain words which he says which seal us to him. Thus we become the eternal child of either God or Satan, depending on which one we choose including what we do with language.

    So, as we learn to use language it’s important to recognize that there are four components to all language. There’s a heart portion, a mind portion, a strength portion, and a might portion. We have to perfect each one of these. Might is our fruit, it is given unto those who are not very spiritual yet to judge others by their fruits by the effects of their language. If their language produces good we know that they are good. If their language produces evil we know that they are evil.

    As we learn to communicate better and better then we begin to communicate by concepts by feelings of the heart directly. Finally by communicating as God does by looking upon the heart of other people. We have to be a little careful we don’t presume we can do that before we actually can. Well, we have said essentially what needs to be said about the use of language in our lives and applying it to the gospel.

    I think that as Latter-day Saints we would do well to try to be rich in the languages of this world. Languages are the keys for bearing testimony. The more languages we know the more people we can help. I think it ought to be our constant study to be working on another language other than the one which is our mother tongue. We need to be learning child language so we can speak to children. Some people can’t talk to children. We need to be learning technical language so that we can speak to people who want to speak technical language. We need to be learning the language of whoever it is that we love. Because if we do love them we will want to speak to them in their own language, in their own frame. Father has promised that every person will hear the gospel in his own tongue. And that may be a certain variety of English, it may be French, it may be scientific language, it may be statistical language, it may be the language of music, it may be the language of painting, it may be the language of dancing. All of these are languages, they speak, they express. And whatever it is we need to know to speak to someone we need to learn that language. The measure of our love for them is our willingness to sacrifice enough to learn their language so that we can bear witness of light and truth to them in terms that they will understand.

    Well, are their questions?

    (unheard)

    God says that in the mouth of two or more witnesses he will establish every word. So, he usually sends out missionaries two by two, so that there will be two witnesses. Whenever he gives a scripture, we see something written here in a book, he always sends his Holy Spirit, if we will receive it, to accompany that. So that we get the witness of the black and white and also of the Spirit. The Father and the Son are two witnesses, the Son and the Holy Ghost are two witnesses. In everything he tries to make sure we get two witnesses so that we will never have to depend on a single source. Two points make a line, he’s trying to give us lines or direction. Does that help?

    I was thinking of prayer when the Holy Spirit speaks to us, where if …

    The other witness will be the fruits of the prayer, the consequences of our prayer. If we don’t learn any other way, we will learn by what happens after we pray. If the prayer is answered, if we get what we asked for or pray for, that’s a pretty good sign. If it isn’t answered we’ll know that maybe something is probably wrong with that prayer and we can ask, why wasn’t it answered? And we’ll probably get an answer as to what we should then do to make amends or reparations. If we do that and it works, then we then know that we’re on the right track. We should always look for the second witness. My experience is that if we are in tune we always get an immediate answer of some kind. It’s true that sometimes I might pray for a million dollars and not get an answer for a long long time, I may never get it, but I can ask, why not? I’ll get an immediate answer to that. I find that sometimes my prayers are not answered but there’s one kind of question I’ll always get an immediate answer to and that is, what should I do next?

    Is there a difference between the language that Satan speaks and Christ speaks?

    Yes. The Savior always speaks in light and truth. Satan always speaks in darkness and warped truth or wrong, untruth. I have to be careful with that, sometimes he speaks truth, he never speaks light but sometimes he speaks truth so that we will buy what he has to say. And so yes, there’s a difference, and that’s why the whole study of our lives that the basic skill of being a Latter-day Saint consists in being able to detect the difference between the voice of God and the voice of Satan. Now we need to study that and try out different cases and try experiments until we become absolutely perfect at making that distinction.

    Satan can never speak to your heart.

    I don’t know about that. I think he can. But that’s my guess don’t believe that.

    The question is, he asked me how I read the scriptures, as the prophet has told us to read the Book of Mormon.

    I try to read it lots of different ways. I find that I have to just read it through occasionally. Start from the beginning and go to the end because that way I sweep out things I hadn’t seen before. Sometimes I read it topically, I look for a certain word or subject and just trace that though all the scriptures. I find it very useful to try a different medium, I’m currently listening to the Book of Mormon on tape for the first time and I hear things I’ve never seen before at looking at the printed page. I read it in Spanish last year. And the Spanish showed me certain things that I’d never seen in the English. I insisted sometimes to myself, that’s not in the English and I’d go back and look in the English and there it was. One difference was ever since I began to read I’ve been a fast reader. So I read the Book of Mormon just as fast as I can read, which is somewhere between 800 and a 1000 words a minute. There’s a lot you miss when you read that fast. I can’t read Spanish nearly that fast and slowing down taught me a great many things. So I would commend to you, slow down sometime, just read it very carefully word for word and piece it together. You have to do that on the tough passages. But read it slowly, read it fast, read it with other people. As you share with other people sometimes their insights are just what you need to put the pieces all together from what you’ve been studying. You’ve got the rest of it, they’ve got the one piece. That’s why the Lord wants us to teach one another, he doesn’t give everything to everybody. He wants us to need each other and to converse and teach each other about these things so that we will learn. So those are some thoughts.

    Question – (unheard) – something about choosing between good and good and between good and evil.

    But the real evil is always a good and the most tempting evil is always a good. That we could do, it is a good thing to do under ordinary circumstances, but it just happens in this case there something better to do so the good becomes an evil.

    Question – (unheard)

    My understanding is it’s always good and evil even though the two things in general terms are good. I use this technique. If there’s some job I’ve been putting off for a long time and I know I should do it. There comes a day I’m prompted to do something that’s much better than this and I say well I’ll go and do that job I’ve been putting off because I don’t want to do the good I’d rather do evil in this case, isn’t that terrible. But I find that I’m able to get some things done that way. The Lord has to try hard to save some of us.

    Question – Why is the devil able to duplicate the gifts of the Holy Spirit?

    Well, what he can duplicate is the results and not the holiness of the spirit. Therefore we know that the two spirits will never be confused. But for instance the devil can heal. And if all you can do is live by signs you have no sense of gifts then you can be taken in by Satan. Those that seek for signs are always evil in their hearts, cause if they had good hearts they wouldn’t seek for signs they would seek for the gifts. And they would seek to know the difference between the good spirit and the evil spirit.

    That’s the basic gift of the Spirit. But if you’re just looking for signs or the guy who’s got the power or to be healed or to speak in tongues or can do mighty miracles, Satan can do all of those things. If that’s the only thing that convinces you, there’s no hope.

    Question – Can Satan hear a silent prayer?

    I don’t know the answer. My belief is, that if we’re under the influence of the Holy Ghost he can’t.

    Question – (unheard)

    May I read you a scripture? I’ll give you my understanding on that. It’s Section 58 of the Doctrine and Covenants.

    “It’s not meet that I should command in all things.”

    Is that the one you’re talking about?  Let’s deal with both of them then. We’re supposed to the Savior says, “work it out in your own mind”. Don’t ask until you put some effort into it. That’s the instruction to Oliver Cowdery as to how he should translate. Now not every problem is a problem of translation. Is that the formula that applies to everything? I don’t think so. If the Lord tells you to do that in some particular problem, study it out in your own mind and present it to him, that’s what we must do. But my experience is this. Sometimes I go to him without having put any investment into trying to finding the answer. I just ask the question and I get the answer before the question is half out. Other times He makes me wait and do research on it for years. So I can’t find that that’s a general formula. That’s a specific instruction and a valuable thing to do when we’re supposed to do it. That takes care of Section Nine.

    Now Section Fifty Eight. This is a Section that was given that many people use that many people say, “we shouldn’t seek the revelations of God, we don’t want to bother Him with anything that’s not awfully important.” But I don’t think that is what He was saying. Beginning with verse 24, the revelation was given to Edward Partridge. He had been told in a previous revelation to take his counselors and move to Missouri where he was to be the presiding bishop of the church. He went to Joseph and said, “ask the Lord how we shall go”? This is the answer, “now as I spake concerning my servant Edward Partridge. This land, meaning Missouri is the land of his residence and those who he has appointed his counselors and also the land and residence of whom I have appointed to keep my store house. Wherefore let them bring their families as they shall counsel between themselves and me. In other words, don’t ask Joseph, ask me! For it is not meet that I shall command in all things. What does he mean by command? He has to mean. He has to mean getting a commandment through flesh and blood. For he that is compelled in all things the same is a slothful and not a wise servant, wherefore he receiveth no reward. Men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause and do many things of their own free will and bring to pass much righteousness. Because the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves.”

    What makes us agents? We are an agent when we can choose either good or evil in a situation. If we don’t have both those possibilities we are not agents. And the Holy Spirit is that which makes use an agent to know what is right to do. The evil spirit makes us an agent in knowing what is wrong to do. The power is within us, the power of the Holy Ghost to bring to pass much righteousness. We don’t have to ask flesh and blood what to do. We can find out by asking the Lord himself directly. That’s what makes a Latter-day Saint, is someone who has the Holy Ghost with him and asks and gets answers and doesn’t have to be commanded in all things.

    Question – What are alms of prayer?

    My understanding that an alm of prayer, that an alm is something that we give to the poor. That’s the basic meaning of the word. But we do it in the intent of doing an act of righteousness, an act of good to the Lord. We’re trying to love our neighbor as he loves us when we give alms to the poor. Now, when we pray we’re trying to learn to pray in the same kind of token and sacrifice as we do when we give alms to the poor. We’re trying to pray correctly. So an alm is an offering or a sacrifice we make. And we offer up our prayers as offerings to the Lord in the same sense we do the offerings of sheep or goats on the alter or the offering of something we give to the poor. That’s my sense of it if that helps.

    Question – Something about gods and lords.

    My understanding is yes, gods are only created for exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom. But some create themselves into terrestrial beings by waiting a long long time to finally decide to choose good and not evil. The ones that choose good early and anxiously are the celestial spirits that become exalted. Those who want to do good but not all of it become ministering angels in the Celestial Kingdom. Those who want to do good but not too soon become terrestrial. And those who finally admit at the last ditch that it’s better to do good than evil they apparently become telestial. But they all choose the good and every one of them does nothing but good ever after. There’s no evil committed by anybody in the Telestial Kingdom. They don’t sin, they don’t do very much but everything they do is good.

    Question – Does that imply that the progression of people in the Terrestrial and Telestial Kingdoms will sometime lead to Godhood?

    My understanding is no. It says, worlds without end they will not pass the barriers. This is the time to prepare to meet God. Now is the day of our probation and after this life it’s over.

    Question – Do we have the same development in our language as we grow spiritually as we do as we grow physically?

    And I think so yes. As we become acquainted with the words and concepts of the scriptures we are growing in our linguistic ability which is also a growth in our spiritual ability. That’s why we study the scriptures and figure out what all these things mean. That’s a growth in language ability which sets us free then to do more perfectly the will of the Lord.