Blog

2 Nephi 15:13-24 — LeGrand Baker — premeditated blindness

2 Nephi 15:13-24
13   Therefore, my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge; and their honorable men are famished, and their multitude dried up with thirst.
14   Therefore, hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure; and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.
….
18   Wo unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart rope;
19   That say: Let him make speed, hasten his work, that we may see it; and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh and come, that we may know it.
20   Wo unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
21   Wo unto the wise in their own eyes and prudent in their own sight!
22   Wo unto the mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink;
23   Who justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him!
24   Therefore, as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, their root shall be rottenness, and their blossoms shall go up as dust; because they have cast away the law of the Lord of Hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel (2 Nephi 15:13-24).

In these verses, Isaiah has not so much given a catalog of sin as he has a description of premeditated blindness. His imagery is of the rich, learned, and powerful who are enslaved to their own absurdity. Who, like the most menial of slaves, are reduced to beasts of burden which “draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart rope.” Their world is so inverted that they “call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness.” They neither know nor understand the realities of the world in which they live.

Two or three weeks ago (written in January 1999) Jim Cannon described to me the mathematical concept of an infinitely multi-dimensional object whose expanse reaches eternity. As he spoke I envisioned Ezekiel’s wheels which are an extension of the wondrous beings who are near the throne of God, and for the first time ever I had an imaginary image of what is meant by “God stood in the midst of them,” meaning the members of the Council.

The world we live in is nothing like that, yet it counterfeits everything like that. It offers temporary glory, passing power, vane riches, and expensive toys which break. Everything about such things insist they are transitory — everything about “worldliness” insists they are real. One of the major objects of one’s being in this physical environment is to give one experience so the person within may assert itself and define for oneself the difference between real and transitory.

Earlier this week, I wrote Cray a note in which I said, “I suspect that when we came into this world we were able to bring with us our love for the Saviour and our love for the people we loved then. While we are on this earth, everything around us testifies that it is temporary and tentative. When we die, that testimony is proven to be true. When we leave this world we have the power to keep what we brought with us and nurtured here — our love for the Saviour and our love for our family and friends. If we do not have that to take, we go empty handed.”

The Lord told the Prophet Joseph, “And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.” (D&C 130:19)

I suspect the word “knowledge” must be understood in the way it was used by the Lord when he explained:

23   Ye were also in the beginning with the Father; that which is Spirit, even the Spirit of truth;
24   And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;
25   And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.
26   The Spirit of truth is of God. I am the Spirit of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fulness of truth, yea, even of all truth;
27   And no man receiveth a fulness unless he keepeth his commandments.
28   He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things (D&C 93:23-28).

And also I suspect the word “intelligence” should be understood to be the same as, “The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth. Light and truth forsake that evil one.” (D&C 93:36-37)

If those assumptions are correct, then “if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life,” he will have to do it in terms of his love for the Saviour and for His children. Otherwise rather than “ knowledge and intelligence” the person will only have acquired information and appetite which may have no relevance to truth. I cannot find in the scriptures that a Ph.D.’s worth of that kind of information or appetite will have much eternal value.

It seems to me that Isaiah is bemoaning the fate of those who walk on their heads in a world turned upside down — who have eyes but cannot see, ears but cannot hear, a mouth which cannot speak the truth — Well, you know the rest of the sequence. Think it through. It seems that Isaiah is saying, “Get with it. It’s either God’s way or nothing!”

2 Nephi 10:24 – LeGrand Baker – Meaning of In and Through

2 Nephi 10:24
24   Wherefore, my beloved brethren, reconcile yourselves to the will of God, and not to the will of the devil and the flesh; and remember, after ye are reconciled unto God, that it is only in and through the grace of God that ye are saved.

Sometimes, while I am rushing along through the scriptures, my toe strikes a little word which I had refused to acknowledge in my consciousness, and I fall flat on my face. Startled, I look about to see what tripped me and I discover an “ordinary” word. I had not acknowledged it because I had been looking but not seeing, reading but not listening. So now, having been thrown off balance by its simplicity, I realize I have just missed something which is mighty important, and I haven’t the foggiest idea what it is.

A phrase in today’s scriptures struck me that way. It reads: “…it is only IN and THROUGH the grace of God that ye are saved.” Now what, I asked my self, “do you suppose that means?” It doesn’t mean “by the grace of God.” If Jacob had wanted to say “by,” he could have said “by.” So I suppose it was intended to say “in and through.”

I think the thing that called that little phrase to my attention is its similarity to a statement in the D&C, referring to the Saviour as

He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be IN all and THROUGH all things, the light of truth (D&C 88:6).

But then, come to think of it, I didn’t know what those words mean in that context either. So I went looking in the usual places, the scriptures and the dictionaries. What I discovered was amazing. So amazing I can’t just dump the conclusions on you. I think if it’s going to make any sense to you, I’ll have to walk you through the steps I walked.

In the Book of Mormon, the phrase “in and through” Christ is used six times to relate to our this- world experiences. One is this week’s scripture. The other five are:

6   Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the Holy Messiah; for he is full of grace and truth (2 Nephi 2:6).

17   And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.
18   For behold he judgeth, and his judgment is just; and the infant perisheth not that dieth in his infancy; but men drink damnation to their own souls except they humble themselves and become as little children, and believe that salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through the atoning blood of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent (Mosiah 3:17- 18).

13   And now, ought ye not to tremble and repent of your sins, and remember that only in and through Christ ye can be saved? (Mosiah 16:13)

But the in the Book of Mormon there are also two other uses of the phrase “in and through.” Those two, and all three in the D&C, clearly are in a context which is much, much bigger than this temporal world. They are talking about our pre-mortal existence and about the creation, or else they are using the concept of “in and through” as a tie between the pre-mortal world, this life, and the next. The first scripture of that group is in Alma’s discussion of pre-mortal existence and for-ordination. It reads:

5   Or in fine, in the first place [I take “first place” to mean first place, i.e. when we were intelligences. ] they were on the same standing with their brethren; thus this holy calling being prepared from the foundation of the world for such as would not harden their hearts, being in and through the atonement of the Only Begotten Son, who was prepared–” (Alma 13:5)

The “they” Alma is talking about are those whom he describes in verse 1-2 as having been ordained by the Father, presumably at the Council in Heaven, and presumably they are the same individuals whom Abraham describes as the “noble and great.” Notice the verb tense: “being in and through the atonement of the Only Begotten Son…” “Being” is present tense. Putting those accounts of the Council together, it seems to imply that the quality of “noble and great” is the same as “ being in and through the atonement of the Only Begotten Son…” In any case “being in and through the atonement” is a necessary condition of the Father’s children before and during the Council.

Alma uses that phrase, “in and through,” again when he is talking with his son Shiblon. He says,

9  And now, my son, I have told you this that ye may learn wisdom, that ye may learn of me that there is no other way or means whereby man can be saved, only in and through Christ. Behold, he is the life and the light of the world. Behold, he is the word of truth and righteousness (Alma 38:9).

That use of “word” wants to be cross referenced with John 1, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.”

While talking to Shiblon, instead of only tying the phrase “in and through” to the pre-mortal existence of man, Alma uses it as the conjunction between people on this earth and our relationship with Christ as the creator god, which was one of his roles at the Council. So the phrase, “in and through” is used to bring our this-life experience into a kind of parallel with Christ’s role as Creator.

For Alma, the phrase “in and through Christ” seems to have a connotation of continuity, or continuation. In “there is no other…means whereby man can be saved, only in and through Christ,” the word “through” might mean something like “Christ was the one who arranged it.” Like in the sentence, “John got the job through Jane’s influence.” But “there is no other way… whereby man can be saved, only in and through Christ” seems to suggest something else. I

suspect that this “way” suggests the same thing as “way” does elsewhere in the scriptures. That is, a path— a direction in space and time that is defined by a sequence of ordinances.

Now I’m wondering if that might also be the correct meaning of this “through.” So off I go to the dictionary for help.

Random House Unabridged Dictionary has 18 definitions for “through.” Number nine reads “By means or instrumentality of; by the way or agency of.” Number 10 reads, “By reason of or in consequence of.” Either one of those definitions would do for what “means” means, but the other definitions were much closer to the notion of “way.”

The dictionary’s first definition of “through” reached out and grabbed me. It read: “In at one end, side, or surface and out at the other.” The rest of the definitions were all variations on that theme, except numbers 9 and 10. For example, “through,” meaning “finished,” is simply getting to the other end. As I thought about it, numbers 9 and 10 also carried that same sort of connotation. “Through” meaning “in consequence of” is simply about going from one end to the other, only it focuses on the agent by which one gets to the other end. So all of the definitions had something to do with the idea of one’s starting at one end and traveling through time or space to reach the other end.

By this time some pretty obvious scriptural connections were filling my mind: “Way,” “highway,” “path” are all words which talk about moving through a sequences of ordinances. All of the ordinances have to do with defining, and refining one’s relationship with Christ. With those words in mind, one remembers Jesus’ affirmation, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6)

Now I’m getting an idea which is difficult to describe. If Christ is the “way” and salvation is “through” him; and that “through” begins in the “first place” and continues into the spirit world, this life, and beyond. How can one envision a time/space concept that “through Christ” really means?

I still hadn’t finished reading the scriptures I started, so I returned to the D&C and read this one:

59  Behold, I am from above, and my power lieth beneath. I am over all, and in all, and through all, and search all things, and the day cometh that all things shall be subject unto me. (D&C 63:59)”

Here the words “in” and “through” have a Christ-related spacial meaning—His relationship with place—i.e. sacred space.

It’s time to return to the dictionary, and look up the word “in.”

First definition of “in” : “Used to indicate inclusion within a space, a place, or limits.”
Second definition of “in”: “Used to indicate inclusion within something immaterial (in politics)” Third definition of “in”: “Used to indicate inclusion within or occurrence during a period or limit of time (in ancient time)”

So the phrase “in Christ” could mean “in” his space; “in” his cause; or “in” his time. The idea of being “in his cause” without also being in his space and time, doesn’t make any sense to me at all. So I decided that being in his cause is simply a necessary quality of being in his space and time. But what does it mean to be in his space and in his time.

3  All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made.
4  In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5  And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not (John 1:3-5).

“Comprehend” means to encircle. If friendly, that could be an embrace; if belligerent it would mean to overpower.

Back to the first D&C reference: It says of Christ:

6   He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth…
12   which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space (D&C 88:6, 12).

All that brings me to an idea I can envision more easily than describe. But now it seems that the best words I could find to describe the idea are those very “ordinary” words used by the Book of Mormon prophets. The concept is this:

From the beginnings of our beginning, throughout our life as spirits and on earth, our resurrection, and our exaltation, “salvation can come unto the children of men, only in [withing his time and space] and through [moving with his assistance through his time and space—i.e. “way” ] the name [“name” denotes a covenant relationship] of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent.”

Now the idea has gotten too big for me to comprehend. So it can just rest there for a while.

2 Nephi 10:9-17 — LeGrand Baker — God’s hand in history

2 Nephi 10:9-17
9    Yea, the kings of the Gentiles shall be nursing fathers unto them, and their queens shall become nursing mothers; wherefore, the promises of the Lord are great unto the Gentiles, for he hath spoken it, and who can dispute?
10   But behold, this land, said God, shall be a land of thine inheritance, and the Gentiles shall be blessed upon the land.
11   And this land shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles, and there shall be no kings upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles (2 Nephi 10:9-11).

I pointed out some time ago, when we were reading 1 Nephi 21 which is Isaiah 49, that the kings and queens who will be the “nursing” fathers and mothers of Israel are probably sacral kings and queens, rather than political ones (My comments on 1 Nephi have been incorporated into the commentary on First Nephi by Stephen Ricks and myself). Here, Jacob seems to concur and to clarify that question. He says “the kings of the Gentiles shall be nursing fathers unto them, and their queens shall become nursing mothers; wherefore, the promises of the Lord are great unto the Gentiles.” Then he adds, “And this land shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles, and there shall be no kings upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles.” It is apparent that in Jacob’s view the kings who have “the promises of the Lord” and the political kings who do not exist in this land, are not the same sort of kings. That is, they are not the kings of this world, rather they are those sacral kings who are anointed during the ancient Israelite temple drama.

12   And I will fortify this land against all other nations.
13   And he that fighteth against Zion shall perish, saith God.
14   For he that raiseth up a king against me shall perish, for I, the Lord, the king of heaven, will be their king, and I will be a light unto them forever, that hear my words.
15   Wherefore, for this cause, that my covenants may be fulfilled which I have made unto the children of men, that I will do unto them while they are in the flesh, I must needs destroy the secret works of darkness, and of murders, and of abominations.
16   Wherefore, he that fighteth against Zion, both Jew and Gentile, both bond and free, both male and female, shall perish; for they are they who are the whore of all the earth; for they who are not for me are against me, saith our God.
17   For I will fulfil my promises which I have made unto the children of men, that I will do unto them while they are in the flesh– (2 Nephi 10:12-17).

Some years ago I asked Chauncey Riddle what he did with his title “doctor.” He replied that it was a great academic distinction, given by the world, to be praised and appreciated by the world. Chauncey said that if he were in a situation where the title “Dr. Riddle” could reflect any distinction on “The Kingdom,” then he would use it. Otherwise, he didn’t think it had much value, so he didn’t bother. I have adopted that principle as my own. Therefore it is in the attitude of an apology for doing so, that I call attention to my own Ph.D. in my comments today.

I received a Ph.D. at the University of Wisconsin in American History, with a focus on the period of the American Revolution and the writing of the Constitution. Since then, much of my professional life has been devoted to the study of the principles of the Declaration of Independence and of the American Constitution, and of the men who created them. I have taught “American Constitutional History” at BYU for many years. My title here at BYU library is “Curator of the Freedom Archives,” and my responsibility is to acquire and process national political and economic manuscript collections which reflect the ways by which the principles of freedom can be used and protected in our time (This was written in November 1998).

I first went to Wisconsin in the fall of 1963. That same fall student riots began to occur all over the United States and the “Revolution of the 60’s” was soon in full swing. In the midst of that revolution, I studied constitutional principle from the writings of the men who best understood it: Washington, Madison, Franklin, John and Sam Adams, Arthur and Richard Henry Lee, and their contemporaries. Those men taught me two things above all else.

1. There are eternal principles which foster and empower individual freedom. Those principles can be expressed in terms of the atonement of Christ or in terms of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. It doesn’t matter how they are expressed, the principles are the same.

2. Those principles are not self imposing, but must be sought after and deliberately incorporated by an individual into his own life, or they cannot impact the life of that individual. Knowing the principles of liberty is not equivalent to incorporating them into one’s life and enjoying their blessings. There is one characteristic absolutely requisite to incorporating the principles of freedom into the life of any individual. That characteristic is best described by a combination of the words righteousness (zedek)and integrity. As righteousness and integrity are requisite for an individual to enjoy the blessings of liberty, so they are also necessary for a community or a nation, if that people are to enjoy the mutual blessings of individual liberty. There can be neither political (Constitutional) nor personal (blessings of the atonement) freedom for any individual or group of individuals whose lives are not an honest expression of integrity in righteousness.

One cannot understand American history without some understanding of its roots in the Greek, Roman, and Jewish worlds. Then, when the Declaration of Independence (which is the expression of the principles of freedom) and the Constitution (which shows how to make those principles functional) – then when those documents are seen in the light of their historical roots, it becomes apparent that American Freedom in that generation was the crowning achievement of a hundred generations of good and honest people who, through the “sifting and winnowing” of political ideas, ultimately discovered constitutional truth.

It was no accident, so Jacob testifies, that this land was withheld from being a part of the European world until after most of that sifting and winnowing had been accomplished.

To me, the past political histories of mankind (and our political “history” as I project it into the future) are living testimonies that there is a God in heaven who has orchestrated the affairs of men throughout our history for our earthly benefit and eternal advantage. One of the ways he has done that is to send a select group of his children into the world at critical times to move human affairs in the direction of liberty and ultimate peace. I thank God for them — and, just now, especially for Jacob, who testifies that the principles of freedom are eternal, and whether they are called political freedom or free agency, they are among the greatest of the blessings of a loving God. Those same great and good men also teach us, through precept as well as example, the methods by which we may appreciate and make those principles an expression of our own lives.

2 Nephi 9:25-38 — LeGrand Baker — Jacob’s warnings

Throughout human history, the object of apostate religion has been to control its adherents. The purposes of that control can usually be dropped into three major objectives,

1. To create a glue binding religious practices and political enthusiasm among the masses. And, conversely, to make things which are defined as politically divisive also be equivalent to the criteria for one’s going to hell. The way to do this is to establish local or national gods who will only save or bless those people who support the local or national king. That kind of king/god relationship was typical of the ancient world, but it is also typical of modern nations — after all, “God is an Englishman!”

2. To provide religions reasons for the religious and political aristocracy to have a monopoly, or a near monopoly, on the accumulation and retention of wealth. The theology to support such accumulation usually asserts that there is virtue in poverty, and if one sacrifices for the good of the religious/political organization in this world, then in exchange for the worldly goods of this life one will receive be greater compensatory glory and wealth in the next world. (That is quite unlike our tithing, where the principle is neither about money, delayed blessings, nor buying one’s way into salvation.)

3. To provide social control, define cultural morality, and define the rational limits beyond which people may neither think nor speak independently. This control is necessary to preserve the religion, the political structure, the system of wealth, and the cultural class structure.

Thus false religion has always been used as a weapon against the people, to control them, and to deny them freedom of both thought and action. The theological basis for that control is the notion that their god loves only his people who adhere to that religion and that all other people will surely go to hell—but that his people will join the others in hell also, unless they retain the traditions which define their culture and their religion.

In the environment of those kinds of ideas, this statement of Jacob’s is absolutely amazing.

25   Wherefore, he has given a law; and where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation; and where there is no condemnation the mercies of the Holy One of Israel have claim upon them, because of the atonement; for they are delivered by the power of him (2 Nephi 9:25).

It violates every objective of apostate religions whose purpose is to control. Jacob’s next statement is more amazing still:

26   For the atonement satisfieth the demands of his justice upon all those who have not the law given to them, that they are delivered from that awful monster, death and hell, and the devil, and the lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment; and they are restored to that God who gave them breath, which is the Holy One of Israel (2 Nephi 9:26)..

It not only rejects the notion that the power of religion might be used to control and dominate, it guarantees that no capricious whim of nature, or accident of birth, nationality, race, culture, or physical infirmity will prevent the blessings of the atonement. It does not bother to say that God is the God of all nations, but it declares that as fact, by defining the universal reality of individual worth and freedom in terms of one’s relationship with Christ.

And there’s the rub! With individual worth and individual freedom comes responsibility far greater than could ever be imposed by the cultural, political, economic demands of an apostate god.

27   But wo unto him that has the law given, yea, that has all the commandments of God, like unto us, and that transgresseth them, and that wasteth the days of his probation, for awful is his state! (2 Nephi 9:27).

The purpose of the gods of apostate religions is to control mankind for the benefit of their earthly “betters.” The purpose of the atonement is to empower each individual that he may be a benefactor to all things. The object of the relationship between man and God is to teach man the laws by which individual people may be fully free, and thus be fully empowered. The communal unity resulting from such individual empowerment creates perfect freedom in a perfect Zion.

But there is nothing willy nilly about such freedom. The people thus “free” are controlled by two separate and immutable laws: The first is the “law of one’s own being” which defines each as a unique individual with a unique personality. The second is, I believe, “the law of the gospel” which provides ultimate opportunity for the fruition of the “law of one’s own being.” I believe the “law of the gospel” was defined when the Saviour said these words: “Behold I have given unto you my gospel, and this is the gospel which I have given unto you–that I came into the world to do the will of my Father, because my Father sent me (3 Nephi 27:13).” The gospel is that the Saviour came to this world to do the will of his Father because his Father sent him. As I understand it, the law of the gospel, as it applies to me, is that I came to do the will of my Father because my Father sent me (3 Nephi 27:21).

If the Gospel of Christ is that he came to do the will of his Father because his Father sent him, I suppose the relevance of that law to me is that I also came to do the will of my Father because my Father sent me, and by virtue of the atonement I am empowered to be able to fulfill my assignment. If that conclusion is true, it is built upon two premises which must also be true. 1) That what I am asked to do is consistent with “the law of my own being,” that is, my assignment is consistent with both my eternal abilities and my eternal desires—that the assignment itself is an expression of the Law of My Own Being. 2) That there was actually an assignment given, and a way guaranteed that I would be able to fulfil that assignment. If that is true, as I believe it is, then there is a dreadful foreboding in Jacob’s warning, “wo unto him that has the law given, yea, that has all the commandments of God, like unto us, and that transgresseth them, and that wasteth the days of his probation, for awful is his state!”

28   O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish(2 Nephi 9:28).

Taken out of context, this last verse is scarey all by itself. In context (If I am reading its context correctly) it might be described as terrifying. Jacob seems to be saying there is an interconnecting relationship between transgressing the law, wasting the days of one’s probation, and being so learned that one thinks he is too wise to harken unto the counsel of God. If that is true, and I believe it is, then having an education can be an exceedingly dangerous thing. Significantly, feeling wise in one’s education does not necessarily imply one has an M.D. or Ph.D. or even that one has gone to college. The illiterate Irishman who knows all the secrets of the “Little People” qualifies in that regard as much the professor/astronomer who has looked into the depths of the universe and decided that there just couldn’t be a God who is out there that far away.

The principle is universal. One can get so caught us in learning that he can lose sight of his own place in the universe, violate the law of his own being, and refuse to fulfill the covenants he made in the realms of his Father.

29   But to be learned is good if they hearken unto the counsels of God (2 Nephi 9:29).

For many persons, the only path by which one may discover the law of his own being is through the excitement and the tedium of getting an education. That also may be universally true, but if it is, then “education” must have some meaning other than formal learning. For example, the farmer who seems intuitively to know how to heal every sick cow in the valley, and the big bosomed school teacher who can hug the tears from every child’s eyes, have mastered their special gifts because they have thought and cared, and listened to learn.

30   But wo unto the rich, who are rich as to the things of the world. For because they are rich they despise the poor, and they persecute the meek, and their hearts are upon their treasures; wherefore, their treasure is their God. And behold, their treasure shall perish with them also (2 Nephi 9:30).

To a paraphrase of a line spoken by a proper gentleman in an English novel: “Of course the poor suffer from being cold and hungry, but they are different from us and could not possibly suffer as we would do.” Having money is not a sin. Letting one’s money insulate oneself from the reality of other people’s needs may be the greatest danger of having money.

31   And wo unto the deaf that will not hear; for they shall perish. 32 Wo unto the blind that will not see; for they shall perish also (2 Nephi 9:31).

There are ordinances about correcting deafness just as there are ordinances about being able to see.

Jacob’s catalog of “Wo’s” gets worse and worse until it finally reaches a crescendo.

33   Wo unto the uncircumcised of heart, for a knowledge of their iniquities shall smite them at the last day.
34   Wo unto the liar, for he shall be thrust down to hell.
35   Wo unto the murderer who deliberately killeth, for he shall die.
36   Wo unto them who commit whoredoms, for they shall be thrust down to hell.
37   Yea, wo unto those that worship idols, for the devil of all devils delighteth in them.
38   And, in fine, wo unto all those who die in their sins; for they shall return to God, and behold his face, and remain in their sins (2 Nephi 9:25-38).

It is like the awesome blade of the Sword of Laban, about which Nephi wrote, “…and I saw that the blade thereof was of the most precious steel.” The “most precious steel” of the days of Nephi, was not made from smelted iron ore. It fell from heaven in the form of a meteorite. The heavenly stone was heated, beaten, shaped, and heated again, then it was dropped into cold water which set its temper. If, during this process, the steel has not become perfectly pure, if it containes particles of rock which responds differently to the heat of the furnace and the cold of the water, then, when it is dropped into the cold water, its surface will pit or crack, rendering the heaven-sent blade virtually worthless.

Every individual who leaves his heavenly home to come to this world is guaranteed, by virtue of the atonement, that he will return again to be judged in the presence of his God. If one has wasted this experience, if, because he has insulated himself by the self-defined luxury of his education or wealth, so that in his refining process he has not been purified, shaped, tempered, and then used as he was intended to be used; if that is so, then, still clothed in the meaninglessness of his luxury, he shall return to God, behold his face, and remain clothed in his sins.

2 Nephi 9:20 — LeGrand Baker — ‘He knoweth all things’

2 Nephi 9:20
20   O how great the holiness of our God! For he knoweth all things, and there is not anything save he knows it.

The question of whether God really does know everything has a fun history in LDS theology. Orson Pratt, who apart from the Prophet Joseph was my first hero in the church, wrote an essay in which he said God is perfect and that his perfection included a total knowledge of all things from eternity to eternity. His argument was that if God were still learning he wouldn’t really be God.

Brigham Young didn’t like the essay or its reasoning. He wrote an open letter, which was published in the Millennial Star which said the principle of eternal progression is an eternal principle. His God, he said, was and would always be progressing. If that were not true, if God ever became static in his progression his existence would become meaningless. (In those days the scripture which now reads, “This is my work and my glory to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” then read, “This is my work to my glory to the immortality and eternal life of man.” There are some interesting differences between them. The later version can be incorporated in the earlier, but it doesn’t work quite as easily the other way around.)

Brigham Young’s open letter said Orson Pratt was wrong, and that if anyone else made such statements as that he would loose his priesthood. There is only one way I know by which one can loose his priesthood. That is by excommunication. President Young’s threat was polite, but only very thinly veiled. Elder Pratt’s response was also polite. In an open letter, also published in the Star, he said he was very sorry President Young had been offended. He did not recant or say he was wrong, only that he was sorry for the offence.

Some years later Elder McConkie gave a speech at BYU in which he identified the most dangerous heresies in the church. One which he mentioned was the idea which Brigham Young had defended so vigorously.

One cannot help but wonder what Brigham Young would have thought about Elder McConkie’s speech. I suspect he might have approved, given the environment in which Elder McConkie spoke. Let me try to explain the environmental contexts in which each of those ideas were expressed.

Orson Pratt was a self taught logician and mathematician, historian and theologian. His was certainly one of the most brilliant minds in the church. His statement that God knows everything was simply a reasonable deduction based on scriptural premises and reinforced by Greek logic. In Elder Pratt’s mind, either God knew everything or he did not. In Orson’s world of perfect logic and order there was no room for a supreme God who was fumbling about still trying to learn stuff. Orson could find no academic tolerance for the notion that God might encounter a situation where he could make a mistake. Such an idea was simply outside the limits of the possible.

Brigham Young’s world was equally pragmatic. In his day, the most advanced scientific theory about the nature of man and society was “social Darwinism.” Its major tenant was that all living things progress nearer and nearer toward both physical and mental perfection. The theory simply held that the most capable people rose to the top of their economic and cultural ladders. In that system of logic, there was no place for progression to stop unless one assumed the conclusion was a static perfection. The idea that God and his creations would become static and without progression seemed both irrational and wrong.

Elder McConkie’s world was different from either of those. At the time he gave his speech the social and religious worlds of America and Europe were all astir. ERA and women’s rights challenged every facet of our culture. One of the arguments introduced by this challenge was the idea that the Saviour was that because the Saviour was only a man, he could not understand women things like female emotion, pain or love. The logic end of that argument was that women ought to pray to a mother god. It was in the environment of that debate that Elder McConkie stated that the idea that God does not know everything is one of the most dangerous heresies in the church. Given the connotations of the argument, Brigham Young would probably not have carried out his threat and excommunicated Elder McConkie for giving that speech.

It seems to me that all three of these brethren are correct in their reasoning, but that ultimately the understanding of that correctness is to be had outside the realms of contemporary doctrinal feuds, and of logical, and sociological theory. I would love to be able to do that, but don’t know how. I suspect, though, that the place where one must go to discover the answerer will probably be within the context of an understanding of Christ’s role as Creator and Saviour, and consequently, of his relationship with space and time.

I believe the scriptures are true which describes the Saviour as “The light and the Redeemer of the world; the Spirit of truth, who came into the world, because the world was made by him, and in him was the life of men and the light of men. The worlds were made by him; men were made by him; all things were made by him, and through him, and of him. (D&C 93:9-10)” “That by him, and through him, and of him, the worlds are and were created, and the inhabitants thereof are begotten sons and daughters unto God. (D&C 76:24)” I believe that in those scriptures the words “by,” “through,” and “of,” denote all which the full power of their meanings can express.

As I understand the atonement, it is the fulfilling and final expression of power which culminates the process which began with the creation. That is, the resurrection, exaltation, and eternal life of all things, are the conclusion of the sequence of events which began with their creation. I believe that throughout that sequence of events, the role of the Saviour has been the eternal and infinitely constant.

To me it seems a bit silly to suggest that the creator and finisher of all things does not know all truth about all those things. Whether that truth is to be actualized in different times or in a different space, seems to me to be beside the point. The scripture addresses that question in the simplest possible way. It defines truth as a knowledge of reality, and says that Christ has all truth. It reads, “And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; … The Spirit of truth is of God. I am the Spirit of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fulness of truth, yea, even of all truth; (D&C 93:24-26)”

All that seems to me to be simple and straight forward enough to prove Orson Pratt’s point. I suspect even Brigham Young would accept it. Then why did Brigham object? I believe that it was because he and Orson Pratt were talking about different things. As I understand it, our universe, and its spirit counterpart, and the intelligences from which it and we are organized, constitute a finite “system” which was created and will be exalted “in” “through” and “of” the Saviour. My capacity to wonder about things does not even begin to comprehend that “system” — never mind to imagine what beyond that, might be the realm of the Father. My belief is that within of this “system,” its Creator and Saviour moves without restraint in both time and space, and that he knows all things. I also believe that beyond that system, Brigham Young knew a lot more about what he was talking about that I know.

2 Nephi 9:15-16 — LeGrand Baker — resurrection and judgment

15   And it shall come to pass that when all men shall have passed from this first death unto life, insomuch as they have become immortal, they must appear before the judgment-seat of the Holy One of Israel; and then cometh the judgment, and then must they be judged according to the holy judgment of God.
16   And assuredly, as the Lord liveth, for the Lord God hath spoken it, and it is his eternal word, which cannot pass away, that they who are righteous shall be righteous still, and they who are filthy shall be filthy still;

The sequence here is quite explicit: the final judgement really is at the conclusion of all things fo this “age” — first come the clarification by experience and choice, then the resurrection, after that, comes “the holy judgement of God.” So when one stands before God to be judged, one is judged according to the degree of glory of the resurrected body which one brings to that judgment bar.

That asks an extremely important question: If the final judgement is not to assign us to a degree of glory, then how is that assignment made and who makes it? The answer is, of course, each of us judges ourselves. But that seems a bit simplistic, and doesn’t tell when or how. A more accurate, less simplistic, and much less conventional answer may be: the earth is our judge in that it surrenders to us the appropriate elements with which our eternal bodies will be made. Well now, that was unconventional! and will need a good deal of explanation before it makes any sense at all. So before you abandon me as a combined heretic and mad man, let me try to explain my idea about that.

The Saviour’s body, like ours, was made from the elements of this earth. His resurrected body was his natural body made perfect. That is, his resurrected body was also made from the elements of this earth. So it will be with all resurrected bodies: telestial, terrestrial, and celestial bodies are all made up of the elements of this earth. When the earth itself is resurrected, it will be wholly celestial in its own make up.

For a further explanation, we must go to D&C 88.

14   Now, verily I say unto you, that through the redemption which is made for you is brought to pass the resurrection from the dead (D&C 88:14).

After that introduction, the lord begins to explain, not how the resurrection is accomplished, but the criteria upon which each person’s resurrection is determined.

15   And the spirit and the body are the soul of man.
16   And the resurrection from the dead is the redemption of the soul (D&C 88:15-16).

There are three categories of meanings of “redemption.” (1) The Greek meanings are to purchase or to ransom. (2) The Hebrew meanings are the same except that it is done by a near relative. (3)

The meaning most frequently used in the Book of Mormon is that to redeem is to be brought into the presence of God (Ether 3:13; 2 Nephi 1:15, 2:2-4; Helaman 14:17-18).

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

Many biblical scholars agree that the “poor” in the Beatitudes are those who fulfill their religious commitments. These poor will own the kingdom of heaven (Note: It does not say “they shall be citizens in the kingdom,” but rather, “theirs is the kingdom of heaven”). That is about priesthood and kingship. The statement that the meek shall inherit the earth is lifted almost verbatim from the Beatitudes. That in turn, comes from Psalms 25 and 37. This should give us a clue that the Beatitudes are a key to understanding all this. The Lord now goes on to explain that the earth itself will be a sanctified celestial world.

18   Therefore, it [the earth] must needs be sanctified from all unrighteousness, that it may be prepared for the celestial glory;
19   For after it hath filled the measure of its creation, it shall be crowned with glory, even with the presence of God the Father (D&C 88:18-19).

20   That bodies who are of the celestial kingdom may possess it forever and ever; for, for this intent was it made and created, and for this intent are they sanctified (D&C 88:20).

The idea that the earth was made for the people is only half the idea. The other half is that the people were created to inhabit the celestial earth. It is apparent that neither without the other is complete. The earth will be a great urim and thummim to those celestial persons who possess it. (D&C 130:9)

21   And they who are not sanctified through the law which I have given unto you, even the law of Christ, must inherit another kingdom, even that of a terrestrial kingdom, or that of a telestial kingdom.
22    For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory.
23   And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory.
24   And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory; therefore he is not meet for a kingdom of glory. Therefore he must abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory.
25   And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law– (D&C 88:21-24).

I suspect that the same criterion applies to people as well: that is, those who inherit the celestial earth are those who “filleth the measure of (their) creation, and transgresseth not the law.”

26   Wherefore, it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it.
27   For notwithstanding they die, they also shall rise again, a spiritual [resurrected] body.
28 They who are [present tense] of a celestial spirit shall receive [future tense] the same body which was [past tense] a natural body; even ye shall receive [future tense] your bodies, and your glory shall be [future tense] that glory by which your bodies are quickened [present tense] (D&C 88:26-28).

Thus, the Lord equates the full glory of the body one receives when it one is quickened (resurrected), with the partial glory one has while living on this earth. The Lord now reiterates that in terms so straightforward that he cannot be misunderstood.

29   Ye who are quickened [present tense] by a portion of the celestial glory shall then receive [future tense] of the same, even a fulness (D&C 88:30).

That is, the glory which partially quickens ones body now, will be the glory which quickens it in the resurrection. To show that the law is universal, the Lord repeats himself as he describes the resurrection of those in the terrestrial and telestial glories.

30   And they who are quickened by a portion of the terrestrial glory shall then receive of the same, even a fulness.
31   And also they who are quickened by a portion of the telestial glory shall then receive of the same, even a fulness.
32   And they who remain shall also be quickened; nevertheless, they shall return again to their own place, to enjoy that which they are willing to receive, because they were not willing to enjoy that which they might have received.
33   For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift(D&C 88:30-33).

The Lord’s next statement comes as close to describing the ‘how’ of the resurrection as one can find in the scriptures:

34   And again, verily I say unto you, that which is governed by law is also preserved by law and perfected and sanctified by the same.
35   That which breaketh a law, and abideth not by law, but seeketh to become a law unto itself, and willeth to abide in sin, and altogether abideth in sin, cannot be sanctified by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment. Therefore, they must remain filthy still (D&C: 88:13-35).

As I read that scripture, it says there are people walking about in this world who are essentially celestial people. Yet, all one has to do is look at them to know they are not entirely celestial. They look old and tired just like everyone else. I think that is a major reason for the blessing of death. It lets the spirit leave the body which is not entirely compatible with its own spiritual nature. Then, at the resurrection, it picks those portions of its body which are entirely compatible. I think that is what Brigham Young meant when he said,

In the resurrection everything that is necessary will be brought from the elements to clothe and to beautify the resurrected Saints who will receive their reward (Journal of Discourses 9:192).

I suppose, then, that there are not only celestial type people walking about, but also terrestrial and telestial types of people among us. We will all die, then at the resurrection, when “everything that is necessary will be brought from the elements,” we will each pick up those elements of our body which are compatible with our spirit.

Thus clothed in our resurrected body, we will be presented to the Lord. Those whose glory is compatible with his, will remain with him. Those who have some lesser glory, will go where they are most comfortable. At least, that’s how I understand it.

2 Nephi 9:5-7 — LeGrand Baker — creation powers of the Atonement

What Jacob says is that the Atonement was performed by the God of Creation. He wrote: 2 Nephi 9:5-7

5   Yea, I know that ye know that in the body he shall show himself unto those at Jerusalem, from whence we came; for it is expedient that it should be among them; for it behooveth the great Creator that he suffereth himself to become subject unto man in the flesh, and die for all men, that all men might become subject unto him.
6   For as death hath passed upon all men, to fulfil the merciful plan of the great Creator, there must needs be a power of resurrection, and the resurrection must needs come unto man by reason of the fall; and the fall came by reason of transgression; and because man became fallen they were cut off from the presence of the Lord.
7   Wherefore, it must needs be an infinite Atonement–save it should be an infinite Atonement this corruption could not put on incorruption. Wherefore, the first judgment which came upon man must needs have remained to an endless duration. And if so, this flesh must have laid down to rot and to crumble to its mother earth, to rise no more.

To me that suggests that Jacob has associated the powers of performing the Atonement with the powers of Creation. That is, that the powers by which the Saviour created all things are the same powers by which he atoned for all things.

The key to understanding that, I think, is in D&C 93:10, which reads, “The worlds were made by him; men were made by him; all things were made by him, and through him, and of him.”

I now want to try to describe what I think is meant by the idea that Christ created “all things.”

Joseph Smith said there is no such thing as immaterial matter, and that physical matter and spirit matter are the same except one is more refined than the other. So I presume the following fundamental ideas are as true of spirit matter as they are true of physical matter.

Matter is an expression of the way energy is organized. Matter and energy are fundamentally the same thing. That’s what Einstein’s most famous theory is all about. A demonstration of that is an atomic explosion. When matter is changed back into energy, that energy is expressed in an explosion of force, visible and non-visible light, and heat.

The string theory teaches the same thing: matter is energy. As was demonstrated by the atomic explosion, energy is light.

The elementary particles of visible light are called photons. Sometimes they act like a wave, other times they act like a particle, so no one is quite sure whether they are either or both.

There are different kinds of expressions of light. D&C 88 suggests photons are only one:

5    … through Jesus Christ his Son-
6   He that ascended up on high, as also he descendedbelow all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth;
7   Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made.
8   As also he is in the moon, and is the light of the moon, and the power thereof by which it was made;
9   As also the light of the stars, and the power thereof by which they were made;
10   And the earth also, and the power thereof, even the earth upon which you stand.
11   And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings;
12   Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space–
13   The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of God who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things. (D&C 88:5-13)

Both physics theories suggest that energy, which is light, or something very akin to it, is the stuff of which matter is made. D&C 88 suggests the same thing. But neither say that precisely — the stuff part, I mean. Einstein talks of “energy” which is sometimes expressed by light, while the D&C talks of “power” which is the same thing as light. Each suggest that matter is a form or function of that energy or power. I suppose it would not be too wrong to simplify all that by suggesting that the elementary particle of matter of which our bodies, this earth, and the universe, are made is light, but not necessarily something akin to or the same sort of thing as photons. I presume, then, it would be correct, if over-simplistic, to say that our bodies are made of light. I also presume it would be equally correct to say that our spirit bodies are made of light also.

This substantiates Abinadi’s testimony that Christ “is the light and the life of the world; yea, a light that is endless, that can never be darkened; yea, and also a life which is endless, that there can be no more death (Mosiah 16:9). The Saviour himself reiterates this point through the frequently repeated statements that he is “the light and the life of the world.” (D&C 34:1-2; 39:1-2; 45:7) Thus, the statement that Christ is the creator of all things, when “all things” refers to the basic element from which everything is organized, places us in a time context which can best be described as the very beginning before the beginning (as it does in the Secrets of Enoch). That seems to be equally true of the beginning of life. For life, cognizance, is also an expression of the light of Christ.

The essence of our being and personality is called in the scriptures, “intelligence.” Of that we learn,

29   Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.
30   All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence (D&C 93:29-30).

The phrase “light of truth” seems to be a literal, rather than a figurative description. We have already read section 88 as it relates to light and matter, but now lets look at it again as it relates to light and life. The first thing we note is that truth shines, and thus is the source of light.

4   This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom;
5   Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his Son– (D&C 88:4-5).

Truth seems to be something like the “elementary particles” of which light is made, or light is an expression of organized truth.

Truth is a knowledge of reality—of things as they really are. Christ is the personification of that knowledge, for he has all truth.

24   And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.
25   The Spirit of truth is of God.
26   I am the Spirit of truth, and John bore record of me, saying: He received a fulness of truth, yea, even of all truth; (D&C 93:24-26)

Having all truth does not constitute a monopoly. For the next two verses say,

27   And no man receiveth a fulness unless he keepeth his commandments.
28   He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things. (D&C 93: 27-28)

What I am about to write may not be correct, but it is as close as I can come with the information I have.

Truth shines, so light is either a product or a characteristic of truth. Christ has all truth and therefore is the immediate source of our light. Light is the power from which matter is organized. Light is also the power of life. Christ is “in all and through all things, the light of truth.” (D&C 88:6) Intelligence is “the light of truth.” (D&C 93:29-30)

I believe that life is also an expression of the love of Christ. Indeed, in my mind, I cannot discover the difference between the love of Christ and the light of Christ. “Love,” I suspect, is simply another expression of light.

God’s light “fills the imensity of space,” so does his truth, so does his love. Therefore light, truth, and love either occupy the same space at the same time or they are expressions of the same thing. I believe the latter is true. Therefore love is as tangible in the same way light is. Even though we can rarely see this love/light, we can feel it (or the lack of it) as it emanates from the people we are around. And they can feel what we are just as easily.

The beginning of the gospel of John is necessary to pull all this together. It equates the light which is “in him” with the life of man. It reads:

1   In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2   The same was in the beginning with God.
3   All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4   In him was life; and the life was the light of men. (John 1:1-4)

Thus, Christ is the source of the light which animates intelligence. Intelligence, which is the light of truth, cannot be created or made (D&C 93:29), but they can be “organized” (Abraham 3:22) Some of the organized intelligences” are greater than others: of those, some are called “noble and great ones.” This gradation of intelligences is because those who were noble were also “good.” These intelligences, receive spirit bodies, come to a physical earth where they receive physical bodies, and eventually are resurrected and become eternal beings. (see Abraham 3).

Thus it appears that man is an expression of the life which is the light which emanates from the fulness of truth of which Christ is the personification. In short, we and all things in this “age” are made of the light which emanates from Christ.

Now let us return more directly to the ideas in Jacob’s observation that it is the Creator God who is also the God of the Atonement.

The next phrase in John’s gospel, v. 5, seems to define the whole power of the Atonement. “The light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended [encircled, encompass, overcame] it not.” The power of the Atonement is the power to withstand, then overcome and defeat darkness, chaos, and entropy.

The ancient Israelite idea of creation of the earth was that the garden of Eden was lifted out of the waters of chaos. Thus creation is an organizing of cosmos from chaos. That idea seems to be represented in what Jacob is saying. The powers of creation (that is the powers which overcome chaos), and the powers of the Atonement (that is the powers which ultimately defeats chaos) are the same powers. Another way of saying that is that by the powers of the Atonement Christ overcame chaos in the initial creation – and in the subsequent organization – of all things. As it is by the powers of the Atonement that Christ overcomes the chaos which has to do with matter, so it is that by the powers of the Atonement of Christ overcomes the chaos which has to do with life.

During the full eternal scope of the creation process (the organization of intelligences, the creation of spirit element, then the creation of temporal element, then the creation of eternal-resurrected element) Christ gives free reign to the individual units of personality which are called “intelligences.” The result of this freedom is the introduction of a new kind of chaos. The chaos from which all things are organized is not bad, it is just not organized. However this new kind of chaos is bad in that it leads toward entropy rather than cosmos. This new kind of chaos is the result of individuals believing in, and propagating ideas to be fact even though those ideas are not truth—that is they are not consistent with eternal reality. The Lord explains,

24   And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;
25   and whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of the wicked one who was a liar from the beginning. (93:24-25)

All things called “fact” need not be “true.” One can “know” things which have no basis in reality. These range from scientific, religious, or historical theories which are simply false, or moral theories (“eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die and that is the end of the matter”) which are vicious. Such non-truths get in the way of knowing real truths. They can destroy, rather than build. Believing, teaching, or incorporating non-truths leads to a lessening of life, to chaos or entropy. That is explained by Alma this way:

9   It is given unto many to know the mysteries of God; nevertheless they are laid under a strict command that they shall not impart only according to the portion of his word which he doth grant unto the children of men, according to the heed and diligence which they give unto him.
10   And therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word; and he that will not harden his heart, to him is given the greater portion of the word, until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full.
11   And they that will harden their hearts, to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries; and then they are taken captive by the devil, and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell. (Alma 12:9-11)

Lies, believed or taught as truths, are, by definition, evil because they lead to chaos. Rejection of truth — not knowing the mysteries — is called “the chains of hell” because they lead to entropy.

Truth and light, on the other hand, are powers which bind things together. Believing, teaching, incorporating truths leads to unity—that is to love. Apparently, as one learns and incorporates truth, darkness is removed from his being, he grows in both life and light to become “holy, without spot.” (Moroni 10:33)

Thus, insofar as I understand it, the power of Creation—bringing organization or cosmos from chaos—is the power of Christ’s Atonement— evoking purifying and sealing powers in place of entropy—thus preventing a return to chaos.

For us in this world, the application of the Atonement begins with repentance and ultimately concludes with resurrection. The Atonement completes the creation process by sealing that which is organized into a permanent condition of its greatest possible glory. A greatly oversimplified review of the Atonement/creation sequence will show you what I mean.

The point of all that was this. It seems to me that the power of Christ to create and the power of Christ to atone, are not separate powers, but each a part of the same whole. That is, that the Atonement is the necessary beginning and the necessary conclusion to the creation process. That the powers of the Atonement were first expressed by the creation of all things, then by the organization of all things, then by the purging of all things from evil, then the eternal resurrection and sealing of all things. That in every aspect of this creation sequence, the

Atonement is, and ever will be, an expression of the Saviour’s infinite and eternal love, as it is of his infinite and eternal power.

2 Nephi 9:1-7 — LeGrand Baker — Keys to Ancient Israelite Religion

I have appreciated Richard Dilworth (Dil) Rust’s comments on Jacob’s teachings — and I look forward to what else he promises to say. Dil has observed that Isaiah is extremely important to our understanding of both the Bible and the Book of Mormon. I would like to mention why that is so.

Discovering the religion of the ancient Israelites before the Babylonian captivity is not as simple as it appears on the surface, and, surprisingly, the Bible is not as good a source as one might think. Even though much of the Old Testament tells about time before the exile, a good part of that was written after the exile, so seems to reflect the religion of the period in which it was written rather than the religion of the period it tells about. From the pre-exilic period, we have the words of Moses and Isaiah; some minor prophets; and some poetic works and wisdom literature; but that is about all. Most scholars believe that the historical portions of the Bible (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles, etc.) were either written or severely edited after the Babylonian captivity. Consequently, they tell the post-exilic official version of their early history and religion, but they are not a contemporary record, and that “official” reflects much of the apostasy which had already occurred. Lemche explains it this way,

In the Old Testament a number of texts — to a large degree to be found in the book of Psalms, but also elsewhere — seemingly testify to religious beliefs which are obviously not in accordance with the official version of the religion as given by the historical literature….The most important evidence of this state of religious affairs may be Deut. xxxii 8-9, in the LXX version, according to which Yahweh seems not to be identified with El Elyon but is considered a son of this mighty creator of the world. Other important testimonies are Ps. lxxxii and Ps. lxxxix 6-9, in that both testify to the belief in a divine pantheon in Israel, although Yahweh is obviously considered to be the king of the assembly of the gods….It now looks as if the description of the Israelite religion in the formative period of the nation as a religion which contained a strictly monotheistic faith has to be surrendered in favor of another picture of the religious development…Still, we are sorely without knowledge as to the content of their religion, and no source available can prove that the religion of the early Israelites was ever a monotheistic one, whether Yahwistic or no….I would say: so much for the presumed original Israelite monotheism! (Niels Peter Lemche, “The Development of the Israelite Religion in the Light of Recent Studies on the Early History of Israel,” in Congress Volume, Leuven, 1989 (Louvain, Belgium, E.J. Brill, for the International Organization fro the Study of the Old Testament, 1991), 109, 112-113, 115.

H. H. Rowley, The Old Testament and Modern Study, A Generation of Discovery and Research (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1951), contains several essays on the history of academic discussions about the authorship and historicity of the books of the Old Testament. The three which are of most immediate interest to our studies are: N. H. Snaith, “The Historical Books,” p. 84-114; Aubrey R. Johnson, “The Psalms,” p. 162-209; and G. W. Anderson, “Hebrew Religion,” p. 283-310.)

This argument, that the historical books of the Old Testament were written after the Babylonian captivity and reflect the religion of the post-exilic rather than the pre-exilic Jews, has important implications to any study of the Book of Mormon. Lehi left Jerusalem a few years before the Babylonian captivity. Therefore, the religion of the Nephites should reflect the belief in a pantheon and that Jehovah is the Son of God as in the religion of the pre-exilic Jews. But it must not reflect the idea that Jehovah is alone in the godhead, which was the idea adopted by the post-exilic Jews. If that test were used to determine whether the Book of Mormon is an accurate reflection of the pre-exilic Israelite religion, the Book of Mormon passes with flying colors.

If these scholars are correct, and the evidence seems to indicate they are, then we have only small windows through which to see the religion of David, Solomon and the pre-exilic prophets. Let me give an analogy of the problem that poses. Having only those sources and trying to discover a complete theology is analogous to the challenge one might have if he tried to discover the theology of Latter-day Saints by reading only the Documentary History of the Church (which is the story of our beginnings as the books of Moses is the story of theirs), a collection of Conference addresses by Wilford Woodruff (which we might put in place of one of the ancient prophets), a single General Conference address by about half a dozen different general authorities (the minor prophets), and some of the words of the temple ceremony without any indication at all of what those segment were about or in what sequence or context they were spoken (the Psalms). Those sources would be important, of course, but they would also be inadequate. The list does not even include the standard works, just as our Bible does not include their ancient scriptures, such as the unedited books of Moses and the books of Enoch, Abraham, Joseph, Zenos etc.

Except for the book of Job, everything in our Bible was written by or after the time of Moses. But there can be little question but that the people who lived while our Bible was being written had ancient scriptures of their own. The complete Book of Enoch is just one probable example. The Book of Enoch was considered scripture by both Jews and early Christian. For example, 1 Enoch 1:9 is quoted as scripture in Jude 1:14. Our problem in trying to discover the ancient Israelite theology is about as difficult as trying to discover Latter-day Saint theology using only the sources I mentioned above.

Jeremiah and Ezekiel were both written at the time of the captivity and are about what was happening then, and prophecies about what would happen in the future. There are theological statements in them of course, but hardly enough to reconstruct even the basic assumptions of their theology on subjects other than those immediately addressed.

So that leaves basically foun places to look. The books of Moses, Job, Psalms, and Isaiah. Job is a review of the temple sequence with great emphasis on this lonely, dreary world. It also contains relatively little theology.

So our two most valuable sources in the pursuit of the ancient Israelite religion are the books of Psalms and Isaiah. The Psalms are quoted in the Old Testament and the New Testament, as well as in the Book of Mormon. Many scholars believe that the Psalms are the very words which were spoken an sung of their endowment/enthronement temple ceremony.All we have to do is discover the context in which those words were spoken (probably sung) and we can know a great deal about the theology of ancient Israel, as well as their enthronement/ endowment ceremonies. But that is exceedingly difficult because they were re-arranged in the post-exilic period so their arrangement is no longer in the sequence which gives them a story line. In Who Shall Ascend into the Hill of the Lord, Stephen Ricks and I have put many of them back in the order of the temple drama.

That leaves Isaiah as one of the best source in the Old Testament by which one might discover the ancient religion of Israel. Scholars agree that Isaiah is heavily dependent upon the Psalms for its ideas and some of its words. So the key to unlocking Isaiah is the Psalms. Knowing what the Psalms are makes it possible to restate that by saying the key to unlocking Isaiah is the temple.

I suppose that the Brass plates contained many of the Old Testament scriptures which are lost to us. So Nephi, Jacob, Abinadi, the Saviour and others might have quoted Enoch or Abraham just as well as Isaiah. But they didn’t. They quoted the one major source which we could turn to in our Bible to learn the fulness of the ancient gospel. Those long quotes in the Book of Mormon let us compare the Isaiah of the Bible with the Isaiah of the brass plates. The upshot of that comparison is that the Bible’s Isaiah is remarkably accurate (except for the Cyrus part stuck in during the Exile). So in the Book of Mormon we not only have confirmation that the Bible’s Isaiah is mostly dependable, but we have the repeated admonition to read it and discover the ancient religion for ourselves. We also have a good deal of help in doing that as the Saviour and the greatest of the Book of Mormon prophets read it to us and explain what it means.