Feeling Spiritually Insecure

People talk about experiences that make them realize “how fragile” life is, like a car accident or another physically dangerous situation. Sometimes those experiences make people afraid to drive (etc.) because they recognize that mistakes happen, and they might make a mistake that will have serious consequences.

Sometimes we do this socially, too. We become selfish and mistreat a friend and offend someone. Then we realize how often we’ve likely been insensitive, and we’re worried about being around that person because we’re likely, perhaps, to do that again without realizing it.

And then, sometimes we do this spiritually. I think I’m humming along, doing good things, enjoying prayer and studies and even teaching and parenting. And then, at some point, I step over a boundary and try to do “something good” but in the wrong way, or for the wrong reasons. When I realize this (and sometimes it’s because I’ve hurt someone rather than helped them) it’s hard for me to get over this. It isn’t just that I’m worried about this or that activity (driving) or this or that friendship, but about my relationship to God.

How selfish am I? How fallen am I? Am I really weak all the time but I don’t always see it? I think I know I’m weak all the time. I think I’m willing to listen to the Spirit and am happy whenever I feel like God is near. So why then did I do something today that left me feeling guilty, even though I thought I was doing something good? If I can do bad when I think I’m doing good, then I’m tempted to feel insecure constantly! I am tempted to constantly worry about sinning and so hide in a corner and maybe get out a good cry. I am so weak!

Which is something like Ether 12:27. We’re all weak – God knows that. He gave us that weakness. We are born that way on purpose, with the end that we’ll need to go to God and become one with Him. He loves us so much that he gave us weakness – ironic present.

So how do I think of that now, in the downward part of the cycle? Right now I’m simply seeing my weakness. What is it that Alma and Moroni do, exactly? They trust God’s grace to be sufficient. Sufficient for what? For their own salvation? Or to do the “good work” that they want to do? Why step away from the Spirit, even slightly, to attempt to God’s work?

That is what I repent of today (and will again many times over I’m sure!). Simply that I tried to take on too much, to think I was smart and superior in some way. The Spirit is what is superior, not me.

Two things often come to mind when I feel this way. One is John Tanner’s working-up of Nephi’s 2 Nephi 4 Psalm into a hymn. Here are the lyrics:

I love the Lord. In him my soul delights.

Upon his word, I ponder day and night.

He’s heard my cry, brought visions to my sleep,

And kept me safe o’er deserts and the deep.

He’s filled my heart with his consuming love,

And borne me high on wings of his great dove.

Yet oft I groan,”O wretched man am I!”

My flesh is weak and I’m encompassed by

A world of sin, which holds me in its thrall,

If I give in and to temptations fall.

Then strength grows slack, I waste in sorrow’s vale.

My peace destroyed, my enemies prevail.

Awake, my soul! No longer droop in sin.

Rejoice, my heart! And let me praise again

The Lord my God, who is my rock and stay

To keep me strict upon his straight, plain way.

O let me shake at the first sight of sin

And thus escape my foes without and in.

The other thing that I remember is Brigham Young’s quotation on listening to the Spirit. Well, yielding to the Spirit, which is what I’m trying to think about today:

Admit that the Spirit of the Lord should give us understanding, what would it prove to us? It would prove to me, at least, and what I may safely say to this congregation, that Zion is here. Whenever we are disposed to give ourselves perfectly to righteousness, to yield all the powers and faculties of the soul (which is the spirit and the body, and it is there where righteousness dwells); when we are swallowed up in the will of Him who has called us; when we enjoy the peace and the smiles of our Father in Heaven, the things of His Spirit, and all the blessings we are capacitated to receive and improve upon, then are we in Zion, that is Zion. (Italics original – from Journal of Discourses, vol 1, page 3.)

So while I’ve done nothing horrible or egregious, I have in some small degree left off grace to take the burden of the work of God on myself. And that’s impossible. God’s work is His work, not mine. His work is to have saved souls who are faithful, not to have interesting Sunday School discussions. In private or on blog posts, I can explore those ideas. And even then, I want to yield to the Spirit. But in group settings, why do I worry? Their souls are God’s, not mine. God is mighty to save.

And so I repent, and in that I admit that God’s grace and love means that even my soul is still His.

Thoughts from “Opposition in All Things: Mormon Perspectives on the Fall” (a Mormon Theology Seminar Conference on 2 Nephi 2 and Genesis 2-3)

There was another Mormon Theology Seminar Conference this past weekend. The organization has held 6 of these seminars so far: one on Alma 32, one on 2 Nephi 26-27, one on D&C 42, one on the book of Revelation, and now this double-seminar (one on 2 Nephi 2 and one on Genesis 2-3), with the conferences held back-to-back. This last conference was unique (and very productive!) that way. Friday was dedicated to Genesis 2-3 and Saturday to 2 Nephi 2, but in each session there were respondents and/or questions from those who had studied the other text. The questions brought out connections or complications that generated very interesting and productive conversation. And Micah and I got to be there to see it all! (Someday I’ll buy him a copy of the books so he can know what it was he was there listening to and clapping for. )

Like I do in many meetings, in this conference I started out mostly let the ideas make me think (and I was also focused on Micah), but I wasn’t taking any notes. I was just letting the ideas change my thinking, or simply just enjoying the experience. Then, for whatever reason, maybe b/c Micah was asleep (or because I was sleepy and needed to do something to stay focused), or maybe it was because some idea thing struck me more than others had and I wanted to remember it… but whatever it was, I started taking notes. And then, as is my habit, once I start taking notes, I keep taking notes and I took notes the rest of the time. So my notes here really start in the afternoon of the first day, but since I thoroughly enjoyed that morning as well, I’ll write a few things from my memory.

The first paper by Julie Smith deconstructed the “Wise Choice Theory” – the idea that Eve knew what she was doing when she ate the fruit and did it completely on purpose for good intentional reasons. It was a good paper with lots of careful reading and good insight. I was trying to keep Micah quite and didn’t write down a thing! But it was very interesting.

The next paper was by Ben Spackman, and he did an excellent job of showing how and when the word “Adam” should be translated not as a proper name. Where it isn’t a proper name, what is it? Dirt, human-kind generally, a member of the human family, etc. He provided a chart as well to show how a dozen different translations over time have handled that question. Very well done, very helpful to someone like me who doesn’t know Hebrew, and very engaging presentation style. Plus, he was skyped in from Spain so that was a novelty too.

The last paper that morning was by Rosalynde Welch, and I’m going to quote her title since it will tell much more than I could about her topic: “Creation, Localism, and Appetite in the Garden World of Wendell Berry.” Interesting piece with some insights, but mostly I needed to know more about localism and Wendall Berry for me to be able to respond to her thesis. It was great to finally meet Rosalynde, though. She blogs at Patheos and does a fantastic job writing intelligent and faithful posts relating to all sorts of Mormon issues.

Now for a list of some of my insights, mostly – as usually here on this blog! – for me to archive some of my thoughts and use them in future studies.

From Jim Faulconer’s “Chaos and Order, Order and Chaos: The Creation Story as the Story of Human Community,” responded to by Julie Smith:

• Eve got knowledge individually and not communally
• She saw tree as good. It was, but she went outside the community.
• How are the “curses” really grace? (My answer: note Eve still bears children, and Adam still eats food from the earth. Now both are coupled with sorrow, but they still are allowed to live out the life God gave to them in the garden.)
• leaving garden = creation of community, relying on each other
• “ashamed” of nakedness. Lots of possible readings. They are now “like God” but not like God. Jim suggested it one reading: they were a priest and a priestess without priestly clothing
• God creates humans on the Sabbath. That was rest?
• Julie asked, How do Mormon cultural ideals of self-reliance, independence, and punishment line up with the community theme that Jim as brought up?
• (Here, but in earlier papers too:) Christ kept scars on His hands. Will the earth have scars from us that it keeps, too?
• (From comments): There are not many examples in scripture of communities being positive. We usually read all the bad things that a society is doing. But perhaps if we had more details of how Zion was created, with the Nephites for example, we would be tempted to simply take that as a blueprint and try to imitate it, which would be a disaster. I thought, Perhaps this keeps us on our toes, hopefully forcing us to listen to the Spirit, which Brigham Young says is what Zion is all about anyway.
• Question from the Hebrew: might Adam be present when the serpent and Eve talk?
• Jenny: We think of Zion as “inclusive” but was Adam and Eve’s problem that they didn’t cast out Satan? How does that change our image of Zion?

Notes from Candice Wendt’s paper, “Environmental Education in Zion,” responded to by Jenny Webb – one of my favorite people

• Eden was Adam’s “ecological education.” He was naming animals, eating fruit, tilling ground
• Knowledge = fruit. Why?
• “earth’s flesh becomes our flesh”
• her general idea is that all fruit brings knowledge. So forbidden fruit could represent that b/c they had already had gained lots of other kinds of knowledge (of the earth, eating, animals, each other, etc) – what made this knowledge – this fruit – so different?wisdom?
• “Ashamed” – there was already a gap between them and God, but still now ashamed (me: Ether 12:27?)
• Enoch the place to think about community.
• Jenny: Marcus Nash recently presented on taking care of the earth but he focused on how we have a responsibility to take care of the earth for future generations. Adam too passes on knowledge of the earth to his children
• Jenny: think also about Alma 32. Your own tree…
• I wondered – serpent was most subtle can be translated most naked. Can we translate Adam and Eve of being ashamed of their subtle way of eating the fruit?
• Kim and I wondered – serpent naked, but in temple Satan has unique clothing?
• Animal feeds man, shouldn’t man feed animals?
• clothed with skins means they experience death, and then they wear it!
• but of course it also teaches about sacrifice and Christ’s atonement. Still, they are wearing death, as it were. A corpse of an animal. They are humans now marked as humans that will someday die. Interesting!

Adam Miller’s paper:

• Does Christ save us from death or from dying?
• Adam makes his own garden – he is being/becoming like God
• bowels remind us that we are bodies of dirt, we produce dirt – earth comes in, earth goes out
• bodies pass air in and out, light passes into eyes, sound passes into ears
• passing, repetition – that is living, that is life
• Book of Mormon – “it came to pass” – events in life come and then go, they came (in order to?) pass
• Comment: Why biologically repulsed by that which passes from us? Adam: it’s for the earth, for others. We are not self-sufficient creatures on this planet.

Rico:

• Question: is Adam’s punishment mortality itself, or death in that day?
• D&C 29 an interesting place to go looking. Spiritual death in that day?
• Does Lehi use Isaiah 14 to get his understanding of Satan (2 Ne 2:17)
• Not a tree of knowledge for Lehi – just forbidden fruit. Why use that name? What is he focused on?
• I wrote down at this point: I wonder if Lehi had any idea that thousands of years later, people would so carefully work to understand every sentence in a discourse he  gave on the fall and atonement.

Jenny:

• Jacob is Lehi’s first-born in the wilderness. If we read as a whole, could be that Nephi saw Jacob as the spiritual leader for the family.
• Now map “flesh” discussion (running through all of 2 Nephi 2) onto this – mortal = Jerusalem? resurrection = promised land?
• Lehi’s words in 2 Nephi call US to listen to Jacob.
• Adam: flesh = spirit and body oriented to death, soul = spirit and body oriented to eternal life
• Candace/Jenny: spirit and flesh opposed in 2 Ne 2
• Sort of a “Last Will and Testament” but of spiritual traces rather than material traces

John Hilton:

• Alma 42 quotes Geneses 3 (provided a chart – it’s very clear!)
• Alma 42 quotes 2 Ne 2 (also very clear!)
• In both Alma 42 and 2 Ne 2 a prophet is teaching a son
• John charted the pattern in Alma 42:11-23 and 2 Ne 2:10-14 (I didn’t copy it well, but things like: Christ, opposition, God would cease to be God, not the case…)
• (me:) Why “if no punishment” or misery, then God would cease to be God? Why at that point?
• (me:) Why is THAT the key part of the list? Makes God a King or Sovereign?
• (me:) or, b/c justice means not going back on decrees given to Adam and Eve? words always fulfilled, and punishment was one of those decrees?
• “affixed” shows up 6 times in Book of Mormon: 3 in 2 Nephi 2, and 3 in Alma 42!
• “affixed” implies not inherent, someone had to affix it.
• affixed, chosen, given the law (who affixes punishment? no subject given for that)
• (me:) having punishment and happiness affixed allows us to choose? how agency created? or am I barking up the wrong tree?
• How did Alma quote 2 Ne 2 (and so seems to have had small plates) but also unsure of timing of Christ’s visit?
• Could be Lehi’s message in 2 Ne 2 was also on large plates
• But why then would not the important info of the timing of Christ’s visit also be on those plates?
• Lots to learn from the way Alma teaches here.
• (My favorite:) Alma cuts past the behavior, and even scriptures on that behavior, and gets to the misunderstood doctrine (of Christ)
• Alma carefully reads – no prooftexting!
• Note where Alma 12/13 are different (as gods…)
• (my question in the Q&A:) how often do we use this very discourse to talk about chastity, when Alma himself doesn’t use scripture that way to help teach his son! Are there other examples in scripture where we see someone cut past the behavior to teach about Christ or another fundamental doctrine and then we see how that was really what was needed?

I realize now that I must have been taking care of Micah during Joe’s paper. I thoroughly enjoyed it (and I’d heard it before). But one of the most interesting parts of his presentation was Rosalynde’s creative description of Joe’s general presentation style. How Joe is like someone taking us down a busy road in downtown NYC and pointing out this and that to us. Or a biologist who slices something smaller and smaller and looks at it under a microscope. Etc. It was a complimentary and creative response to Joe.

Also, Deidre gave a paper in the afternoon that I failed to comment on here. I think I remember feeling like I needed to know a lot more about feminism to really appreciate what she was getting at. She did a great job, but I have a lot more to learn about feminist theory and feminist theology.

But a wonderful, wonderful conference! Every paper and every response gave me things to think about. Every lunch or dinner conversation was enlightening and fun. I don’t desire the attention and work that comes with presenting at a conference, but I think I’ve almost talked myself into writing up and submitting papers to these sorts of things (like MSH) just so I can have the excuse to go and be around the people and the conversations during these conferences.

Thanks to Sue, again, who offered to watch our kids so I could go both days! It was a great experience.

D&C 132

I recently had a great time studying D&C 132. After studying some references to the Abrahamic Covenant, and the way that connects generation to generation back to Adam, things jumped out at me in D&C 132 that never had before. Putting those pieces together, I now have a new (to me anyway) reading of D&C 132 that I really like.

Here’s about how it goes…

So, first off, the opening verses make it clear that this is in response to a question Joseph Smith had about why Abraham had lots of wives. The tenor of the verse is something like, “Why in the world would that be allowed?” Other places in scripture are pretty clearly against it (see, for example, Jacob 2, especially verse 24).

I think the way the section progresses answers this question, and also Jacob 2, very well. First of all, it should be noted that the “law” explained and outlined in section 132 is not about polygamy or about marriage generally. How can I get away with stating that? Look now at verse 7, the first time this “law” is outlined in the section:

7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.

So forget for a moment that you have ever been taught that D&C 132 is about marriage, and try reading this verse. All it says is: everything that constitutes a connection on earth will mean nothing in the eternities; everything that is sealed by the priesthood will remain in the eternities. That’s it.

Jump with me, for just a moment, to other places in scripture that talk about something similar. D&C 128:9 says, “It may seem to some to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of—a power which records or binds on earth and binds in heaven. Nevertheless, in all ages of the world, whenever the Lord has given a dispensation of the priesthood to any man by actual revelation, or any set of men, this power has always been given. Hence, whatsoever those men did in authority, in the name of the Lord, and did it truly and faithfully, and kept a proper and faithful record of the same, it became a law on earth and in heaven, and could not be annulled, according to the decrees of the great Jehovah. This is a faithful saying. Who can hear it?” He goes on in verse 10 to quote Matthew 16:18-19 where Peter is given “the keys of the kingdom of heaven” and told that “whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

Again, God says something similar to Nephi in Helaman 10, “behold, I will bless thee forever; and I will make thee mighty in word and in deed, in faith and in works; yea, even that all things shall be done unto thee according to thy word, for thou shalt not ask that which is contrary to my will. Behold, thou art Nephi, and I am God. Behold, I declare it unto thee in the presence of mine angels, that ye shall have power over this people, and shall smite the earth with famine, and with pestilence, and destruction, according to the wickedness of this people. Behold, I give unto you power, that whatsoever ye shall seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven; and thus shall ye have power among this people.”

The idea in both of these verses is that someone has come to the point where that person won’t ask anything in prayer that God won’t want to give, so He can simply trust that person to ask or say what needs to be done and it will happen. That person becomes in the greatest sense God’s servant on earth; they become a team with God.

That is how the sealing power is defined in scripture. The focus is not on marriages, although that is the only application we usually talk about in our Church meetings.

Now, imagine for a moment you are Joseph Smith. Apparently, Joseph has already or is now being given this same power. Verse 7, the same quoted above, says “I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days.” That’s quite the responsibility! Put yourself in the place of someone receiving this full version of the sealing power. You have that power, and are given that law outlined in verse 7, and so you know that anything you don’t seal on earth won’t matter in the eternities, and anything you do will matter in the eternities!  The verses right around verse 7 make it clear that this is very serious business. Whoever enters into this law, “must obey the same” (verse 3), ” and “he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned” (verse 6).

Verses 9 and 10 add their own warnings, in language similar to the story of Cain and Abel: “Will I accept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name? Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed?” That’s pretty strong language to use too. What was Cain’s first problem? That he knew what God expected, and he chose to do otherwise. Imagine someone who knows the law of verse 7, and who can seal up the right things for eternity, but tries to either use that power to seal up something not right, or, does not seal up something he knows God wants him to seal. This is a real heavy stewardship with heavy consequences.

As we continue through the rest of D&C 132, keep this law in mind. The “law” of D&C 132 is the law given to those who have this full sealing power, the power held by one only person on earth at a time. Remember also the warnings in verses 3 and 6, but especially those in 9 and 10. Note also that the “law” of verse 7 is also described in verse 14 thus: “For whatsoever things remain are by me; and whatsoever things are not by me shall be shaken and destroyed.” That language of “by me” will come up over and over again. And I like it: Christ is always the gate that opens and closes to Heaven. The sealing power is just His power given to someone on earth for a certain time.

On to the rest of D&C 132. Marriage is first mentioned in verse 15. But notice how this verse starts: “Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world….” It starts with a therefore, and has to be read in the context of verses 1-14. “Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.”

That “therefore” means that marriage is one example of what can be sealed up for the eternities. It is not the only purpose of the sealing power, but it is an genuine and important use of this fullness of the sealing power.

Note in verse 17 this curious statement: “For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly.” Why the words “abide my law?” Why the (seemingly harsh) consequence? It might mean those who did not know about the law and were married without the priesthood, but that seems to contradict everything in scripture about those who don’t know the commandments aren’t judged by those commandments. Rather, perhaps, and this is my own interpretation, it means those who know about the law, and after that still choose to be married without the priesthood. They went outside what God had appointed (see verses 9-10) and therefore aren’t trusted with the power that godhood would entail! It’s one reading of the text, anyway. It opens up the room needed for those who didn’t know about the law and are now receiving ordinances vicariously. Or perhaps this is talking more about those who actually had the sealing power? Lots to think about.

Anyway, the point for now that I hope is clear is that marriage is one example of a “covenant, contract, bond, obligation, oath, vow, performance, connection, association, or expectation” that can be sealed up.

But it’s not just that marriage is an example. It’s a very, very important bond that should be sealed, because marriage on the other side of the veil has important consequences:

And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths … and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.

The seems that only way for “the seeds” to continue forever and ever is if there are gods and goddesses sealed together with the right power and authorization. If no one on earth were ever to have a marriage sealed, would the work of the gods cease? That’s a question I want to ask, if I could. So it seems to be, anyway, from the words we have here.

Now, let’s jump to Abraham’s first mention, in verse 29: “Abraham received all things, whatsoever he received, by revelation and commandment, by my word, saith the Lord, and hath entered into his exaltation and sitteth upon his throne.” First point: Abraham received all things (wives included and implied here) by commandment, and therefore was not condemned. (Later on verses 34-37 will bring out this same point in its complexities.)

Verse 30 detours a bit to address Abraham’s covenant situation:

Abraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins—from whose loins ye are, namely, my servant Joseph—which were to continue so long as they were in the world; and as touching Abraham and his seed, out of the world they should continue; both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the stars; or, if ye were to count the sand upon the seashore ye could not number them.

Abraham was promised – note – seed “both in the world and out of the world” that would “continue as innumerable as the stars.” And Joseph Smith was apparently part of the fulfilling of that promised seed.

Verses 31-33:

This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham, and the promise was made unto Abraham; and by this law is the continuation of the works of my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself.

Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.

But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham.

Not only is Joseph a fulfilling of that promise (a number in that innumerable amount of children), Joseph can also have the same promise too. In fact, God commands it. But, there is a catch: “if you enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham.” First, before Abraham received his covenant, he had to enter into the “law” outlined in verse 7. You have to become the kind of person who sees the world that way: all that is sealed by God matters in the eternities, all that is not sealed by God doesn’t matter in the eternities. When that is clear (and perhaps when you also have that full sealing power? I’m not sure) God can also covenant with you to receive the same promise of seed continuing in and out of the world forever. (And in that work, of saving more and more people, is the “works of my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself.”)

Again, let’s jump back to verses 3, 6, and 9-10. If this law is known but not obeyed, then wherein will the works of the Father continue? This law allows marriages to be sealed, and the work of salvation to continue.

The basic idea is clear, but there are some clarifications that come next.

Verses 34-35:

God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.

Was Abraham, therefore, under condemnation? Verily I say unto you, Nay; for I, the Lord, commanded it.

I love the phrase: “This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.” Part of why Abraham had another wife was because God has given him a very big promise that he would have innumerable seed! One thing this polygamy accomplished was to fulfill that promise already given to Abraham. (This follows Jacob 2:30, by the way.) But, it wasn’t something Abraham could have initiated himself. That would have been to do something not appointed (verses 9-10). But since God commanded it, he was under no condemnation.

But otherwise, he would have been. Polygamy is not just a “good idea” that is sort of “out of fashion” in today’s world. It is expressly abominable to God that anyone would think to marry more than one woman! In fact, please consider carefully the comparison in the next verse (verse 36):

Abraham was commanded to offer his son Isaac; nevertheless, it was written: Thou shalt not kill. Abraham, however, did not refuse, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness.

Polygamy is compared to killing one’s own son! Having more than one wife is compared to breaking the commandment: “Thou shalt not kill.” In both cases, it should be seen that the commandment is NO, but in every case imaginable, obeying God trumps the commandments. Only if God commands is polygamy, killing, or any other breaking of a commandment justified. (This again accords with Jacob 2:23-34.)

Verse 37 clarifies: “as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their exaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods.” I think that not only is this verse pointing out that they were justified and not condemned for what they did, I think it’s also pointing out that the reason they are gods is because they “did none other things than that which they were commanded.” They kept the law outlined in verse 7, and heeded the warnings such as those mentioned in verses 9-10.

Now we see the counter example of David. “David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me. David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.”

Note that David’s primary sin, as outlined here, is not that he killed Uriah. David, and others, haven’t sinned when they have had more than one wife “save in those things which they received not of me.” David didn’t sin by his other wives and concubines, “save in the case of Uriah and his wife.” He knew of the law outlined in verse 7, but he chose to go outside of that law. Like Cain, he offered up an offering that was different than what God had commanded. And therefore, “he has fallen from his exaltation.”

I think it’s important to recognize from all of this that D&C 132 is primarily a discussion of the sealing power and the law outlined in verse 7. Marriage is an important and necessary bond that needs to be sealed. But we can’t quite wrap our brains around that, or even really be worthy to receive that fully, unless we understand and reconcile ourselves to the view of the law outlined in verse 7. Are our hearts such that all we really care about are things that can be sealed up for the eternities? Could we someday be trusted to live in such a way that we would only ask for whatever God would be okay to grant? That seems to be the primary question we can take from D&C 132. And in that sense, perhaps things like the law of consecration in D&C 42 are meant to be only a step on the way, a specific and practical, straightforward application of the broader and all-encompassing view of D&C 132:7, that “All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise … are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead.”

And perhaps we can also take from this that our own sealing is not just about my spouse and myself, but about being part of the fulfilling of the promises given to Abraham. We aren’t just sealed to each other, as we would usually say it, but our place in Abraham’s family is sealed and we become part of the eternal fulfilling of his promise. What all that entails, I’m still learning, but it’s something glorious nonetheless and I’m thrilled to keep studying it more! (Not that I’ve ever posted on the Abrahamic Covenant before! ha!)

This section of the “Guide to the Scriptures” at lds.org needs a bit of work…

Sometimes I do a bit a research on what the typical answers are to what I think are hard, complex, unresearched questions. Like more on the Abrahamic Covenant than just “God made a promise with Abraham that made him unique. We have that promise too.” When I researched lds.org for Abrahamic Covenant, I found it defined in the Study Guide materials in several places, and each one had a different list! Though usually there were several elements in common. Funny, though, I just searched “Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood” in the Guide to the Scriptures - it was very, very, very unhelpful! I guess it’s meant for new members, but still! The scripture references were awful! Okay I’m being too harsh because I got little sleep, slept in (which makes me feel groggy and grumpy), and I haven’t studied for days! And I’m frustrated at all that, which I’m taking out on this. But still – it wasn’t much help! Which I actually find fascinating, not frustrating. Why would it be so vague and unhelpful? The initial paragraph was all right, and it was actually what I’m used to hearing. But the scripture references listed below the paragraph almost didn’t even seem to relate! Maybe that’s where I’m the one that needs to put two and two together. But they were odd choices. The ones about Abraham were just ones where it stated God was making a covenant with Abraham. But it was unclear there was an oath involved, and it was unclear there was anything about priesthood involved (though I’ve done my own research on that), and it was unclear this had any connection to an average member of the Church. All those references did was show God can sometimes make a covenant. What does that have to do with the initial paragraph? Why aren’t we talking at least about Melchizedek? Or Aaron? Wouldn’t that be more helpful? Then the next scripture listed said it was about how the priests “fed not the flock,” which at first sounded literal: they weren’t taking care of sheep. Of course as I clicked on the link and read the verse it was comparing the people to sheep and how the priests weren’t “feeding” or taking care of the people. But for a quick guide for new members that was a weird thing to include! And the last reference said that in Malachi’s time the Priests corrupted the priesthood. But when I clicked on the link, it went to a verse that didn’t specifically mention that kind of thing at all. So, I think this section needs a bit of work!

Upcoming post: D&C 132 is not about polygamy! :)

At least, D&C 132 isn’t about polygamy primarily. Does it talk about it? Yes, of course. But it isn’t the point of the section. Even marriage generally is not the overall point. These are examples within the message of the section. And I don’t think I could have seen that without all the study I’ve done on the Abrahamic Covenant lately.

I want to work it out at length, but here’s a teaser, at least. Note that the info about Abraham & polygamy begins with a “therefore.” We need to understand what comes before that “therefore” if we’re going to see what God is teaching us about Abraham. Marriage is an example of what the section is about, not the subject primarily.

I’ll get to a verse-by-verse commentary soon (likely when my kids are all done being sick!). Hope to see you back, then. (If anyone besides me ever reads this! Ha! )

References for scriptures on the Covenant (divided by three promises: the Gospel, the Families, and the Priesthood)

As I read Moses 5-6, there are three things which God promises (or decrees) to Adam that will be in the world from the beginning until the end. Those three things are 1) the Gospel, 2) a chosen seed that will always be preserved and will bless all the Families of the earth, and 3) the Priesthood. (With Abraham, the promise of a chosen seed that will bless all Families is slightly altered: his seed will be as innumerable as the stars or the sands on the shore, and everyone who believes the Gospel will be counted as his seed. Abraham also receives promises about an inheritance of specific land, which I’m not addressing here.)

Here are the passages from Moses 5-6 where those three promises are made initially, and some other significant passages throughout scripture that shed some light on those three promises.

1) The Gospel 

Moses 5:7-8: And then the angel spake, saying: This thing is a similitude of the sacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father, which is full of grace and truth. Wherefore, thou shalt do all that thou doest in the name of the Son, and thou shalt repent and call upon God in the name of the Son forevermore.

Moses 5:14-15: And the Lord God called upon men by the Holy Ghost everywhere and commanded them that they should repent; And as many as believed in the Son, and repented of their sins, should be saved; and as many as believed not and repented not, should be damned; and the words went forth out of the mouth of God in a firm decree; wherefore they must be fulfilled.

Moses 5:57-59: For they would not hearken unto his voice, nor believe on his Only Begotten Son, even him whom he declared should come in the meridian of time, who was prepared from before the foundation of the world. And thus the Gospel began to be preached, from the beginning, being declared by holy angels sent forth from the presence of God, and by his own voice, and by the gift of the Holy Ghost. And thus all things were confirmed unto Adam, by an holy ordinance, and the Gospel preached, and a decree sent forth, that it should be in the world, until the end thereof; and thus it was. Amen.

Moses 6:29-30: and a hell I have prepared for them, if they repent not; And this is a decree, which I have sent forth in the beginning of the world, from my own mouth, from the foundation thereof, and by the mouths of my servants, thy fathers, have I decreed it, even as it shall be sent forth in the world, unto the ends thereof.

Enoch teaches it: Moses 6:51-52 and elsewhere; Noah teaches it Moses 8:19, for example (And the Lord ordained Noah after his own order, and commanded him that he should go forth and declare his Gospel unto the children of men, even as it was given unto Enoch.)

2) Chosen seed who will bless all Families / Seed Multiplied / Seed not destroyed:

Moses 5:10-11 (I don’t understand what this has to do with the families of the earth, but verse 10 links it, so I’m including the reference until I figure it out) 

Moses 6:2 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bare a son, and he called his name Seth. And Adam glorified the name of God; for he said: God hath appointed me another seed, instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

Moses 6:8: and a genealogy was kept of the children of God. And this was the book of the generations of Adam, saying: In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him…

Moses 6:22-23: And this is the genealogy of the sons of Adam, who was the son of God, with whom God, himself, conversed. And they were preachers of righteousness, and spake and prophesied, and called upon all men, everywhere, to repent; and faith was taught unto the children of men.

Also D&C 107:40-42: …the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made. This order was instituted in the days of Adam, and came down by lineage in the following manner: From Adam to Seth, who was ordained by Adam at the age of sixty-nine years, and was blessed by him three years previous to his (Adam’s) death, and received the promise of God by his father, that his posterity should be the chosen of the Lord, and that they should be preserved unto the end of the earth;

Moses 7:50-53: And the Lord could not withhold; and he covenanted with Enoch, and sware unto him with an oath, that he would stay the floods; that he would call upon the children of Noah; And he sent forth an unalterable decree, that a remnant of his seed should always be found among all nations, while the earth should stand

Moses 8:2 And it came to pass that Methuselah, the son of Enoch, was not taken, that the covenants of the Lord might be fulfilled, which he made to Enoch; for he truly covenanted with Enoch that Noah should be of the fruit of his loins.

JST Genesis 9:14-15: And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying, And I, behold, I will establish my covenant with you, which I made unto your father Enoch, concerning your seed after you.

Abraham 1:4: I sought for mine appointment unto the Priesthood according to the appointment of God unto the fathers concerning the seed.

Abraham 1:19: As it was with Noah so shall it be with thee; but through thy ministry my name shall be known in the earth forever, for I am thy God.

JST Genesis 17:8-9 (to Abraham): But as for thee, behold, I will make my covenant with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. And this covenant I make, that thy children may be known among all nations.

Genesis 22:17-18 (to Abraham, after Isaac’s sacrifice): That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Genesis 26:3-5 (to Isaac): And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;

Genesis 28:14 (to Jacob): And thy seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

Genesis 49:25-26 (Jacob to Joseph): The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bound of the everlasting hills: they shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren.

2 Nephi 3:16 (to Joseph): Yea, thus prophesied Joseph: I am sure of this thing, even as I am sure of the promise of Moses; for the Lord hath said unto me, I will preserve thy seed forever.

Exodus 32:9-14: And the Lord said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people: Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation. And Moses besought the Lord his God … Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever. And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

ISAIAH. (Basically, the whole book.) For example, Isaiah 61:9: And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed.

2 Nephi 3:23 (Lehi to Joseph): Wherefore, because of this covenant thou art blessed; for thy seed shall not be destroyed, for they shall hearken unto the words of the book.

D&C 68:8-11 (to Joseph Smith): Therefore, thus saith the Lord unto you, with whom the priesthood hath continued through the lineage of your fathers—  For ye are lawful heirs, according to the flesh, and have been hid from the world with Christ in God— Therefore your life and the priesthood have remained, and must needs remain through you and your lineage until the restoration of all things spoken by the mouths of all the holy prophets since the world began. Therefore, blessed are ye if ye continue in my goodness, a light unto the Gentiles, and through this priesthood, a savior unto my people Israel. The Lord hath said it. Amen.

D&C 128: 18: …It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding link of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other…

D&C 132: 30-31 (to Joseph Smith): Abraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins—from whose loins ye are, namely, my servant Joseph—which were to continue so long as they were in the world; and as touching Abraham and his seed, out of the world they should continue; both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the stars; or, if ye were to count the sand upon the seashore ye could not number them. This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham, and the promise was made unto Abraham; and by this law is the continuation of the works of my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself.

D&C 132:34: God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.

3) Priesthood

Moses 6:7-8: Now this same Priesthood, which was in the beginning, shall be in the end of the world also. Now this prophecy Adam spake, as he was moved upon by the Holy Ghost, and a genealogy was kept of the children of God.

D&C 107:39-58: It is the duty of the Twelve, in all large branches of the church, to ordain evangelical ministers, as they shall be designated unto them by revelation— The order of this priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made. This order was instituted in the days of Adam, and came down by lineage in the following manner…

Matthew 16:18-19: And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

D&C 84:6-17: And the sons of Moses, according to the Holy Priesthood which he received under the hand of his father-in-law, Jethro; And Jethro received it under the hand of Caleb; … Esaias also lived in the days of Abraham, and was blessed of him— Which Abraham received the priesthood from Melchizedek, who received it through the lineage of his fathers, even till Noah; … father Adam, who was the first man— Which priesthood continueth in the church of God in all generations, and is without beginning of days or end of years.

D&C 128:9 It may seem to some to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of—a power which records or binds on earth and binds in heaven. Nevertheless, in all ages of the world, whenever the Lord has given a dispensation of the priesthood to any man by actual revelation, or any set of men, this power has always been given.

D&C 132:7:  …and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred…

Revelation (May 2013 YW New Curriculum Topic)

What a beautiful scripture to (perhaps) quote to the  YW:

“If thou shalt ask, thou shalt receive revelation upon revelation, knowledge upon knowledge, that thou mayest know the mysteries and peaceable things—that which bringeth joy, that which bringeth life eternal.”

That’s D&C 42:61. It is of course talking to Joseph Smith, but I think every word in there has applied to me personally.

I am thinking of talking about personal revelation for this week’s lesson. I thought about using Two Lines of Communication, but that didn’t feel right yet. Then I thought about Sis. Dibb’s talk on finding holy places, since I think revelation comes in holy places. But that hasn’t settled on me yet either. Right now I’m thinking of other scriptures that talk about having faith that you can receive your own revelation, like 1 Nephi 15 where Nephi asks his brothers why they haven’t thought to ask God.

I also thought about connecting it to the Restoration lessons by talking about how the Gift of the Holy Ghost comes by the priesthood, which is part of the Restoration.

I guess I could also have a lesson on the Priesthood, which is what I would have taught on last week but plans had to change last minute. Hmm. That’s an option.

But, my study wants to go elsewhere this morning, so I’ll have to work on this more tomorrow. Adios!