Truth Never Changes Volume 10, Number 2

TRUTH NEVER CHANGES

A PUBLICATION IN THE SPIRIT AND TRADITON OF TRUTH MAGAZINE

Y VOLUME 10              FEBRUARY 2006              NUMBER 02 Y

obedience & free agency

We have heard some men talk about obedience to the laws of life and salvation as revealed by God and taught by his servants in these latter days, as though it seemed to them an impossible thing for a man to be as much a free agent in keeping the commands of God as in disobeying them.  When a man yields implicit obedience to the requirements of heaven in all things, some pretend to think that he must necessarily lose his free agency and at once becomes a puppet for others to manipulate. 

IN THIS ISSUE: OBEDIENCE & FREE AGENCY……..…….46 THE AMERICAS: THE REAL CRADLE  OF CIVILIZATION………………...…………….50 POLYGAMY-CAN IT BE ABANDONED?...52 THE PROPHET JOSEPH’S ANSWER TO SUNDRY QUESTIONS……………………...57 QUOTE ………………..……….…………….60 COMMENTARY ON MARRIAGE………….60 QUOTE ……………………………………....62 GOSSIPING…………………………………..63 AS GOD IS SO MAN MAY BE……………..65 THE HOLY GHOST (cont’d.)………………..67 REVELATION TO B. YOUNG…………...…74 REVELATION ON C. P. M………………….75 THE 14 ERRORS OF LIFE……………….…78 EDITORIAL………………………………….79 GOD OF OUR FATHERS, KNOWN OF OLD……………………………………....84

The advocates of such an idea apparently entertain a very low estimate of human nature, for they would have us believe that to love sin and delight in its practice is the natural condition of the human family, nor do they appear to be willing to admit that a man may voluntarily, freely and without constraint love God and keep his commandments.  But we contend that the idea that the sinner only is the free agent, is one that will not bear a moment’s scrutiny in the light of truth; and further, that there are no fetters so galling as those that bind the sinner, no thralldom so terrible as that which unbridled passions impose, no taskmaster so exacting as the adversary of the souls of men.  And again we would ask, if the drunkard as free a man as he who is temperate?  Is the debauchee any more a free agent than he who avoids the haunts of vice?

If not, on what grounds can we assume that the obedient man uses his agency any less freely than he who chooses to disobey?  Because a man chooses to serve God and obey his laws, is he any less free in doing so than his unwise fellow who prefers to live without God in the world?  Cannot a man as freely serve God as he can the devil, and tread the path to heaven as voluntarily as he can descend the road to hell?  We think so; why not?

The fact that some who take no pleasure in righteousness, confound ideas when they talk about entire and unreserved obedience to God and his representatives destroying man’s free agency, they really mean that he who keep God’s laws has no license to sin, but it is that license and not the power, permission and opportunity to choose between right and wrong that is withdrawn.  A man is just as much a free agent in avoiding sin as in committing it, in doing good as in working evil.

Some also contend that obedience is derogatory to the nobility of our manhood, that the fact of our bending our wills to the will of another is bartering away our birthright.  We fail to see it in any such light.  If the being we obeyed were the inferior of man in wisdom, intelligence and power, there might be something unworthy of our manhood in stooping to his behest, or were his laws unadapted (sic) to our eternal natures, unworthy of our divine origin, crude, incomplete, immoral or degrading, we might rebel, though we fear the majority of mankind would not do so, for the behests of Satan are of this very descriptions, and so great a number obey them uncomplainingly.

For ourselves we can see nothing unworthy of our manhood in tendering the gratitude of our hearts to the giver of all good for his unnumbered blessings, in praising his name therefore, nor in proving our gratitude by joyous obedience to his will.  “Joyous obedience”, because our faith and prove our gratitude to him for each and every gift our hearts rejoice in, and because the expression of his will gives us that opportunity; because we desire to show our faith by our works, and because we can best testify our love for him by keeping his commandments.  And for this cause we contend before all men that we feel as free in serving the Lord, ah, far freer than the most hardened man ever felt in living a life of son; and we know that a true servant of the Lord is a freer man in the Sanctuary observing the laws of his Creator, than the man of the world in the whirl of unrestrained pleasure, the atheist amidst his vain philosophy, or the sot among his boon companions.  A man to be free indeed, must be free from the thralldom of sin, a triumphant victor over his own passions, and a partaker of that freedom which the Gospel of Heaven alone endows.

Here an objector may interpose and declare that he has not one word to say against a man being obedient to God, but it is this obedience to other men to which he is opposed; and were we to listen to him, we should probably hear him mutter something about oppression, slaves, deceivers, deceived, blind obedience, etc., and witness him make up in violent denunciations what he was lacking in reason and argument.  To other men, as men, we believe in giving honor and obedience as our respect for them impels or the requirements of earthly laws demand.  But to men clothed with the Holy Priesthood we give reverence because they are the representatives of our Father in heaven, and as we love to reverence him, we hearken to his words through his mouthpieces, and esteem it a privilege to honor those whom God delights to honor; and more happy still are we in our obedience when realizing that the power of God in such is blended with holiness of life, when our affection and our reason combine “to make this duty our delight”.  Nor are we ashamed to own that we consider ourselves greatly blessed in the privilege of hearing their instructions and of following their examples in all that makes man noble in time and Godlike in eternity.

This portion of the subject then hinges on the question, are they to whom we yield obedience of a truth the mouthpieces of God?  For if we do know that they are so, then in honoring them we honor God, in obeying their words we obey him, or, on the other hand, in despising them we despise him, in rejecting them we reject him to our own condemnations.

Have we not on record the words of Jesus to his Apostles, when he said unto them, “He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.”  And again, “Verily, verily I say unto you, he that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.”  We have also the declaration of the Apostle Paul, “For God hath not called us into uncleanness, but unto holiness.  He therefore that despiseth despiseth not man but God, who hath given unto us His Holy Spirit.”  And in this connection we would observe that the fact that others do not know that they to whom we yield obedience are the servants of the Most High, does not affect us.  If we have received this knowledge from heaven, of which in all boldness and sincerity we bear testimony, then other men’s ignorance is nothing to us, nor shall we be answerable therefore, if we shrink not from our duty.  Inasmuch as we have heard the voice of the Lord, the testimony of a million that they did not hear it is no proof to us that he did not speak, and when God has himself borne record to us by his Spirit that these men are his servants, the question so far as we are concerned, is above and beyond the reach of human controversy.

This being so, it matters not to our free agency whether  we obey the words of the Lord, as they come direct from the mouth of a living Apostle, or we gather them from the records of his teachings handed down to us after he has laid aside this mortality.  He who believes in a living Priesthood endowed with the power of God, is no less a free agent than he who takes the Bible alone as his rule of faith and practice, while the former has the immeasurable advantage of receiving the word of the Lord direct as his own individual circumstances may require.  (Millennial Star, 34:152-154)

Brigham Young delivered a sermon on the Adam-God doctrine to the world 9 April 1852.  Many LDS apologists often state his words were taken out of context.  They were not.  He edited that sermon, which was published in Millennial Star #48 a year and a half later on 26 November 1853.  That sermon was also published in the first volume of the Journal of Discourses in 1855.  The Being we call our Heavenly Father was known as Adam here upon the earth.  What a beautiful doctrine it is—to know that we are literally the posterity of God.

MISSION STATEMENT

Truth Never Changes does not represent any organization, neither is it the voice for any religious group, church, &c.  We are not a corporation.

We encourage family patriarchal organizations.  No one here considers himself the “One Mighty & Strong” to set any church or group in order.  We believe in the perpetuation of the Fulness of the Gospel as revealed by the Prophet Joseph Smith by the Lord Jesus Christ.  We believe in the preservation of all of the ordinances of the Holy Priesthood.

We invite any reader to contribute articles, poetry and faith-promoting experiences that would be uplifting in nature.  We reserve the right to deny or edit any (or all) portion(s) of contributed material.  All contributions will remain on file and the identity of the author will remain anonymous, as we believe in keeping an eye single to the Glory of God and not men.

Controversial material or opposite viewpoints will be printed, providing the material is in good taste.  The opinions expressed are not necessarily the opinions of Truth Never Changes nor its voluntary staff—they are the opinions of each individual writer.

Truth Never Changes provides all individuals the opportunity to express themselves in accordance with their Constitutional Rights.  Often, many voices aren’t heard because of the circumstances they are placed in.  One, being a member of a church or group, may not have the opportunity to speak due to possible repercussions or consequences.  Truth Never Changes provides that opportunity through anonymity. 

Most back issues are available.  We reserve the right to deny subscription/service to anyone.  Shoes, shirt and tie required!

PO Box 433                                                                             angelwolf51@yahoo.com

ST. JOHNS, AZ 85936-0433                                                                                sanhedrin70@yahoo.com

THE AMERICAS:

THE REAL CRADLE OF CIVILIZATION

Since the divine teachings of Joseph Smith, the Prophet, Mormons have believed several items of faith that may or may not be supported through today’s science:

1)      The location of the Garden of Eden was located in Jackson County, Missouri, USA.

2)      The City of Enoch was where the Gulf of Mexico now resides

3)      The Jaredites lived in South America

4)      Lehi and his entourage landed of the coast of Chile

5)      The Americas is the Promised Land, as spoken of in Scripture

In reference to item one, we read in the book of Genesis 2:13-17 (Inspired Version) we read:

“And I the Lord God, caused a river to go out of Eden, to water the garden; and from thence it was parted and became into four heads. 

“And I, the Lord God, called the name of the first Pison, and it compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where I, the Lord, created much gold; and the gold of that land was good, and there was bdellium, and onyx stone.

“And the name of the second river was called Gihon, the same that encompasseth the whole land of Ethiopia.

“And the name of the third river was Hiddekel, that which goeth toward the east of Assyria.

“And the fourth river was Euphrates.”

The Lord tells us that He Himself named these rivers.  But if the Garden of Eden is in Jackson County, Missouri, why the references to the lands of Havilah, Ethiopia, and Assyria?  Was the Lord mistaken?  Was the Prophet Joseph mistaken?  No, and no.  The answer is really quite simple: These rivers were named here, on this, the North American continent, and those rivers, named such in the Near East, along with those countries, were named after the original places.  Mankind has always had a tendency to name cities, places, mountains and rivers after cities, places, mountains and rivers from whence he came.  If you don’t believe me, just look at any detailed U. S. map.  Utah has a Mount Nebo, so do a group of hills west of Heshbon in the land of Moab.  Utah has a Jordan River—a tributary that flows from a fresh water source to a salt-water body of water, and so does Palestine—with identical circumstances.

It is then logical to state, that if our First Parents lived upon the North American continent, then so did Enoch, Methuselah, Peleg and Noah, who built the ark here.  On what is now known as American soil.  And it is equally conceivable that following the deluge, Noah really did land on Mount Ararat in what is now known as Turkey, and from there sprang the societies and histories as we know them.

Peruvians have a legend of a traveling man called Viracocha, who in antediluvian times preached among the natives—to love one another, to show charity to all, to cease fighting amongst each other.  He spoke to them in great kindness and love and he wrought miracles: he healed the sick and healed the blind.  And most interesting of all, he referred to the natives as his ‘sons and daughters.’

“And Adam hearkened unto the voice of God and called upon his sons to repent.”  (Genesis 6:1)

The natives’ myth called him the “Great Creator God”, who first made earth and sky, then made the earth for men to live in, and it was he, Viracocha, who decided to destroy the giants with a great flood.

The Book of Jasher states that giants watched from afar prior to the flood.

What is interesting, is there are 500 cultural accounts of a great deluge that occurred upon this earth, and 62 of those are independent from Christian/Semitic cultures.

The Sumarians—another people of great antiquity—had an account of the Deluge, known as the Epic of Gilgamesh, and in this account, Utnapishtim preserved humankind and all animals by building a vessel to escape the flood.  Scientists in the early 1900’s excavated 28 feet down in various places in the Near East, and discovered eight feet of uniform sediment and clay, which was an indication of a great flood.

The Aztecs dated the flood at 4008 B. C., during Matlactli Atl (Ten Water).

The Mayan’s Popul Vuh had a story of the Deluge.

If Adam and Eve and their posterity lived upon this continent, then most certainly did Cain.  The Olmec heads in San Lorenzo puzzle anthropologists, because it indicates a Negroid presence in Central America.  Stelae at Monte Alban reflect Negroid and Caucasian prisoners of war.

Other enigmatic reliefs picture bearded Caucasian men at Uxmal, La Venta and Monte Alban.  For non-Mormons, this certainly is a puzzle.  But when one approaches this information that civilization began in the Americas, it is not confounding.

A relief figure carved on a slab of stone at La Venta reveals a Caucasian male “dressed in what looked like tight-fitting leggings, his features were those of an Anglo-Saxon.  He had a full-pointed beard and wore a curious floppy cap on his head…around his slim waist was tied a flamboyant sash.  The other Caucasian figure, this time carved on the side of a narrow pillar, was similarly bearded and attired.”  (Fingerprints of the Gods, pp. 134)

Was the artist who carved these figures attempting to carve men dressed in Priesthood clothing?

In reference to items three and four, the Books of Chalam Balam—ancient Mayan religious texts, report that the ‘first inhabitants of Yucatan came from the east in boats across the water, led by Itzamana, a healer who could cure by the laying on of hands and could raise the dead.  Could Itzamana been Mahonri Moriancumr, the brother of Jared or even Father Lehi?

The Cholulans had an account of the Tower of Babel and the confounding of languages—information obviously carried to the Promised Land.

And more recently, linguists have found Chiastic patterns—rhetorical patterns that match elements in reverse order—in the Book of Mormon and in Mayan texts.  Chiasms are used in modern civilizations, as well as ancient, and quite notably employed in the Near East.  The Bible uses chiasmus extensively, which “sometimes governs the structures of entire chapters.”  (Ensign, October 1988, pp. 28)

The Americas is the Promised Land.  The Americas is the real cradle of civilization, whether it is supported by science or not.  It is only that after the Deluge, humanity was transplanted to the Near East, and from there, the rest is history.

Polygamy—can it be abandoned?

Reproduced from truth 15:201-205, from

Deseret News, 1885

The question of Polygamy, since its introduction by Joseph Smith as early as 1831, has been agitated among the people of America and the world.  For years the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has accepted it as the principle upon which eternal increase is based.  The Church not only taught this principle, but defended it by placing her integrity and the blood of her Prophets and Saints upon the altar of sacrifice.

With the efforts of the Church to streamline itself in the early ‘20’s came a new Church President and a new Church policy regarding this sacred principle. The faithful and sacrificing years of the past were soon forgotten.  The Church, in its effort to proved itself friendly with the world, began to un-church those of the old line Mormons who would not agree to relinquish their faith in the principles revealed through Joseph Smith.  This mild judicial action finally, and inevitably, ripened into first rate persecution on the part of the Church Authorities, until today the leaders and the Saints feel that they are doing God a service, when they succeed in placing men and women in prison for upholding this principle for which Joseph Smith gave his life.

Thus, once again, history repeats itself, and the persecuted has turned persecutor!  What is the result of all this?  Reader—read on—and weep!  Editor.

______________________

“Polygamy, a question which for political effect has been agitated for years among the people of America, and the bitter opposition to which has been keenly felt by the Saints who originated its practice in the nineteenth century, now seems to have assumed a new phase entirely, if reports are at all true.

“The Christian reformers are now predicting an ABANDONMENT OF THE PRACTICE of this (to them) very obnoxious doctrine or tenet of our faith.  Some are even quoted as willing to stake money upon the issue.

“The matter is treated in common conversation and discussed in the public journals in a manner that indicates a woeful ignorance of the genius and spirit of the religion of the Latter-day Saints.  Even the more conservative and tolerant are now fully satisfied that if “Mormonism” survives the present attack, supported as it is by the united voice of the American people, it can only live hereafter by complying with the condition demanded, which is neither more nor less than yielding up polygamy with all its associations, including the wives and children that have been obtained outside of legal enactments.  Polygamist men, though, are not expected to abandon entirely these wives and children to the mercy of a cold and cruel world, for they say who make the demand: “I suppose, in mercy to us, you can continue to provide for them; yet all these marital relations that are excessive, must cease for hereafter one man and one woman shall only be recognized as husband and wife, and their children only shall be legitimate.

“The whole matter was treated as a mere business transaction.

“Affections, kindred ties and those bonds that grow out of an holy union with the sexes, coupled with the love between parent and child, according to their reasoning can be severed at pleasure in a moment; such separation need give no concern to the parties most deeply interested.  The men can then go about their business and the women also unmolested; while these polygamous children can grow up among us and be tolerated as citizens of the United States and their parentage will never be questioned.

“What magnanimity of soul!  What wise statesmanship!  What profound wisdom is here displayed!  Such sentiments are only worthy of the libertine, the seducer, and the vile wretch whose finer feelings have been blunted by continuous and unlawful excesses, and whose boasts are gauged only by the number of his cast-off victims—a thing without feeling, without affection, without soul, without honor, without manhood, all—all destroyed; hopelessly, irretrievably lost.

“Let me here ask: What would be gained by such an abandonment, for surely the stupendous efforts that are now being made must have some reason to support them, and that reason ought to indicate some food not only to these misguided people, but to society generally, as well as the country at large?

“Are these polygamist men and women essentially bad?  Are they bad neighbors?  Are they bad citizens?

“Not if the Rev. D. S. Tuttle, Episcopal Bishop of this diocese spoke the truth concerning them in his public utterances in the east some time ago; for he testified to their good qualities in these regards, and his long residence among us enables him to speak understandingly upon the subject.

“Will their general intelligence compare favorably with that of a like number of monogamists of the same nationalities as themselves?  We invite the COMPARISON.

“Are children born of polygamic parentage any less intelligent than monogamic children or is their physical development at all below par?  Professor Fowler and other scientific men have expressed themselves most emphatically upon this subject, and that, too, in our favor.  While, according to their view, the union of one man with one woman was the most natural, yet they failed to see any indications of deterioration in our offspring, viewed as a whole, either mentally or physically.  And we now venture the assertion that the continual practice of polygamy, as taught by the “Mormons”, would so materially improve the race, both physically and mentally, as to place them a century hence beyond all comparison.

“How do they compare in morality with our Christian neighbors?  We answer, there is no comparison, “Mormon” credit is at a premium in the mercantile world, their general sobriety is known to all, while virtue to them is priceless.  In short, no Christian people upon the earth teach and demand of their members the observance of such strict morality as do the Latter-day Saints.

“Now I can hear the enemy laugh and say, sneeringly, “Polygamy included, I suppose.”

“I answer, Yes!  A thousand times, yes!  For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so is the polygamy of the Latter-day Saints higher than the monogamic practices of the Christian world.

“(I humbly ask pardon of the women of “Mormondom” for mentioning the two in connection, for one is the very antipodes of the other, and I only do it because of the present necessity in the comparison between us and them.)  Having made this explanation, I now turn to the subject, and ask: Is their immorality existing among us?  And answer with sorrow, Yes.  But is it due to “Mormon” teaching or “Mormon” practice?  I proudly answer, No.  I turn to professors of Christianity—the would be REFORMERS OF UTAH, and charge them with its introduction among us in all its phases.  What better evidence of this fact can be furnished than that the drinking saloon, the brothel, the gambling hell were not here until they brought them; or, in other words, they followed close upon their very heels, and their continued existence is due largely to the fostering care of the class mentioned.  For they have not laughed behind their (un)holy altars when they have looked upon or have been made acquainted with the defilement of the “Mormon” youth?  In the language of the Holy Writ, they have “looked upon Zion and said, Let her be defiled”.  Their representative sheet in this city has published the echo in the following words, under the title of “WHAT UTAH WANTS”:

“I believe that billiard halls, saloons and house of ill-fame are more powerful reforming agencies here in Utah than churches or schools.  What the young Mormons want is to be freed. ***I rejoice when I see the young Mormon hoodlums playing billiards, getting drunk, running with bad women, anything to break the shackles they were bound in, and that ever so-called religious and virtuous influence only makes the stronger.”

“Is there one Christian minister or member of any Church that has ever made a public remonstrance against these hellish suggestions?  Not one.  Why this studied silence for more than five years, unless in means a full endorsement of these sentiments?

“Again, is the large increase of native-born citizens (the result of these plural marriages) any injury to the State?  Wise statesmen have always encouraged the increase of native population in preference to that which is imported; viewing the former as more reliable (especially in emergencies) than the latter.  Are the “Mormons” loyal?  Aye, to the very core.  Blatant demagogues, pot-house politicians and carpetbag-hangers-on have yelled loudly for years past the words, “Treason”, “Church and State”, “Priestly rule”, “Polygamy”, “The growing political power of the Mormons”, etc., without cause, without reason, without proof.  We stand today before the nation of the most pronounced defenders of the constitutional rights and privileges, and we will prove it to all the world ere long.  But we are NOT MEN WORSHIPPERS, and because of this we have been and are today condemned.

“If, in the foregoing, we have omitted any comparisons, let them be furnished and we willingly will try them in the crucible; all we ask is, FAIR PLAY AND EQUAL RIGHTS.

“What would the “Mormons” gain by any exchange whatever?  We have proved by comparison our superiority in every particular; hence, to yield one point would be to us a serious loss; we therefore prefer to retain our possessions intact, I now ask in this connection: Will the nation, either of the political parties, a state, or a solitary individual gain anything by fighting the “Mormons” or their religion?  If past history may be taken as evidence, and if it is any index to the future, then the answer is most decidedly negative.

“Many years ago, when the “Little Giant” (Stephen A. Douglas) was fast growing into power, Joseph Smith, the Prophet, spoke to him in this wise: “Judge, you will aspire to the Presidency of the United States, and if you ever turn your hand against me or the Latter-day Saints, you will feel the hand of the Almighty upon you, and you will live to see and know that I have testified the truth to you, for the conversation of this day will stick to you through life.”  This occurred, if I mistake not, in May 1843, before Judge Douglas had even reached Congress.  He grew to eminence and would undoubtedly have reached the pinnacle of his ambition had he kept faith with the prophet, but the fatal words “Cut the Loathsome Ulcer Out” (referring to Utah) spoken in his memorable Lexington speech sealed his doom.  Again the declaration that the “TWIN RELIC”, meaning slavery and polygamy “must be wiped out”, was very ominous.  Slavery is abolished; we will now wait and see whether the prediction concerning the last will ever be fulfilled.  We claim that polygamy is of God, while slavery was instituted by man; herein is the difference.  The Republican party have wrestled manfully for twenty-four years with the “twin” still remaining, and what are the facts? 

“Polygamy, as a principle of faith has a firmer hold upon the hearts of the people today than ever, and I would here ask, Where such a faith exists can be “WIPED OUT”?

“On the contrary, will it not show itself at every opportunity, running the gauntlet again and again despite all opposition?  It is an eternal truth, that nothing, not even death itself can destroy a living faith.

“I might mention many other instances of defeat traceable to the same cause as that, that decided Judge Douglas’s fate, but space will not allow, and I will merely add: If any people or individuals imagine they can gain prestige or position by fighting the Latter-day Saints or their doctrines they will signally fall.  (Let the Prosecuting Attorney of Utah take note of this).

“The folly of entertaining for one moment the PROPOSITION TO ABANDON POLYGAMY is so apparent to a true Latter-day Saint that it is hardly worth mentioning.  It was not Joseph Smith nor Brigham Young; neither was it John Taylor that gave the revelation on Celestial Marriage, it was God Himself, and He has said, “My word shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and prosper in the thing whereto I send it.”  The entire Church and all of its Priesthood, with the Presidency at the head might motion and vote against this principle until doomsday with just one effect, (namely) to vote themselves away from the fellowship of the Holy Ghost from the possession of their Priesthood, and to find themselves very speedily outside the Church and Kingdom of God; while He would raise up others that would honor and observe this law.

“But the question is asked, could not your President RECEIVE A REVELATION so authorizing him, thus assuming no responsibility neither involving any consequences to himself in the matter?  I answer: If the people of this nation, the Congress of the United States, the President of the United States, with his Cabinet, the government officers of Utah or any other have the ear of the Almighty they had better ask the question themselves, for He reveals what He pleases to Prophets and when He pleases.  AND NEVER REVOKES WHAT HE HAS SAID.  Those who are so anxious for the revelation might dictate the Almighty, but a Prophet waits God’s own time to speak and reveal His will, and that Prophet or that people who will not hearken unto His voice will be cut off.  These are His own words.

“I listened some time ago to an INGENIUS ARGUMENT upon this subject.  One speaker claimed that God gave a revelation to His Church that if the enemy should hinder them from building a temple, the Lord would not hold them responsible, but would require it at the hands of the enemy,  He remarked that the same rule would apply to polygamy or any other commandment: That we would therefore be justified in abandoning polygamy, for the United States and the Federal officers of Utah would gladly assume the responsibility if we would only yield the point ourselves.

“Now this was very generous, and spoken with apparent good feeling; but here is quite a difference between these two things.  While we are commanded to build temples yet, under certain emergencies a pile of stones speedily erected, as Jacob and others of old did, would answer for an altar and be acceptable to God, for it is the authority and not the place that possesses virtue.  The Temple is as naught without the Priesthood, and that same Priesthood can sanctify a crude altar as well as a gorgeous Temple; while we are commanded to observe the law pertaining to Celestial Marriage in our own person, and that too, at the risk of our exaltation.

“If we have been hindered by our enemies from building a temple in which to receive the ordinances of Celestial Marriage, there is still no excuse for us, for a crude altar can be erected, the ordinance performed and the altar left standing or destroyed, it having served its purpose.  God has never made any provisions to relieve us individually from the responsibility resting upon us in connection with the law pertaining to Celestial Marriage; neither have I the slightest idea that He will revoke the law though fifty-five million people in the United States should so decide—no not if all the Christian world should unite in one grand petition and tell Him as this nation has done, that He must, or they will send all the Saints to the penitentiary.  It is not John Taylor and the government, but, in the language of the departed McKean, It is (a principle of) Mormon Theocracy vs. Federal Authority.  In other words, it is the United States vs. the Kingdom of God.

“We wait patiently THE ISSUE, being powerless to interfere.

“There may be a few half-hearted souls among us who, seeing the loss that business in Utah must sustain if this raid is continued, and not being desirous nor even willing to make any sacrifice for the truth’s sake, who would say: “Let polygamy go for the present, then our business interests will not be jeopardized and our real estate will continue to command a good figure”, etc., preferring to sacrifice a principle of eternal truth rather than a little property.  To such I would say: Our aim is higher!  It is God, His ordinances, His laws, and the triumph of truth upon the earth, even should it cost life itself as a sacrifice.  Deseret News, April 1, 1885”

The Prophet Joseph’s Answer to Sundry Questions

I answered the questions which were frequently asked me, while on my last journey by one from Kirtland to Missouri, as printed in the Elder’s Journal, Vol. 1, Number II, pages 28 and 29, as follows:

First: “Do you believe in the Bible?”

If we do, we are the only people under heaven that does, for there are none of the religious sects of the day that do.

Second: “Wherein do you differ from other sects?”

In that we believe the Bible, and all other sects profess to believe their interpretations of the Bible, and their creeds.

Third: “Will everybody be damned, but Mormons?”

Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness.

Fourth: “How and where did you obtain the Book of Mormon?”

Moroni, who deposited the plates in a hill in Manchester, Ontario County, New York, being dead and raised again therefrom, appeared to me, and told me where they were, and gave me directions how to obtain them.  I obtained them, and the Urim and Thummim with them, by the means of which I translated the plates; and thus came the Book of Mormon.

Fifth: “Do you believe Joseph Smith, Jun., to be a Prophet?”

Yes, and every other man who has the testimony of Jesus.  For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy—Revelation. 19:10.

Sixth: “Do the Mormons believe in having all things in common?”

No.

Seventh: “Do the Mormons believe in having more wives than one?
No, not at the same time.  But they believe that if their companion dies, they have a right to marry again.  But we do disapprove of the custom, which has gained in the world, and has been practiced among us, to our great mortification, in marrying five or six weeks, or even in two or three months, after the death of their companion.  We believe that due respect ought to be had to the memory of the dead, and the feelings of both friends and children.

Eight: “Can they [the Mormons] raise the dead?”

No, nor can any other people that now lives, or ever did live.  But God can raise the dead, through man as an instrument.

Ninth: “What signs does Joseph Smith give of his divine mission?”

The signs which God is pleased to let him give, according as His wisdom thinks best, in order that He may judge the world agreeably to His own plan.

Tenth: “Was not Joseph Smith a money digger?”

Yes, but it was never a very profitable job for him, as he only got fourteen dollars a month for it.

Eleventh: “Did Joseph Smith steal his wife?”

Ask her, she was of age, she can answer for herself.

Twelfth: “Do the people have to give up their money when they join this church?”

No other requirement than to bear their proportion of the expenses of the Church, and support the poor.

Thirteenth: “Are the Mormons abolitionists?”

No, unless delivering the people from priestcraft, and the priests from the power of Satan, should be considered abolition.  But we do not believe in setting the negroes free.

Fourteenth: “Do they not stir up the Indians to war, and to commit depredations?”

No, and they who reported the story knew it was false when they put in circulation.  These and similar reports are palmed upon the people by the priests and this is the only reason why we ever thought of answering them.

Fifteenth: “Do the Mormons baptize in the name of ‘Joe’ Smith?”

No, but if they did, it would be as valid as the baptisms administered by the sectarian priests.

Sixteenth: “If the Mormon doctrine is true, what has become of all those who died since the days of the Apostles?”

All those who have not had an opportunity of hearing the Gospel, and being administered unto by an inspired man in the flesh, must have it hereafter, before they can be finally judged.

Seventeenth: “Does ‘Joe’ Smith profess to be Jesus Christ?”

No, but he professes to be His brother, as all other Saints have done and now do: MATT 12:49-50, “And He stretched forth His hand towards His disciples and said, Behold my mother and my brethren; for whosoever shall do the will of my Father, which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.”

Eighteenth: “Is there anything in the Bible which licenses you to believe in revelation now-a-days?”

Is there anything that does not authorize us to believe so:  If there is, we have, as yet, not been able to find it.

Nineteenth: “Is not the canon of the Scriptures full?”

If it is, there is a great defect in the book, or else it would have said so.

Twentieth: “What are the fundamental principles of your religion?”

The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it.  But in connection with these, we believe in the gift of the Holy Ghost, the power of faith, the enjoyment of the spiritual gifts according to the will of God, the restoration of the house of Israel, and the final triumph of truth.

I published the foregoing answers to save myself the trouble of repeating the same a thousand times over and over again.  May 8, 1828  (T.P.J.S., 119-121; D. H. C. 3:28-30)

R

“The question is frequently asked, “Can we not be saved without going through with all those ordinances?”  I would answer, No, not the fulness of salvation.  Jesus said, There are many mansions in my Father’s house, and I will go and prepare a place for you.  House here named should have been translated kingdom; and any person who is exalted to the highest mansion (kingdom) has to abide a celestial law, and the whole law, too.”

  The Prophet Joseph Smith, Jun.

—COMMENTARY—

ON

MARRIAGE

An article was recently published in Time Magazine, which had a study about modern Mormons marrying later and having fewer children.  This article also stated that within the Church there is a surplus of marriageable sisters.  This disheartening information was received with feelings of sympathy and sorrow.   Another study from BYU in 1989, yielded that “…for those older than the regular marrying age in the Church, there are 14 Melchizedek Priesthood holders for every 100 women!”  (Utah County Journal, Church News, Oct. 14, 1989, p. 13).

Within this era, society places too much emphasis upon careers, and sadly, the rising leaders Church seem to support this position.  The Church today also encourages young sisters to go on Missions, as if it were a calling from the Lord—instead of marrying and raising families.  Many of these sisters return and want to continue their education, start a career, and then begin a family when they are well into their thirties—these being perfectly acceptable choices for “Latter-day Saints.”

It is not the calling of a woman to toil in the Mission fields.  It is not the calling of the woman to be the breadwinner. Woman, because she is woman, has the greatest responsibility and calling in the world—to give life, then instruct those little children in the ways of the Lord.

First, the Church gave up the Principle of Celestial Plural Marriage and then the emphasis was placed upon the monogamist members to have large families, something of which Mormons were once known as having.  Also somewhere along the line, apologists for Plural Marriage began teaching that it was “never an essential for salvation and exaltation,” and that it was only a temporary law voted in by the Church to “rescue” the widows, whose husbands died on the trek to Deseret.  Any student of Mormon history knows that this was not so.

Today, large Mormon families are uncommon—we heard a report that at a family reunion, one small family with six children suffered ridicule from their relatives—members of the corporate Church—for having “such a large family of six kids!”  When I grew up, a family with six kids was only medium-sized!  Today, micro families with two or three kids seem to be the norm among Church members.

What happened along the way?  The Church welcomed the world and shook hands with the wicked and partook of the sins of Babylon.  The Church, through the accentuation of the precepts of men, and renunciation of Celestial Laws, has evolved, and continues to change into a religion, whose scarcely discernible vestiges are anything near to the Grand and Glorious condition it once was.  We “Fundies” certainly look forward to the Mighty and Strong One to restore order within the Church—for it still remains the Lord’s Church.

The members of the Church today are imbued with modern trends, and all is not well within Zion—nor will it ever be until we renounce the world and again stand for the principles of truth and righteousness.  The day of the Lord’s return is at hand and Israel needs to repent.

I pray the surplus of unwed sisters within the Church—who have the longing to marry and raise a family, can do so; that their hearts’ desire to raise a righteous seed unto the Most High God will be granted.  There are men of integrity still, whose sole desire is to build up the Kingdom of God upon the earth.  And, these men, whom the members call Fundies, recognize the crucial importance to live all the revealed laws of this dispensation.

If the Church hadn’t relinquished the Principle of Plural Marriage, the Church wouldn’t be experiencing this dilemma.  If the Church didn’t encourage sisters to go on missions, then perhaps this would not be an issue. When the Church is placed in order, every sister who desires a righteous husband could have one—even if it means sharing one with a sister-wife in Plural Marriage environment.  “Oh, but that law will be lived in the Millennium!”  So we often hear.  But where has the Lord commanded that?  Where is it written?  “That’s what the Living Prophet says.”  The Latter-day Saints of today are conditioned to not question.  What a saddening situation we see today—and such ignorance that prevails. 

I once visited an LDS web site chat room and afterwards, I wept—not only because of the ignorance the members there had, but the stubborn obstinacy to not research Church history for the truth of things, because the leaders discourage members to do so.  Is seeking the mysteries of Godliness is a bad thing?  Doesn’t the Lord encourage us to search the mysteries?  They reacted like it was an evil thing to do!  Like they would suffer the torments of hell if they sought the mysteries of God.  And why?  It is because the leaders of the Church don’t want the members to discover the contemporary leaders’ teachings are not in line with their predecessors.  And their apathy made me weep like I haven’t wept before.  That night I poured out my heart to the Lord for these people in the Church—for the Church no longer teaches the necessity and obedience to the fulness of the ordinances, and the laws of the Priesthood.  Rather than believing and practicing the teachings of he, who was taught by the Lord Jesus Christ—he who knew God the Father and God the Son—the members of the corporate Church ignorantly insist that the different doctrines of “the living prophet” are better.  There is no easier way to the Celestial Kingdom!  How is it that these members—in their deluded state, think they can achieve the highest exaltation and salvation with anything less than which those laws are predicated?  I prayed for the return of the Prophet Joseph to restore order within the Church; I prayed for the return of the Lord in His glory.  O, Lord, how long will these leaders of the Church continue to cloak Thy eternal truths?  How long wilt Thou permit them to lead Thy children astray?

So long as the Church is swayed by the ideas of the world, she will not be able to progress.  She will yet be redeemed.  It is ever my prayer that the Lord will deliver her from bondage, and that justice will prevail, and that Zion will be established and all who seek just laws can seek refuge there, I pray in Jesus’ name.  Amen.

MARRIAGE VS. MURDER

Of all disingenuous arguments, of all flimsy casuistry, of all transparent sophistry, shallow pretexts, that by which it is sought to place plural marriage on par with murder, robbery, or any felony or capital crime, should be awarded the palm.

It is a favorite plea, argument we can scarcely regard it, of most persons who oppose plural marriage, that a man may as well be excused for theft or murder as for celestial marriage.  Ah!  Why so?  Whom does a man injure by marriage?  Himself?  We hope not.  The woman he marries?  That he need not do.  Any other woman?  Not that we ever heard of.  Any other man?  How can he?  Does he rob anybody?  If he does, who is it?  Does he destroy life?  Why no, marriage naturally increases life.  What harm then does he do?  What wrong does he do?  What crime, morally speaking, does he commit?  We have never met with the man who could give an intelligent answer to this question.  If there is one, we wish he would stand up and bring forth his strong reasons, as say why, in this enlightened age, in this enlightened country, a man should be threatened with incarceration, confiscation, fire, and sword for contracting a marriage common in all ages of the world, among the best known to history, and among the bulk of the inhabitants of the earth.  (Millennial Star 33:727)

GOSSIPING

There has been considerable talk of late, among that portion of our people who take interests in public affairs, concerning the absence of discretion among neighbors in this city and other places in the Territory, and the loose and imprudent way in which they gossip about each others’ affairs.  It is said, and perhaps with considerable truth, that much of the trouble that the Saints have been put to by their enemies is due to the foolish, gossiping talk of those who call themselves their friends.  If this be so, and I am inclined to think that to a certain extent it is, what a disgrace it is, and what a serious responsibility rests upon those who are guilty of such conduct!  Though they may not intend to do their brethren and sisters harm by their talk, they really become their betrayers, and do them as serious injury as if they were their personal enemies.  Rumors are circulated about one and another, they pass from mouth to mouth, from family to family, until they become the common gossip of the neighborhood and are generally believed to be true.  Apostates and other enemies catch them up and carry them to some official, then a long examination is entered upon, numerous witnesses are summoned, and the parties accused are subjected to annoyance and expense, they and their family affairs are brought prominently and unpleasantly before the public, and perhaps it ends in their being indicted by the grand jury and put to all the cost, inconvenience and risk of a trial in the district and other courts.  I do not overstate the case when I say, there have been many instances of this kind, and they had had their origin in the foolish, and I may say wicked, gossip of neighbors and so-called friends.  And yet such persons call themselves Saints, and would doubtless feel deeply offended if doubts should be expressed respecting their loyalty to the cause of God and their devotion and love to their brethren and sisters.

I have a friend whose frequent exclamation in former times was, “When will Israel learn wisdom?”  I ask myself the same question today.  When, indeed, will Israel learn wisdom?  When will the Latter-day Saints learn to govern their tongues and mind their own business?  The only creed that I have ever known is the Church to publish as such, is the simple sentence: “MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.”  Only think of the happiness and peace and good feeling that would prevail everywhere among the Saints if they would live up to this simple yet comprehensive creed!

What right have I to meddle with or gossip about my neighbor’s family or affairs?  What right has he to meddle with or gossip about me, my family, or my affairs?  If he is a Priest or a Teacher he has a right to visit me and my family, to question us concerning our lives, to see that we perform the duties of our religion.  That we live at peace with one another and with our brethren and sisters and practically embody in our lives the religion we profess.  When this is done, his duty requires no more.  Outside my house, my family affairs should be sacred from observation or comment, from him, unless there is something wrong which we will not repent of, and which, therefore should be brought to the attention of the Bishop and his counselors.  That which is correct in the treatment of me, my family, and my affairs in this respect, is correct in the treatment of every other person or family in the Church.  But Pope, the English poet, wrote the truth when he said:

      “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.”

There are people who have a standing I the Church, who respect neither age, station nor anything else.  The commands of the Lord, the covenants they have made in holy places, nor any other good influence appears to have the least power to restrain them.  The Lord has attached a penalty to the command which he has given, that we shall not speak evil of the Lord’s anointed.  {As to the Lord’s Anointed—this pertains to all who, have partaken of that covenant—we are all the Lord’s Anointed—Associate Editor}  There are many who treat this with utter contempt.  When they meet together in their social circles their greatest enjoyment appears to consist in talking about their neighbors and their affairs.  Nothing is too private, nothing too sacred for them to discuss and gossip about.  If a celestial being were to live here awhile, long enough for his mode of life and his relations with others to be known, everything about him and his affairs would be, by the class of which I speak, canvassed and overhauled.  If he had taken a new wife, or had brought wives with him, not a single particular concerning him and them would escape criticism and comment.  The most private details of their lives would be made the subject of gossip.  Not content with this, either, he would be exceedingly fortunate if these gossips should confine themselves to the truth, if they did not misrepresent him and misrepresent his family, and say things about him and about them that were utterly false.

Is this too strong a statement?  I do not believe it is.  I know that the leading men in this Church, and their families and their affairs in general are subjected to this kind of treatment by the tongues of persons who call themselves Latter-day Saints.  Their characters and motives are picked to pieces; they are misrepresented, and I am ashamed to say it, they are lied about by those who ought to know better, but who yield to this dreadful habit of gossiping.  This tearing to pieces of a character, this meddling with private concerns, is not confined alone to those leading men and their families; it is extended to others, until none are exempt, and matters which belong to a man and his family alone, and with which no one should meddle, and about which no one should talk, become the common gossip of the entire neighborhood.

This is not only an unfortunate habit which these people have fallen into, it is positively wicked.  Where it is indulged in, the Spirit of God cannot exist.  Whoever practices it will go into darkness.  The only safe course for a Latter-day Saint to pursue is to mind his or her own business.  What a shameful occupation it must be for men and women when they get together to begin dissecting the character to begin dissecting the character and conduct of their neighbors, discussing their family affairs, regaling each other with all the gossip they have been able to pick up about their friends or the people around them!  It is just such an occupation as the devil takes delight at people being engaged in; but how about holy angels and the Holy Spirit?  Will they not flee from such society?

Now that I am upon this subject I may be permitted to give my opinion as to the cause of this idle gossip.  It is no more than reasonable to think that sensible people, aside from the commands of the Lord upon the subject, would discountenance it.  Such people would naturally think that while they were engaged in dissecting other people’s characters, and gossiping about their affairs, others would, in like manner, be dealing with them and their concerns.  Therefore, as a matter of self-protection they would naturally frown upon and discourage such a practice in society.  But sensible people have other topics of conversation than small talk and personal gossip.  It is only silly people, who never use their brains to think, who never use their time to read, who fall back upon gossip as a means of amusement or passing away the time in company.  In the most of instances it is for a dearth of something else to talk about that they take up the family affairs or business of their neighbors.  There are thousands of more interesting subjects for people to talk about than neighborhood gossip.  If they would exercise their brains, as much as they do their teeth or their fingers, or their legs in dancing, they would not lack subjects of conversation.  Gossip is the refuge of silly people.  It is the amusement of people who have no other use for their brains or tongues.  Yet though so destitute of sense, they are most mischievous.  They are a plague, if not a curse, to any community where they live.  They are to be dreaded and should be shunned.  Can they be cured?  Why, yes, if they, themselves, will consent to be instructed.  But not without.  They can be taught to control their tongues.  They can store their minds with useful information; they can learn to understand interesting things; they can school themselves in talking about them, instead of personal gossip.  By doing so, they will have more enjoyment, they will be happier, their friends will derive greater profit and satisfaction from their association, society will be benefited and the tone of all social gatherings at which they may be present will be improved.

Let me, therefore, advise all who may have been guilty of gossiping to stop the practice, and those who have never fallen into it to be careful and never yield to it.  When inclined to indulge in it, think how you would feel, if you discovered that the person of whom you wished to speak were within earshot and could hear every word you said about him or her.  (President George Q. Cannon, Juvenile Instructor, 20:108)

AS GOD IS SO MAN MAY BE

At a meeting of the Presidency and Twelve, President Lorenzo Snow made these remarks: “There is one thing that a Latter-day Saint, and Elder of Israel, should never forget; it should be a bright, illuminating star before him all the time—in his heart, in his soul, and all through him—that is, he need not worry in the least as to whether he should be a deacon or president of the church; it is sufficient for him to know that his destiny is to be like his Father, a God in eternity.  He will not only be president of a church, but he may see himself president of a kingdom, president of worlds, with never ending opportunities to enlarge his sphere of dominion.  I saw this principle after being in the Church but a short time it was made as clear to me as the noon-day sun, and I expressed it in this language: As God once was, so now are we; as He is now, so man may be.

This thought in the breasts of men filled with the light of the Holy Spirit, tends to purify them and cleanse them from every undue ambition or improper feeling. T his glorious opportunity of becoming truly great belongs to every faithful elder in Israel; it is his by right divine, and he will not have to come before this or any other quorum to have his status defined.  He may be a God in eternity; he may become like his Father did before him, and he cannot be deprived of reaching this exalted state.  I never sought to be a Seventy or High Priest, because this eternal principle was revealed to me long before I was ordained to the priesthood.  The position which I now occupy is nothing as compared to what I expect to occupy in the future.  (Words of Lorenzo Snow as recorded in the Journal of Amos Milton Musser, Truth 10:81)

THE HOLY GHOST

13 JANUARY 1977, SLC, UT.

BROTHER RULON C. ALLRED

(Continued from page 43)

Q: What does Heber C. Kimball mean when he says the sun, our sun, is partially celestialized?

RCA: In the sense that it has only a portion of the celestial glory and power and size and growth and age that other celestial suns above it have.  When this earth receives its celestial glory, dies and is consumed by fire and becomes a great sea of glass and a celestial orb, as the 88^th Section of the Doctrine and Covenants tells us, and the celestial beings dwell upon it and others will go elsewhere, then it will be a celestial glory.  But it won’t have the glory of the sun.  It hasn’t lived as long and isn’t as big.  You can take our little earth at that time and put it in the middle of the sun.  If you cut the sun in half now and took the earth like you would a rubber ball and put it into a baseball or in an indoor ball, into the center of that cut piece, and you had the moon circling around it, it would become less than half way up on the circumference of the sun.  Because the sun is 880,000 miles in diameter.  And the moon is only 270,000 miles from the earth.  That will give you a pretty good idea that the sun is a pretty good-sized planet.  But there are suns in our galaxy that are so large that you could put our sun and all if its planets inside their diameter.

Q: Is the sun a sun, or is it a cluster?

RCA: The sun is a sun.

Q: It has a God upon it?

RCA: Yes.

Q: Where is Kolob?

RCA: So far away that with our most powerful telescopes—we know that somewhere way out there in existence, there is still another great governing planet that ll of these other ones are governed by.

Q: What is the purpose of a satellite like the moon?  Is it in a state of preparation, and if so, what for?  What about someone’s blessing that he would preach to the inhabitants of the moon?

RCA: The 88th Section of the Doctrine and Covenants says, “This earth abideth the law for which it was created; wherefore it shall be perfected and sanctified and become a celestial glory and the abode of celestial beings.  The meek of the earth shall inherit it.  And those who inherit other glories, other places have I the Lord prepared for them.”  Now, Brother Calhoun was promised that he would go and preach the gospel to the people that were on the moon.  And I have no doubt that he will.  He didn’t mean in the flesh, because while he was in the flesh he couldn’t go.  And when he went into the spirit world he wouldn’t go because the Prophet also tells us that we will not leave this planet until we have been resurrected and glorified.  So as a resurrected being he will go to those who are in a telestial, resurrected state, to the inhabitants of the moon and other planets that were prepared for less exalted beings.

Q: That’s not saying that there are supposed to be inhabitants there now, but that will be a place for them later?

RCA: That is a place for them.  The Lord said He was preparing or had prepared places for them.  But He tells us that the spirit children on this earth will never leave its atmosphere or its confines until they have been taught the gospel and given every chance for redemption.  Then if they don’t become sons of perdition and go back to native element, they will be exalted to a degree that they have the capacity to enjoy.  And that will include those of the terrestrial world which is like the glory of the moon, and those of the telestial world which is like the glory of the stars that we see that seem to have very little light. And they will be resurrected, immortal beings not visible to our mortal eyes unless they were to show themselves to us.  They will inhabit these other planets.  But we find no habitation, no people upon them now.  You say, well they couldn’t live there because there’s no atmosphere.  It’s too hot on Venus, it’s a literal hell.  Well, Venus was called by the ancients, “Son of the Morning”.  Sounds an awful lot like Lucifer.  And it’s also called, “The Morning Star”, and it is symbolical again of the earthly and the heavenly creations of the Gods as it refers to men and human beings.  It will doubtless have a career for individuals who inhabit telestial or terrestrial or who go back to destruction after they are cast off the earth.  These things God knows.  We don’t.  We can only surmise.  But the Lord tells us that all these things were created for the good of man, as part of God’s plan.

Q: In regard to the sun, you say there are inhabitants on the sun at the present time?

RCA: Absolutely.  Celestial, immortal, resurrected beings.

Q: Is it their glory that makes that sun so bright?

RCA: They contribute to it.  But the sun itself is glorified.  It has died and has been resurrected, and it has the glory.

Q: Through telescopes when we see fire shooting off the sun and sun spots, is that the physical counterpart.  Does it have a spiritual and a physical?
            RCA: It has—you might say that everything that is spiritual is also physical, except that it is much more refined.  The sun is a resurrected, immortal planet.  We are told by Isaiah in speaking of the earth and its exaltation that it will be consumed by fire, become like a sea of glass.  And then he asks his mortal listeners, “Who among you, who among us can dwell in the presence of God in the midst of eternal burnings?”  So the earth is going to be like the sun is.  It will be the same kind of planet, and it will become the center of another creation under the direction of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and other creations.

COMMENT: I wonder if our astronauts will ever make it to the sun.

RCA: If they do, they will never come back!

Q: What about the sea of glass?  What is meant by that?

RCA: Well, it is a physical counterpart of what John the Revelator saw, and he interpreted it with an analogy that was comparable to his physical understanding of what it looked like.  You could see into the very midst of it.  He tells you, and so do the prophets, that when we inherit the earth and it becomes like a sea of glass, that those who are walking upon it can look into it and inquire of the Lord, and it will be like a great Urim and Thummim to them.  They can see all planets below their stage of existence.  In other words, they will be in a celestial world, and everything that is within the compass of their understanding and experience, they can view in detail through the glasslike surface of the earth.  But those who are Gods will have a white stone of their own, upon which is written their name.  With their intellect they will naturally reach out to encompass the realms of the Gods and their future part in future creations.  They can inquire of the Lord in whose presence they are, and in this they can see anything that they inquire about above them, because they have the promise that all things will be made known to them if they ask.

Q: Will that seerstone be of eternal duration?

RCA: Yes, it will be an eternal part of their perfection.

Q: Does God have one?
RCA: Yes.

COMMENT: I would understand also, speaking of this Urim and Thummim, of this stone which they gaze into, it will also grow as they grow.

RCA: That I do not know.  I only know that we have the positive promise that each perfected God will have a Urim and Thummim of his own, that has his name written upon it.

COMMENT: When I said grow, I don’t mean grow in size, I mean as you “put more into the computer”.

RCA: Well, it will encompass and compose and present to you anything you inquire about.  You might liken it in a very small way symbolic to your television and your speaking system.  If you tune in, you can look anywhere you dial to.  And in this you tune in by the Spirit of God, and in anything you inquire it will become an integral part of the revelations of God to your mind.

Q: Is there any significance other than personalizing it, to having your name on it?  Will it say “Rulon” or “Owen”?

RCA: It will have your spiritual name on it.

Q: Before we came here, that name?

RCA: Yes.  You see, we have a name here that symbolizes our mortal existence.  It is the symbol of our mortal existence.  And when we as mortals have our tabernacle, our physical tabernacle and our spirit inseparably reunited so that we can have a fulness of joy, we will be known by the name that God Himself gave us.  Our spiritual name is symbolized in the house of the Lord.

Q: In terms of the name, is that perhaps another way of saying that that stone will be designed for the individual’s use according to his capacity and his achievement, so that he couldn’t have access to somebody else’s stone who might be at a different level?

RCA: He is not going to intrude upon somebody else’s individuality, personal rights or knowledge; he’s going to mind his own business.

Q: It’s not so much his personal name as that name meaning that that’s his individual stone?

RCA: Well, I think that it won’t necessarily have his name upon it as we would understand it now, but it will literally be a part of his eternal possession.  And nobody else could use it or take it from him or rob it from him, anymore than he could take someone else’s away from them.

Q: That is what I meant.  In terms of stones, at the time of Joseph Smith there were a lot of people who had seer stones, and they weren’t necessarily used for righteous purposes.  But why isn’t it possible nowadays to have these stones to help those who really are seeking the truth?
            RCA: Because most of us, like Hyrum Page and others who did get a hold of such seer stones, would not know how to use them righteously, and the devil would use it and us for his own purposes.  You must be in somewhat of an exalted position before God will entrust us with such things.

Q: Why was it, though, that they had them at the time of Hyrum Page and Joseph Smith?

RCA: Because Lucifer always has his counterpart.  And when God starts off with a seer stone, he has to have something that he can use, too.  Those people who are more or less within his control are given this so that they may be more easily deceived.  There are people today who use seer stones for their purposes, and many truths are revealed in them, as also many falsehoods.  They have not the spirituality to have something given to them of God.

Q: How do they work?  Is there a natural law that God works through to make them work? I understand God to be bound by scientific law.  How does He go about…?

RCA: He operates within the limits of the law, and He doesn’t violate the law.  They work upon the principle of concentration of the mind, which is enhanced by gazing into something that is crystal.  It’s just as simple as that.  And you’ve got to learn to do it.  But the average man having such a crystal ball, like a clairvoyant, is just as subject to deception as their body and mind is subject to deception in their normal contacts in the world.  So consequently they will look into it and fathom with the mind many truths.  And the devil, because of his knowledge of their limitations, will reveal to them many untruths.

Q: How do you tell the difference between hallucinations and…

RCA: You don’t.  It’s very difficult to tell the difference.  We could go into that at great length.

Q: How many different names do we have, then?  There’s our spirit name and our earthly name…?

RCA: You have a spiritual name which was given you of God that you will have in the eternal world.  But when you lost your recollection of those worlds, you were given a temporal name which would symbolize your existence in mortality.  When you go back into the spiritual world, you will know your spiritual name, and you will be known by that name.  And you will further be designated, “In mortality you called so and so.”

Q: What about our temple name.  We were given a special name.

RCA: That symbolizes your spiritual name.

Q: I’d like to go back a little bit and see if I can’t get some other things clear.  We were saying that our spiritual Father, that He wasn’t literally the Father of all our spirits perhaps, in that…

RCA: Not all of the spirits of this world.

Q: Right, because there were others exalted with Him who were helping Him?

RCA: As there will be from this world when we go back with Jesus Christ.  He will be the God of that earth, and He will be the Father of all men by sealing.  And all men under Him who are Gods will beget children, but they will all be His.

Q: Does that explain the different races on this earth?
            RCA: Yes, in my mind it does.

Q: Because the Chinese race, the oriental race, or some of the other true races who have achieved high levels of development have been children of other exalted beings?

RCA: Yes.

Q: This brings up other interesting things.  We talk about our earthly parents, etc.  But really our parents are our brothers and sisters.

RCA: Absolutely.

Q: In fact a child may be older than his parents.

RCA: Absolutely.

Q: So really, when we’re talking about children, the only children we can really talk about as being ours are the spiritual children we have?
            RCA: That we beget, yes, if we are worthy.

Q: So this makes it all-important to reach that level.

RCA: We are partners with God in bringing His children into the world now.  And the only kingdom we will ever have is the kingdom we beget ourselves spiritually and temporally.  We will stand in the race of God’s children here in a father-son relationship.  But we are all brothers and sisters.

Q: Is not that always eternally so, too?

RCA: Yes.

Q: So are you saying that we do not all have the same Father?  That Adam is not the Father of all of us, there are others who…

RCA: Yes, Adam is our Father.  But you’ve got 69 or 70 generations between Him and us.  And when we go back into the spirit world—Orson Spencer in writing of the teachings of the Prophet said, “When God sets up a family pattern upon the earth, it is exactly after His pattern in the heavens.”  If it’s God’s pattern, it will be after His pattern in heaven.  That being so, the celestial tying of father to son by sealing back to Adam, is perfectly represented in the spirit world also.  Therefore, there were many fathers and many mothers.  But we were all the children of the Head God.

I think one of the things that brought this to my attention that I marveled over most and praised God for most, was the statement that Joseph Musser made to me on one occasion.  He took me and put me just behind his right shoulder and said, “Rulon, you stood in this position as you stand now, on my right hand, when we were in the spiritual world.  And you now occupy it here.  I think it may be of some comfort to you to know that we both had the same mother.”

Q: Did he mean through adoption?

RCA: I was talking about Joseph Musser.  It was revealed to him.  He said he thought it would be of some comfort for me to know that we both had the same mother.

COMMENT: Going back to the same principle, I may have a dozen children, and they may be of a different mother in eternity.  Like Rulon was saying a little while ago in talking about the different names that are given to us as we progress from one step or phase of progression to another, each name will go with us, and in time we will qualify for names or titles that will be added on to those names.  And I hope that they will all be good titles, not ones that will downgrade, but upgrade.

Q: Do you have an idea of what the titles are?

COMMENT: Well, yes.  As an example, you have a bishop, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that there’s only one bishop.  He’s one individual.  Unless you add his other name to it, you don’t know who you’re talking about.  Bishop is an office, or a title that he has qualified for.  And it’s the same way with a deacon, a priest, an elder, or any office or calling that you’re called into.  As we progress through eternities, these titles—where did the Savior get the title of Christ?  Where did you get the title of Archangel?  We know them more by these titles than we do by their given names.

RCA: Archangel, Ariel, Raphael, and various other names that are given to us out of the spirit world that God identified His representatives with.

Q: In what sense would they say we are Gods in embryo, and in what sense are we going to be Gods?  Certainly not like Adam.

RCA: We will be Gods in the same way that we are mortal with each other.  I don’t know that I can make this comparison and get you to understand it.  We are here because we weren’t cast out of heaven without a body.  So we are all here in this world and we are all the children of our Father Adam, and we all have mortal bodies, and we all have the same opportunity for exaltation that we are willing to acquire.  But we are all very different.  When we get into the spirit world we will be like Adam, we will be immortal and resurrected.  If we’ve kept all the commandments of God we will have children of our own as He has children of His own, but we will be regulated to the particular place that our capacities enabled us, or that we wanted to acquire.  We will be just like Adam as far as our resurrected bodies are concerned.  We will be Adams to our children.  But we are not the Adam who is over everybody.  We can even have saviors on Mt. Zion who will rise up and save the house of Esau and the gentiles.  But they are not Saviors like Jesus Christ was, who redeemed all of us.

Q: So maybe they are making analogies when they say we will be able to create worlds of our own.  That means our families will be our world and we will be Gods over our families?
            RCA: It is limited.  We are Adams.  In the house of the Lord we speak of the same thing.  We are acting in the office and starting again to reenact the office of Adam.  When we get over there we will start again in the spiritual, resurrected sense to enact the office of Adam to our own posterity.  But we will have Adams over us eternally.  We will have the same glory that our capacity has enabled us to enjoy, but we won’t have the glory of our Father Adam, anymore than this world when it becomes a resurrected being will have the glory of the sun.  That’s what Heber C. Kimball said when he was talking of the sun.  he said the sun doesn’t represent celestial glory in its fulness.  He meant as compared with Kolob or Olea or Shinar, or these other stars that are over it.  The world will be glorified just like our sun is then.  But it won’t be like it in all aspects because it just hasn’t lived long enough.  It isn’t big enough.

Q: So the idea is that Christs beget Christs?  We can never be a Christ or Adam?

RCA: That is right.  We can be an Adam to our posterity, but we cannot be a presiding Adam over all children.  We can be a savior to our children and to those to whom we preach the gospel and those who we baptize, and use the power of the Priesthood to redeem, and we can redeem those who are dead by doing the work for them in the house of the Lord, without which they could not be redeemed.  The title, “Savior” simply means one who does something for someone else which he could not possibly do for himself.

Q: My understanding is that in order for Joseph the Prophet to be witness to the Father and the Son, that he had to see them and bear witness of that.  Then was the first vision a vision or was it not?  He woke on his back.  Did his spirit leave his body so that there was an actual meeting so that he could bear witness of that, or was it a vision?

RCA: Recently, we had one of our brothers say that Joseph Smith did not see the Father and the Son, that he saw them only as a vision.  I didn’t want to contradict him, and didn’t.  I disagree with the statement in the light that he did not see the Father and the Son, and he did not see the vision of them.  He did see the Father and the Son, and he did not see them with his mortal eyes; he saw them with his spiritual eyes.  And he was not conscious mortally.  And when he awakened and was on his back, his spiritual entity had again fused itself perfectly with his mortal entity.  But it was not a vision as you would see a picture on a screen.  It was an actual presentation of the Father and the Son.  I don’t want anybody among our people to get the teaching as some of us have done that Joseph Smith did not actually see the Father and the Son, because that is not true.  It was his mission to bear witness to that.   He had to see them.  Otherwise his testimony would be a lie.

COMMENT: The Prophet himself said, “I know not whether I saw them with my natural eye or my spiritual eye, but I know I saw them.”

RCA: He said, “When I awakened I was lying on my back,” and that is the same as saying that his spirit had left his body, or he had gone to sleep and seen them in a dream.  But he encompassed the greatest, to sleep and seen them in a dream.  But he had encompassed the greatest and most powerful darkness of the adversary of the whole world, and in doing this the Father and the Son had come and saved his life.  And how did they do it?  He passed out of worldly consciousness and in the spiritual entity, saw the Father and the Son.

Q: What about the idea that we were intelligences before we became spirit children.  How are intelligences begotten?  Where do intelligences dwell?  Is there an office that a spiritual person can hold with his mate and make intelligences?

RCA: The first creation—or organization would be the better statement here, because in the English language we use the term “creation” to mean organizing something out of nothing.  The Prophet Joseph Smith said we never organize anything out of nothing.  The Prophet Abraham said, “And they organized it—the Gods spoke and they organized the worlds, and they organized the spirits.”  And when God was speaking to those spirits they were begotten spirits of the immortal Gods, and Abraham was one of them.  You may say that there was never a time when we could not say, “I am.”  There was intelligence before we were organized.  We can’t comprehend that fully with the mortal mind without the revelations of God enlightening our minds, but I can help you understand it.

The Prophet says there is no such thing as immaterial matter.  All things are matter.  The spiritual is only a more refined substance.  The spiritual organization by begetting spiritual children is upon the exact same premise as begetting mortal children.  We are begotten of fathers and mothers as resurrected, immortal beings, and the power, then, to beget spirits or organize spirits is there.  And those spirits are organized from pure, refined substance that brings forth spirits and has within them the spirit of God, intelligence, light and truth.  That light and truth organized in a spiritual body begotten of immortal Gods, has in it the light of God which lets light and intelligence radiate from the presence of God to that individual.  And it becomes a separate and distinct entity by having been begotten.  And the intelligence was not organized until then, anymore than the spiritual tabernacle was organized until then.  And we don’t know the basis upon which this organization takes place spiritually.  But we do know pretty well how it begins to be organized mortally, from the fusion of the tiny ovum and sperm, and it breaks into cells and grows.  And in the spiritual creation through the begetting of immortal children, there is a process that binds together the refined materials of spiritual existence and light and truth to make a spiritual being, so that it has an organized intelligence.  That intelligence is light and truth which emanates from the presence of God throughout all space.  You have the light of the sun radiating to the infinite depths of the earth.  You can’t go down far enough to get away from some of the rays of the sun into the depths of this earth.  {To be continued…} (Treasures of Knowledge, Vol. 2, pages 321-329)

Revelation given to brigham young,

Platte river, Nebraska

May 28, 1847

I, Brigham Young, am constrained by the Spirit to say to you, my brethren, in this Camp of Pioneers, who have gone; or who have come out of bondage to find a location for a Stake of Zion, except you repent, and humble yourselves before the Lord, you shall not have power to accomplish your mission; and all your toils and labors will prove a curse instead of a blessing unto you.  In vain do you think that your works will be accepted of the Lord, whilst your hearts are from him.

The voice of the Spirit of the Lord, unto the elders of Israel, prepare ye for the coming of the Son of Man in the Clouds of heaven; yea in a pillar of fire, to take vengeance on the ungodly; yea, this is my commandment unto you, mine Elders, saith the Lord Almighty, that you speedily repent, lest judgments overtake you, and you be numbered with the foolish virgins.

Let it suffice; take heed to your ways, and keep your former covenants; and I the Lord will deliver you from all your enemies, saith him who is your Advocate with the Father, even so, Amen.  (Brigham Young Papers, Church Historians Office)

Revelation on Celestial Marriage

Given to President John Taylor,

Salt Lake City, Utah, June 25^th and 26^th, 1882

Question: Is the Law of Celestial Marriage a law given to this nation or to the world?

Answer: No.  In no other sense than as the Gospel is given, and in accordance with the laws thereof.  So far as it is made known unto men, it is made known unto them as the Gospel is made known unto them and is a part of the New and Everlasting Covenant; and it is only those who receive the Gospel that are able to, or capable of, entering into this Covenant.

Have I not said through my servant Joseph that “all kingdoms are governed by the law,” and if they receive not the law of my Gospel they cannot participate in the blessings of Celestial Marriage which pertains to my elect.

No person, or people, or nation can enter into the principle of Celestial Marriage unless they come in by me, saith the Lord, and obey the law of my Gospel through the medium of him who is appointed unto this power as made known unto my people through my servant Joseph in a Revelation on “The Eternity of the Marriage Covenant, including Plurality of Wives.”

I have therein stated that “all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same; For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.”  (D&C 132:3-4)

Furthermore, “And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fullness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fullness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.”  (D&C 132:6)

It is again written that “all kingdoms have a law given.”  (D&C 88:36)

The Celestial Kingdom including the promise of eternal life pertains to “the Church of the First Born, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ, his Son.”  (D&C 88:5)

Therefore such must be sanctified from all unrighteousness that they may be prepared for the Celestial Glory, “For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory; And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory; 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.”  (D&C 88:22-24)

Each of the persons inhabiting these several kingdoms shall be quickened by the same power that pertains tot he kingdom that they are destined to inherit, whether Celestial, Terrestrial, or Telestial; and shall receive of their respective glories. 

And again it is written, “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.  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 judgement.”  (D&C 88:34-35)

It is further written, speaking of Celestial Marriage, “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.”  (D&C 132:7)

This law is a Celestial law and pertains to a Celestial Kingdom.  It is a new and everlasting covenant and appertains to thrones, principalities, powers, dominions, and eternal increase in the Celestial Kingdom of God.

You are not now sent to proclaim this principle to the United States, nor to the world, nor to urge it upon them.  It is not for them as a nation or nations, only as many as accept the law of my Gospel and are governed thereby.

Behold, if you were to preach this principle unto them and they said “we accept it,” could you then administer it unto them?  Verily, I say unto you, nay.

Have I not said, Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.

“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?

“And will I appoint unto you, saith the Lord, except it be by law, even as I and my Father ordained unto you, before the world was?

“I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord.

“And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, by thrones, or principalities, or powers or things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me, saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and shall not remain after men are dead, neither in nor after the resurrection saith the Lord your God.

“For whatsoever things remain are by me; and whatsoever things are not by me shall be shaken and destroyed.

“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.”  (D&C 132:9-15)

Thus saith the Lord God, “Obey my law, and seek not to become a law unto yourselves, nor trust to outside influences; but seek in the way appointed to the Lord your God.  Ye are my spokesmen, I am your God; and as I have before said, I now again say, “Henceforth do as I shall command you.”

Concerning the course taken by the United States they have (the agency) a right to reject this law themselves, as they have (the agency) a right, to reject the Gospel; but it is contrary to the provisions of the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, for them to prohibit you from obeying it.

Therefore, abide in my law which I have revealed unto you, saith the Lord God, and contend for your rights by every legal and constitutional method and in accordance with the institutions, laws, and Constitution of the United States.

Be humble, be faithful, be diligent, seek unto me and it shall be made known unto you from time to time what my will is pertaining to this matter.

I am the Lord your God, hearken to me, and obey my law, and your enemies shall be confounded, and my Kingdom shall be victorious.  Even so, Amen.  (Unpublished Revelations I, (Collier); Part 80, pages 129-132)

“Brother Rulon, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the authority of the Holy Priesthood, I lay my hands upon your head and ordain you my Second Elder.  Henceforth you will stand at my side as Leslie Broadbent did to Lorin and Hyrum did to Joseph.  I confer upon you all the keys and power and authority which I myself hold and you shall stand in this office as long as I live.” —Joseph W. Musser in blessing to Rulon C. Allred.  (Priesthood History, Melba Allred Notes)

 THE 14 ERRORS OF LIFE

1)    To expect to set up our own standards of right and wrong and expect everybody to conform to it.

2)    To measure the enjoyment of others by our own.

3)    To expect uniformity of opinion in this world.

4)    To look for judgement and experience in youth.

5)    To endeavor to mold all dispositions alike.

6)    Not to yield in unimportant trifles.

7)    To look for perfection in our own actions.

8)    To worry ourselves and others about what cannot be remedied.

9)    Not to alleviate if we can all that needs alleviation. (sic)

10)           Not to make allowances for the weaknesses of others.

11)           To consider anything impossible that we cannot ourselves perform.

12)           To believe only what our finite minds can grasp.

13)           To live as if the moment, the time, the day were so important that it would live forever.

14)           To estimate people by some outside quality, for it is that within which makes the man.

(TRUTH, 16:275)

E    D    I    T    O    R    I    A    L

“Some people will say ‘Oh don’t talk about it.’  I think a full, free talk is frequently of great use; we want nothing secret or underhanded, and for one I want no association with things that cannot be talked about and will not bear investigation.”  - John Taylor, J of D 20: 264

THE CAGE OF REASON:

Reason vs. Faith in the Mormon Religion

“Truth Is Reason” – Eliza R. Snow

“There has been one difficulty always in the world, with very few exceptions, and that is, that men have been left to pursue their own personal feelings, to pursue a course which is dictated alone by a false philosophy, a false religion and false politics… they have followed in the wake of tyrants and oppressors or adopted the notions of vain philosophers without any teachings from on high.” – John Taylor, J of D 9: 275

Palefaces & Redskins

In my long, gone days of college, I turned in what I thought was a literary masterpiece to my English professor.  He returned it to me and said, “That’s all the world needs – another confessional writer.”

                He then proceeded to classify writers into two camps – palefaces and redskins.  Redskins are writers who approach their style from a totally experiential point of view, completely subjective.  Palefaces dwell in the preferred realm of abstract thought, their musings totally unhampered by the unwanted first person.  Their writings come from a place where abstract concepts like reason take on a form of apotheosis, like gleaming balls of light hovering independently in nothingness like something out of Star Trek.

Atlas Shrugging??

Strange as it may seem, in some people’s minds, abstract concepts exist as if they were totally divorced from human experience, completely objective.  Take the following quote from the appendix to Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged:

“My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of life, with productive achievements as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute”  (emphasis added)

                Herein I disagree with my professor and with Ayn Rand.  Little did my professor realize that, ethnically, I am both paleface and redskin.  I can do the abstract thing.  But I can only experience the abstract through my own experiences.  My being is the only threshold through which I may come into contact with the absolute.  Ayn Rand, the mother of all objectivists and perfectibilists, makes a very sound and very rational argument – until the last statement.  This statement cannot conform to Christian ideology, because it denies God His rightful place to preside over the realm of the absolute, as it were.

                Now consider Brigham Young’s words:

                “There is no planets nor kingdoms that mortal man can decipher and find without the revelations of the Almighty.”  (Teachings of Brigham Young, pp.414)

                Intellectuals and scholars have debated Ayn Rand’s philosophies in cafes, universities and institutes around the world.  And yet Brigham Young’s simple, uneducated words exude more wisdom and more understanding of the absolute.  It is not through reason that we can come to know the divine, but through revelation.  Reason is certainly a vital tool, but not the ultimate expression of true gnosis – true knowledge.

Rock Me, Amadeus

               

Before we explore this concept further, allow me to transport you back to one of my favorite time periods – the 17^th and 18^th centuries.  The Age of Enlightenment.  The Age of Reason.  Powdered wigs.  Louis Quatorze.  Les précieuses.  Les élus de Cohen.   The Scottish Rite.  Vivaldi.  Marie Antoinette.  Cagliostro.  Descartes.  Voltaire.  Baroque.  Chamber music.  Franklin.  St. Germain.  The Martinists.  The Bavarian Illuminati.  The American and French Revolutions.  Liberté, égalité, fraternité.

Really.  What’s not to love?

The Renaissance opened the doors for great thinking, free thinking.  Men like Isaac Newton and René Descartes paved the way for the modern age of science.  And whereas men like Newton were deeply religious, their thinking eventually encouraged a mood of skepticism concerning the question of religion.  The universe became a cold and mechanical place, functioning perfunctorily according to the inanimate and unregulated laws of nature, barren, clinical.

                This mood of skepticism gave rise to Deism, a philosophy which questioned the most fundamental tenets of religion – including the divinity of Jesus Christ – yet acknowledged at least the possible existence of a God, far removed from our universe, floating out there giving company to the little glowing abstract idea-ball-thingies.  This train of thought was embraced by such thinkers as Voltaire, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine.

                The latter in his book Age of Reason  - one of the greatest arguments against the validity of the Bible and Christian faith - expressed, “The most formidable weapon against errors of any kind is Reason.  I have never used any other, and I trust I never shall.”

                This was the mood of most of the great thinkers of that day and age.  It was their argument against the superstition and ignorance of the Dark Ages.  This shift in thinking brought about much change.  Indeed one may argue that this mood of skepticism was needed for people to question the establishments of the day in order to form our own republic, and even to inaugurate in the Restoration.  Sadly, it is often the tendency of humanity to gravitate to extremes.

                In fact, the French Revolution was the culmination of this particular “enlightenment”.  They sought to stamp out all relics of Christian faith by changing the holidays, creating a calendar in which the month of January became Pluviose and the month of July became Thermidor.  They also sought to create a religion where Reason was worshipped instead of God.  Their most pious endeavors caused them to extend enlightenment to their enemies, like the guillotine blade that ultimately cut through Robespierre’s enlightened neck.

                Ironically, for all his support of the Revolution, Thomas Paine was imprisoned during the Reign of Terror, but his tormentors thought that his manuscript for Age of Reason – most of which was written during his sojourn in the Bastille - was quite good; just the sort of agnostic drivel they approved of.

Before all this, he was originally asked to come to America by Benjamin Franklin, where he did much good publishing works that helped inspire the American Revolution.  He later assisted the French in overthrowing the monarchy, and as a reward was imprisoned for several years.  When he died, no one remembered him for his patriotic contributions, but for his one bitter treatise against organized religion.    As Sting sang, “These are the works of man; these are the sums of our ambitions.”

What Has Athens To Do With Jerusalem?

               

It is not my intention to launch into a history of philosophy, but I do want to point out something before I tie this into Mormon thought.  Without making implications of their merit, reason and other logical processes are the products of Greek thinking.  And Greek thinking has wriggled its way into Christianity since the beginning.  There have been entire Christian factions that have existed for the sole purpose of trying to reconcile the teachings of Plato and Aristotle with those of Jesus.  Early Christian thinkers like St. Augustine based their (naughty) thoughts almost completely upon Greek philosophies, and many of the tenets that today we consider “Christian” were pilfered from the pantheon of Greek scholars.

                It has always been a trick of the Devil.  “They teach for doctrines the philosophies of men mingled with scripture.”

Gullible’s Travels

               

It was recently said to me by a rather erudite friend of mine that Mormonism, above all others, is the only religion that stands to reason.  And this is true.  It is the only religion that offers explanations that make sense as to the nature of our world and universe.  Other religions require us to accept things like Adam being created from a lump of mud, Eve being formed out of a rib, and Immaculate Conceptions.  Other religions require their adherents to swallow these things on faith, and without the benefit of even a little water to wash it down.  It is difficult to reason these events out in the logical mind, even with the aid of illicit chemicals.

Reason & Revelation

               

Then along came Joseph Smith and his followers, all products of the Age of Reason, and offered us revealed doctrines that resonated truth and reason to the human mind.  In fact, that is one of the things that contemporary Christians detest about Mormons; they say we try to explain too much.

                Most religions do not claim modern revelation, and yet those of the Mormon faith do.  Not just revelation from an oracle or hierarchy, but the precious gift of personal revelation.  Every Latter-day Saint has the opportunity to get personal revelation - direct communication from heaven itself.

                And the first step of seeking personal revelation is REASON.

                “But behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore you shall feel that it is right.  (D&C 9:8; emphasis added)

                To “study it out in your mind” is to use reason.  One must take any given issue and ponder the pros and cons before taking it up to the Lord.  One must research to see if there is any other word or authority on the given issue.  Only then will the Lord comply by sending revelation.  In other words, we must use the faculties we have to strive for the answer.  Once we have proven to the Lord that we are willing to take the steps necessary to seek an answer, He will reward our diligence by providing revelation.  Otherwise, it is almost an insult to require the Lord to be redundant in granting our ignorant request.  The Lord honors our use of reason, and the sincerity of our hearts, as in the often quoted Moroni 10: 4.

                “And when ye shall receive these things; I would exort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.”

                In other words, God does not want to leave us completely to our own devices in seeking knowledge.  He does want us to include Him in the process – reiterating that the first step is to use reason.  Even if another source receives revelation on our behalf, it is vital that we seek the Lord to verify that this revelation is true for us.

The Price of Personal Revelation

               

A departed friend years ago told me that she believed that I spoke the truth to her when I preached the fullness of the gospel to her.  She said, “If you were to prophecy to me right now, if you were to say that you had revelation and tell me what to do, I would believe it.”

                I explained to her, “Even if I received revelation on your behalf, you would still have to go to the Lord and receive revelation that my revelation was true for you.”

                That is the price of personal revelation – that we go constantly before the Lord to know the truth; otherwise we would be subjected to some sort of error.  Nephi is the example of this.  After his father Lehi had a vision, Nephi went to the Lord to know of it was true and was rewarded with experiencing the same vision.

                In fact, I would suggest that there is arguably never any second-hand revelation; it does not exist.  We are always required to seek revelation for ourselves, even should a man proclaim to have it for us.

                “Revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication.  After this, it is only an account of something which that person says was a revelation made to him; and though he may find himself obliged to believe it, it cannot be incumbent on me to believe in the same manner; for it was not a revelation to me, and I have only his word for it that it was made to him.” – Thomas Paine, Age of Reason.

Me, Myself & Reason

               

We have discussed how reason is a useful tool in the process of obtaining revelation.  But reason in and of itself – without any other faculty - can be deficient in the thought process.  Reason is only as good as the person who is using it.  The atheist can reason that God does not exist.  Scientists have reasoned that our universe started with a big bang.  A well-intentioned man can come to a false conclusion by faulty reasoning.

                And that is because most rational thought is based on empirical evidence, proof that relies on the senses.  And our senses depend on our contact with the physical world.  If truth can only be experienced through the physical world, then there is little wonder why men like William of Ockham were prone to skepticism as they were.  Or why men like Descartes believed that the only knowledge of eternal truth could be attained by reason alone.

                “I have learned to be less confident in the conclusions of human reason, and give more credit to the honesty of contrary opinions.” – Thomas Jefferson, 1824.

                Our religion teaches us that there is a metaphysical truth beyond the substance of this physical realm.  There is a veil that has been placed between our dimension and the plane in which our God and Father dwells.  It is important to remember that we originated from that realm but live in this one, and that we have abilities to perceive that transcend our senses.  Mankind is also inherently intuitive and has the capacity of gleaning information through means that have nothing to do with our senses or the corporeal sphere in which we live.

The Extremes

               

It has been said that man can attain revelation from three sources:

                1.  The divine, received from the Holy Spirit.

                2.  From the devil, meant to deceive and lead astray.

                3.  From man himself, in flights of fancy.

                As in all things, there can be two extremes.  First, a man can give himself over so much to his own faculties of reason that he becomes enamored with his own acumen.  He can become so convinced that he is right in his worldview that no one can pierce or shatter his bubble with any other idea.  He becomes like a solipsist who thinks that his reality is the only one, and we practically owe him our existence because his opinion is the only relevant one.  He negates the power of revelation, and inspiration becomes a primitive function.  Also, he doubts any type of spiritual experience, especially when others claim to have them.  He does not necessarily have to be without religion, but can be religious.  He and his kind “teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”  JS-H 1: 19

                The second extreme is the person who claims revelation constantly without thought or effort.  He is governed by his emotions and interprets them as revelation.  He constantly claims to be inspired to this or that, and often the revelations contradict each other.  He takes hold of every whimsical spiritual notion that flits his way, and he expects everyone to take what he says as the authoritative word of God, viewing anyone who disagrees with him or tries to study things out as having lack of faith.

                These two extremes stare at each other haughtily, never comprehending wherein both might be in error, never realizing the degree of their arrogance.

Testing Spirits

               

So, as with so many cases, the answer is balance, balance, balance.  The truth rests in the middle.  Relying only on reason is not complete.  Expecting revelation without thinking, researching and pondering is not complete.  One must find the middle ground, but how does one do this?

                Reason is not merely the first step in the process of revelation.  It is also the last step.  Once you have received your answer, it is wise to test it.  Does your answer conform to the other truths that God has revealed?  If it is of God, it will not contradict previous revelation, but add upon it.  It will stand to reason.

                God will not be offended if we test this new knowledge.  In fact, He expects it of us.  Testing the spirits is one of the key mysteries that we learn within the temple.

                “Prove all things, hold fast that which is good.”  - 1 Thessalonians 5: 21

                “Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone into the world.” – 1 John 4: 1

                So how do we test the spirits?  By seeing if what they have revealed to us stands to reason.  And above all, we must keep our minds open, because there is much truth out there that we do not yet understand in our infantile grasp of the gospel, no matter how old, no matter how wise.  God will spend a lifetime – if we will allow it – of revealing more truth to us.

                “Convince us of our error of doctrine, if we have any, by reason, by logical arguments, or by the word of God, and we will be ever grateful for the information, and you will ever have the pleasing reflection that you have been instruments in the hands of God of redeeming your fellow beings from the darkness which you may see enveloping their minds.”  - Orson Pratt, The Seer, pp. 15-16.

                We can learn anything from anyone.  I knew one elderly patriarch who was offended that a twenty year-old boy would presume to lecture him in the gospel.  But we should remember that through the mouths of babes, God will establish His truths in these last days, and that Balaam was corrected by none other than his ass.

The Reason Why

               

Reason is a tool, a gateway, as it were.  It is a tool for discovering what is natural and true, a way of discovering truth.  Reason is not an absolute, but only as good as the mind who is wielding it.  It is a way to attain the absolute – revelation from God.  St. Thomas Aquinas taught that there could be no genuine or apparent conflicts between deliverances of faith and deliverances of reason.  Reason and faith serve equally as checks on one another.

                Proponents of reason within the Mormon religion like to quote the beautiful hymn by Eliza R. Snow, O My Father:

                “Truth is reason; truth eternal tells me I’ve a Mother there.”

                Perhaps I can illustrate my conclusion by making this comparison.  We can arrive to the conclusion by means of reason that we have a Mother – and a Father – beyond the veil in the burning kingdom of heaven, and our reason has served us well.  But we will never truly know until we transcend the earthly process of reason and come to true knowledge by divine revelation itself.

                “Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion.  Question with boldness even the existence of God; because, if there is one, he must approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.”  - Thomas Jefferson, 1787.

      Truth never changes!

God of Our Fathers, Known of Old

God of our fathers, known of old,

Lord of our far-flung battle line,

Beneath whose awful hand we hold

Dominion over palm and pine,

Lord God of hosts, be with us yet,

Lest we forget, lest we forget.

The tumult and the shouting dies;

The captains and the kings depart;

Still stands thine ancient sacrifice,

An humble and a contrite heart;

Lord God of hosts, be with us yet,

Lest we forget, lest we forget.

Far called, our navies melt away,

On dune and headland sinks the fire;

Lo, all our pomp of yesterday

Is one with Nineveh and Tyre!

Judge of the nations, spare us yet,

Lest we forget, lest we forget.

—Rudyard Kipling—

Holiness

Y

To the Lord

TRUTH NEVER CHANGES

VOLUME 10, NUMBER 02

FEBRUARY, 2006

PO BOX 433

ST. JOHNS, AZ 85936-0433

“TRUTH NEVER CHANGES—NOR FAILS”