Over on Feast Upon the Word Blog, there is a discussion about the use/creation of scripture-based cartoons. One of the concerns is whether it is a good idea to create "reduced narratives" of the scriptures. I think the concern is that our cartoons are actually caricatures of the scriptures.
But I've been thinking: aren't the scriptures themselves mere representations of something much greater? As beautiful, sacred, and moving as they are, they are still just an expression of our true object of worship.
Which is not to say that scriptures are caricatures of God, but how closely do they really approximate Him?
Showing posts with label scripture study. Show all posts
Showing posts with label scripture study. Show all posts
11 November 2007
Caricatures of Caricatures?
19 August 2007
Grace and More
There is a very good discussion going on over at Feast Upon the Word. Robert C started it with his post on grace and works in Ephesians. The discussion is quite long (up to 72 comments as of this posting) but worth reading. It's helped me clarify my thinking on many topics and think about new things as well.
Among other helpful thoughts, the discussion got me thinking about works. What are they good for, anyway? Let's just suppose that we believe Luke 17:10 and Mosiah 2:21: Even if we serve God with all diligence (i.e. obedience) we would still be unprofitable servants.
What does unprofitable mean? Well, in the context, it means that the servant has not gained anything to his credit. What does that mean?
Imagine a man living in Jesus' day, looking for a way to make a living, so he decides to sell himself into slavery, becoming a bondservant (sort of like an indentured servant). He gets a place to live, food, and protection, and the master gets someone who will do everything the master tells him to do. That's the deal. So if the servant does everything he is told, that is not counted towards him as some kind of bonus, as though he went above and beyond. Thus, he cannot one day say to the master, "I worked really hard so now you owe me something," because those were the terms of the contract. The word "unprofitable" applies to the servant, not to the master; i.e. the master may very well have profited from the servant's labor, but he doesn't owe the servant anything.
So, how do we profit from works if they are in fact "unprofitable"? I think the discussion I linked to holds the answer....
05 August 2007
"Bitter" + "Cup"
I've been thinking about the words “bitter cup.” (A more detailed version of this post is available here.)
How is the word “cup” used in the scriptures? A search of the KJV for the word yielded 57 references, which I divided into eight categories:
1) ACTUAL CUP – though additional symbolism is (at least sometimes) implied
2) SACRAMENTAL CUP3) CUP OF FURY/TREMBLING/JUDGMENT
4) CUP OF THE ATONEMENT/MARTYRDOM/DISCIPLESHIP5) CUP OF REWARD OR INHERITANCE
6) CUP OF SALVATION7) CUP OF CONSOLATION
8 ) CUP OF ABOMINATIONS/INIQUITYSYNTHESIS
What, if anything, do all of these verses have to with each other? First: that our discipleship is sometimes bitter in the same way (though to a lesser degree) as the Lord’s atonement. Bringing in the verses from Group 2, we see another important point: the sacramental cup is inseparably connected to that bitter cup Jesus hoped to avoid. Nevertheless, trembling, he took the cup and drank it completely. There’s something to be said about quantity and quality here: Groups 3 and 8 talk about God’s wrath and our iniquity reaching a maximum—that’s the “quantity” part. But Group 3 also refers to “the dregs,” which forces us to consider the quality of Christ’s suffering and the full meaning of his words on the cross, “It is finished.”
Lastly, the connection between Jesus’ bitter cup and our sacramental cup is both beautiful and overwhelming. That cup, which for Jesus was the bitterest, made possible the sacramental cup, which for us is the sweetest.
12 July 2007
Passover Symbolism During the Last Supper
(Yes, this is the same thing I posted at Feast Upon the Word. Why did I double-post? Because I've learned that some people who read this blog---or used to; it's been a while---don't read FUTW. So this is for you.)
As I studied the reading for Sunday School Lesson 23 (Luke 22:1-38; John 13-15), I kept coming back to the thought, "How did Jesus use the Passover feast to instruct his disciples?"
I'm going to try to present this sequentially, even though the Gospel authors don't agree in this respect. The sequence I am following is patterned after a typical Passover feast from the time period (I am relying on many sources for Passover ritual, but the one I should definitely mention is The Temple, by Alfred Edersheim). I don't know that Jesus' party followed the same schedule, but I assume that his Apostles would have been familiar with the "norm" and noticed any deviations from it.
Passover as Introduction and Conclusion
I found it particularly interesting that Jesus used the Passover, as opposed to any of the other feasts. What makes Passover such an appropriate time for his atonement? One could argue that other feasts are also rich in atonement-related symbolism; why not choose one of those dates? (Yes, I am assuming that God had some choice in the matter.) For example, why not choose Yom Kippur which, after all, means "Day of Atonement"? Or perhaps Sukkot (Feast of Tabernacles/Booths), which commemorates Israel's forty years in the desert and is also one of the most joyful Jewish holidays. I could think of ways to relate that to the Atonement of Christ, if the two shared the same date.
I'm beginning to think that the reason that Passover was chosen has as much to do with the timing of the feast as it does with the symbolism of the feast itself---or, more precisely, the timing of the institution of the feast. Moses' instructions concerning the Passover occurred at a unique time in comparison to the other feasts: the Passover precedes the Law from Sinai, whereas the other feasts are part of that Law (Cf. Exodus 12 for Passover; Leviticus for other feasts). This one feature seems important because Jesus' Atonement fulfilled the "Old" Law and instituted a "new" one: Passover was before the Law and was the end of the Law.
First Cup of Wine: Rejoicing in Jehovah's Goodness
There were three to four cups of wine---mixed with water---used in the Passover feast. The first cup marked the beginning of the feast and was accompanied with a blessing of praise for Jehovah's goodness toward Israel. This is probably the cup the Apostles drank as Jesus said,Take this, and divide it among yourselves: For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. (Luke 22:17-18)
Why did Jesus promise abstinence? One could say he was referring to his impending death, and using the wine as just one example of food he would not have time to enjoy; i.e. "I will not drink wine, because my death comes too soon," except that there is a reasonable expectation that Jesus partook of other foods at the Supper. The wine stands out as something uniquely refused. The reason may have to do with the purpose of this cup: the disciples could drink and rejoice in Jehovah's goodness, but Jehovah himself was too burdened by the thought of his ultimate act of goodness (Cf. D&C 19) to delight in that particular celebration. That juxtaposition is troubling for me: my greatest joy is Jesus' greatest agony.
Washing the Feet
After the first cup of wine, participants washed their hands. Obviously there was a practical aspect to washing one's hands before eating, but the ritual cleansing also symbolized making oneself spiritually clean. The account in John 13 isn't exactly clear on when Jesus "[rose] from supper...and began to wash the disciples' feet," but I suppose it was immediately following the first cup of wine.
Jesus plays off of the meaning of this symbol in at least two significant ways:
It's possible Jesus had both meanings in mind when he said of his disciples---and Judas in particular---"ye are clean, but not all" (John 13:10). The eleven were clean because they lived worthy to receive the atonement (meaning #1) and because they served others (meaning #2), but Judas forfeited both, due to his treachery (meaning #1) and his selfishness (Cf. John 12:6).
(Yes, Jesus also makes a point about service and humility, but that does not play off the original meaning of the symbol. As an interesting side note, however, when the disciples later argue about "which of them should be accounted the greatest," Jesus replies, "he that is chief, [let him be] as he that doth serve" (Luke 22:24-30). Is Jesus teaching that the way to be the "greatest" is to serve others, or is he pointing out that because he (Jesus) serves others he is already the greatest? The former has a sort of job-opening feel---"Wanted: Great People; Qualifications: Serve Others"---whereas the later indicates that that position is already taken. In other words, Jesus is already the greatest, and compared to his glory, of what significance are the differences between the disciples?)
Bitter Herbs
After the first cup of wine and the ritual washing, the head of the dinner party (the father of the home, or Jesus in this case) took some bitter herbs sandwiched between pieces of unleavened bread, dipped them in salt water or vinegar, and ate them. He then gave some to everyone else at the feast. I've always thought it strange that Jesus identified Judas as his betrayer with this gesture, rather than simply pointing at him, but maybe the symbolism holds some answers.
The unleavened bread which formed part of the "sop" was meant to remind everyone of the haste with which they were freed from bondage, mirroring nicely the haste with which Jesus would be tried and crucified, and the haste with which we can be freed from sin by calling on his name (Cf. Helaman 5). Sandwiched in between this symbol of liberation were the bitter herbs, representing the trials endured in Egypt. But how did Israel get stuck in Egypt in the first place? Hadn't Joseph saved Egypt by feeding them through the famine? Didn't Pharaoh commit the land of Goshen to the Israelites? But, as we know, "there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph" (Exodus 1:8), who reneged on the promises between Joseph and the previous pharaoh. Thus, Egypt (and the bitter herbs) represents not only persecution, but also betrayal.
The "sop" of bitter herbs and unleavened bread would have been the last part of the feast Judas 'enjoyed,' for "having received the sop [Judas] went immediately out: and it was night" (John 13:30).
Paschal Lamb
The feast on the lamb was obviously a major part of the meal. Strange, then, that there is almost no mention of it in the Gospels. There is rich symbolism between the lamb and Jesus, but since this post is on how Jesus used Passover symbolism to teach his disciples, and there is no record of how Jesus may have done this, that is all I will say about this portion of the feast.
The Wine of Blessing and 'Extra' Bread
After feasting on the lamb, participants were not to eat anything more until dawn, although drink was permitted. Jesus, however, apparently 'broke' this rule by passing bread along with wine.And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, 'This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.' Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.' (Luke 22:19-20)
What is the significance of 'breaking' the Passover rules with the institution of the sacrament? Possibly this was symbolic of the fact that once Jesus, the Lamb of God, had completed his Passover sacrifice, the 'rules' of the Passover no longer applied. In their place we find new rules and a new ordinance to remember them. Thus, the sacrament is an indication or remembrance that The Passover has been fulfilled.
It's also interesting to note that Jesus used the third cup---the cup of blessing---to institute the sacrament. This cup was drunk in thanks for a meal just enjoyed, whether at Passover or some other occasion. Just as this cup normally stood for thanks for the Passover meal, in the sacrament this cup shows thanks for The Passover sacrifice.
The Hallel
Matthew tells us that "when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives" (Matthew 26:30). I'm not going to go into detail on this, since it is merely mentioned by Matthew, but I felt I should at least mention the hymn. The full Hallel is essentially Psalms 113-118. I mention it because Psalm 118 in particular (especially verse 22) is such a meaningful way to end the Last Supper and frame the discourse that would become John 15-17.
04 January 2007
Resource for Sunday School Teachers
There is a new blog devoted to being a resource for teachers. It is called Feast Upon the Word Blog. Some may recognize the name as coming from the scripture study wiki Feast Upon the Word. Indeed, the creator of the wiki is also behind the blog, and I was lucky enough to be asked to participate (and flattered but mostly terribly intimidated by the invitation as well).
There are three main categories of posts on the blog:
1) Sunday School lessons: these will cover specific reading assignments in the New Testament (this year) and will include notes, questions, handouts, and lesson plans.
2) Study guides: these will address study methods, including (for examples) how to study a specific chapter or how to deal with Greek translation.
3) Teaching topics: these will include both generally applicable and specific topics. By general, I mean topics that apply to any lesson, regardless of the reading assignment, such as how to ask questions, how to involve shy students, what to do differently with large vs. small classes. By specific, I mean topics dealing with a specific lesson, such as how to introduce the Joseph Smith Translation or how to make sense of Paul's epistles.
Note that the blog has just begun and so these categories are not firmly established and there may be more added.
I'll still be posting here, though the themes will change a bit since most of what I've done here in the past has been Sunday School-oriented. (I'm thinking of making this more of my daily scripture reading blog.)
03 December 2006
What Is My God?
I've been thinking about a common theme in the Old Testament: The Israelites are constantly straying to other gods. The common application to us today is to ask, "Who/what is your god?"
But how should I understand the question? How do I know whether something has become my god, replacing the true God?
The Book of Hosea gives one definition: My god is whatever I trust:"For their mother hath played the harlot: she that conceived them hath done shamefully: for she said, 'I will go after my lovers, that give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, mine oil and my drink.'
Some verses in Isaiah may give a slightly different definition: My god is whatever I credit:
"Therefore, behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns, and make a wall, that she shall not find her paths. And she shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them: then shall she say, 'I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now.'" (Hosea 2:5-7)"Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter’s clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, 'He made me not?' or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, 'He had no understanding'?" (Isaiah 29:16)
There is also the popular definition: My god is whatever I focus on:"And thus we see that except the Lord doth chasten his people with many afflictions...they will not remember him. O how foolish...are the children of men; yea, how quick to hearken unto the words of the evil one, and to set their hearts upon the vain things of the world!" (Helaman 12:3-4)
Any additional definitions (with accompanying scriptures) would be appreciated.
Mocking the False Gods
However we define our false god(s), Isaiah has something quite humorous to say about it:"Then shall it be for a man to burn: for he will take thereof, and warm himself; yea, he kindleth it, and baketh bread; yea, he maketh a god, and worshippeth it; he maketh it a graven image, and falleth down thereto.
In other words: "Wake up, you fool! The thing you reverence so deeply is the very thing you yourself created. It should be serving you!"
"He burneth part thereof in the fire; with part thereof he eateth flesh; he roasteth roast, and is satisfied: yea, he warmeth himself, and saith, 'Aha, I am warm, I have seen the fire': And the residue thereof he maketh a god, even his graven image: he falleth down unto it, and worshippeth it, and prayeth unto it, and saith, 'Deliver me; for thou art my god.'
"And none considereth in his heart, neither is there knowledge nor understanding to say, 'I have burned part of it in the fire; yea, also I have baked bread upon the coals thereof; I have roasted flesh, and eaten it: and shall I make the residue thereof an abomination? shall I fall down to the stock of a tree?'" (Isaiah 44:15-19)
(And some people think that only Elijah knows how to irreverently mock.)
Speaking of Elijah...
There is an interesting difference between what Elijah teaches and what Joshua demanded. Joshua famously demands a choice:"Choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." (Joshua 24:15)
Elijah, on the other hand, shows that there is no choice:"And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, 'How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him.'" (1 Kings 18:21)
Now that may sound a lot like what Joshua said, but look at how Elijah follows up on his question:"And they...called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, 'O Baal, hear us.' But there was no voice, nor any that answered.
"And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, 'Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.'
"And it came to pass, when midday was past, and they prophesied until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that there was neither voice, nor any to answer, nor any that regarded.
"And it came to pass...that Elijah the prophet came near, and said, 'LORD God of Abraham, Isaac, and of Israel, let it be known this day that thou art God in Israel, and that I am thy servant, and that I have done all these things at thy word.' Then the fire of the LORD fell, and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench.
"And when all the people saw it, they fell on their faces: and they said, 'The LORD, he is the God; the LORD, he is the God.'" (1 Kings 18:26-39, emphasis added)
18 November 2006
Why Favor (or Even Have) Israel?
Why does Israel seem so favored by the Lord? We are all God's children, so he should love us (ie. treat us) all the same, right? Then why do we find promises like this one throughout the scriptures:
"Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people." (Exodus 19:5-6)The answer is also found in the scriptures:
"Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be not dismayed; for I am thy God: I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness. Behold, all they that were incensed against thee shall be ashamed and confounded: they shall be as nothing; and they that strive with thee shall perish.Israel is a special witness of or example before the Lord. That means they are greatly blessed and sorely cursed:
"Behold, I will make thee a new sharp threshing instrument having teeth: thou shalt thresh the mountains, and beat them small, and shalt make the hills as chaff. Thou shalt fan them, and the wind shall carry them away, and the whirlwind shall scatter them: and thou shalt rejoice in the LORD, and shalt glory in the Holy One of Israel.
"I will open rivers in high places, and fountains in the midst of the valleys: I will make the wilderness a pool of water, and the dry land springs of water. That they may see, and know, and consider, and understand together, that the hand of the LORD hath done this, and the Holy One of Israel hath created it." (Isaiah 41:10...20, emphasis added)
"Even all nations shall say, 'Wherefore hath the LORD done thus unto this land? what meaneth the heat of this great anger?'The House of Israel is a light to the Gentiles. Many, of course, do not recognize that light and persecute the Jews and pay no attention to the covenants God has made with them. Others, however, will be introduced to Jehovah through the witness of the Jews in Jerusalem:
"Then men shall say, 'Because they have forsaken the covenant of the LORD God of their fathers: For they went and served other gods, and worshipped them, gods whom they knew not, and whom he had not given unto them: And the anger of the LORD was kindled against this land, to bring upon it all the curses that are written in this book: And the LORD rooted them out of their land in anger, and in wrath, and in great indignation, and cast them into another land, as it is this day.'" (Deuteronomy 29:24-28)
"Yea, many people and strong nations shall come to seek the LORD of hosts in Jerusalem, and to pray before the LORD. Thus saith the LORD of hosts; In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, 'We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you.'" (Zechariah 8:22-23)I like how Max I. Reich puts it:
"The nation of Israel was chosen to be the trustee of the divine self-revelation, culminating in the Messiah." (The Messianic Hope of Israel)
(As a side note: a Jewish friend commented on the difficulty of becoming a Jew. They don't seek converts and they make it very difficult to convert---the process may take years. My friend summed up by saying, "You'd have to be crazy to want to be a Jew anyway. Life is so much easier not being a Jew and you can still get all of the same blessings in the afterlife.")
14 November 2006
God’s Promises
The Book of Job offers many lessons, and one is that conventional wisdom about God is often wrong. As an example, read Eliphaz’ claim:
"Call to mind now: Who, being innocent, ever perished? And where were upright people ever destroyed? Even as I have seen, those who plow iniquity and those who sow trouble reap the same." (4:7-8)This may sound good, unless one reads the first and last chapter of Job. In the first, we learn that "[Job] was pure and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil" (1:1), so hardly one deserving of destruction. In the last, we read God’s own rejection of Eliphaz: "My anger is stirred up against you and your two friends, because you have not spoken about me what is right" (42:7). The Book of Job leaves us with a God who blesses and curses whomever he pleases.
So what should we make of these verses:
"And keep the charge of the LORD thy God...that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest" (1 Kings 2:3)
"The LORD preserveth all them that love him: but all the wicked will he destroy" (Psalms 145:20)
"He that is righteous is favored of God" (1 Nephi 17:33-35)
"Who am I, saith the Lord, that have promised and have not fulfilled?" (D&C 58:31)
"I, the Lord, am bound when ye do what I say" (D&C 82:10)With the Book of Job under our arm, we might be reluctant to enter into any agreement with the Lord, fearing that we are either mistaken in our theology (God does not strike bargains) or misplacing our trust (God is too unpredictable). In regard to the latter, we turn to Alma’s words:
"For he will fulfil all his promises which he shall make unto you, for he has fulfilled his promises which he has made unto our fathers" (Alma 37:17)Alma makes something very clear: God will fulfill the promises he makes to you, the individual. By including this phrase, Alma reminds us that promises are non-transferable; a promise made to one person or group does not necessarily apply to another.
Numerous examples support this idea. One is found in the Book of Mosiah. King Mosiah’s sons decided on missions in hostile Lamanite lands, and their father understandably feared for their lives. The Lord comforts Mosiah with a promise that he would "deliver [Mosiah's] sons out of the hands of the Lamanites" (Mosiah 28:7). While parents today would like to have that same promise as they send their sons and daughters around the world, tragically some missionaries in recent years were not brought home safely.
While this may seem like "harsh doctrine," it is important to understand. The alternative incorrectly assumes participation in certain promises, only to be discouraged or disbelieving when results fall short of expectations.
It is far better to identify which promises have actually been made. Many promises found in the scriptures are available to anyone who complies with the requirements—we could call these "opt-in promises." Notice the inclusive terms "all" and "every":
"For every one that asketh receiveth" (Matthew 7:8)
"sanctification...to all those who love and serve God" (D&C 20:31)Additionally, modern prophets extend promises on behalf of the Lord:
"Without reservation I promise you that if each of you will...[read the Book of Mormon]..." (GBH, A Testimony Vibrant and True, Ensign, August 2005)Lastly, while the promises made to King Mosiah may not be ours, we can certainly follow his example. He sought and received a promise specific to his need, and so can we. Patriarchal blessings are one source of these "personalized promises," as are personal prayer and priesthood blessings. Furthermore, King Mosiah brings out an important point often lost in discussions of Job: God is open to ideas. We see this with Abraham, Alma the Younger, and John, among others.
The bottom line is that God is a God of promises. He retains complete control over the terms and the participants, but once he makes a promise he is bound. So why include all those stories in the scriptures if the promises only apply to the people in the stories? Because they demonstrate that God has a habit of making and delivering on his promises:
"For he will fulfil all his promises which he shall make unto you, for he has fulfilled his promises which he has made unto our fathers." (Alma 37:17)
26 October 2006
The Weakness of the Book of Mormon
Those who attend Gospel Doctrine class are by now nearly through the Old Testament. To many this has been...chore, but hopefully it has also been enlightening. The Old Testament has so much to offer, not simply due to its length, but also to its complexity. Certainly there is more, but the title of this post indicates that this is not what I wanted to talk about—so let’s move on. "And now I, Nephi, cannot write all the things which were taught among my people; neither am I mighty in writing, like unto speaking...And if they are not the words of Christ, judge ye—for Christ will show unto you, with power and great glory, that they are his words, at the last day; and you and I shall stand face to face before his bar; and ye shall know that I have been commanded of him to write these things, notwithstanding my weakness." (2 Nephi 33:1,11) Many of us read that, then read one of our favorite verses (eg. 1 Nephi 3:7) and think, "What? They're just being modest!" (By this point I fear that most readers will have either stopped reading this post due to lost interest or are close to leaving due to being offended by my critique of the Book of Mormon. To the former I say, "The winning numbers for tomorrow’s lottery are 4-3-6-9-7." To the latter, I say, "Read on.") I can imagine that Nephi and Moroni might have pictured the Lord rewriting and embellishing their words to make them more like the Old Testament, but what actually happened is even more profound: the past weaknesses of the Book of Mormon are actually its strengths today. We struggle through the Old Testament because: In summary, I love the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon, but in some ways for different reasons. Imagine our missionaries around the world handing people the first ten books of the Old Testament to read as an introduction to our faith. I think it would be a disaster. In contrast, the Book of Mormon, thanks to its weaknesses, is actually pretty easy to follow and makes a very clear statement: "that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL God, manifesting himself unto all nations."
Here are a few characteristics of the Old Testament, some that make for truly superb study, others that that make it indecipherable, and some that do both:
Two Book of Mormon authors, Nephi and Moroni, lament what they call a "weakness" in writing:"And I said unto him: Lord, the Gentiles will mock at these things, because of our weakness in writing; for Lord thou hast made us mighty in word by faith, but thou hast not made us mighty in writing; And thou hast made us that we could write but little, because of the awkwardness of our hands. Behold, thou hast not made us mighty in writing like unto the brother of Jared, for thou madest him that the things which he wrote were mighty even as thou art, unto the overpowering of man to read them. (Ether 12:23-24)
But if we remember to what they compared themselves (viz. the Old Testament), we see that they have a point. The Book of Mormon lacks much of what makes the Old Testament such a pleasure—and a challenge—to study:
The Book of Mormon authors who worried so much about their weak writing were promised by the Lord that it would be made strong: "And I know that the Lord God will consecrate my prayers for the gain of my people. And the words which I have written in weakness will be made strong unto them...." (2 Nephi 33:4)
"Behold, I will show unto the Gentiles their weakness....
"And I, Moroni, having heard these words, was comforted, and said: O Lord, thy righteous will be done, for I know that thou workest unto the children of men according to their faith." (Ether 12:28-29)
24 October 2006
God as a Woman (Isaiah 49:15)
The Bible likens the Lord to many different things in order to illustrate his relationship with us. In those comparisons, the Lord is usually represented in a masculine form: bridegroom, king, husband, warrior, father, tradesman. (Each of these is used often enough that I don't feel that they need citations.)
As far as I know, there are only two* scriptures that cast the Lord in a feminine form:"Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee." (Isaiah 49:15)
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Matthew 23:37)
Nevermind any speculation on what this might mean concerning the nature of God, Heavenly Mother, etc. I want to point out three things:
___________________________
* The following is an addition after posting made in response to Julie M. Smith's comment:
Deuteronomy 32:11:"As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings:"
The problem with this example is that the eagle in many translations is neuter; ie. "its wings" instead of "her wings." (My Israeli friend confirms that the Hebrew reads as either "him" or "it.") Perhaps KJV translators erroneously assumed that an eagle hen is abandoned by the cock and alone must care for the young?
Deuteronomy 32:18:"Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee."
I read this as a masculine reference. Compare Isaiah 51:1-2, where Abraham is a rock and Sarah is a quarry.
Job 38:29:"Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?"
Thanks for the addition.
Psalms 22:9-10:"But thou art he that took me out of the womb: thou didst make me hope when I was upon my mother’s breasts. I was cast upon thee from the womb: thou art my God from my mother’s belly."
The way I read this verse, the speaker (David?) is referring to his actual mother, not comparing God to a woman. He is saying, "I have had faith in you since the day I was born."
Psalms 91:4:"He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler."
This is an example of God as a bird, but not as a hen. It reads "his feathers."
Isaiah 42:14:"I have long time holden my peace; I have been still, and refrained myself: now will I cry like a travailing woman; I will destroy and devour at once."
Good example. Thanks!
Isaiah 66:9:"Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the LORD: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God."
I am intrigued by this one. Is the LORD giving birth or is he acting as midwife? The verse on its own reads as the former, but the context points to the latter. Either way, it is a female role.
Isaiah 66:13:"As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you; and ye shall be comforted in Jerusalem."
Beautiful! Thanks for the addition.
23 October 2006
Forcing Peace (Isaiah 2:4)
In the past, whenever I have read Isaiah 2:4, I have read it as a time when the Lord would live on this earth and "fix all its problems," specifically that he would bring about world peace:"And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."
As I read it this year, something stood out to me: the verse doesn't say anything about the Lord establishing peace. He will "judge" and he will "rebuke," but it is the people that will abandon war, thus ushering in a time of unprecedented peace.
(Of course, the Lord's judgments and reproofs will undoubtedly play an important role in bringing about the necessary changes of heart.)
17 October 2006
Abraham Part VII: A Strange Definition of Rest
Found:
"...finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me..."We end how Abraham began—a phrase I have always found humorous. What could Abraham possibly mean by "greater...rest"? If we look at Abraham’s life, we see that this is both an understatement and a very strange definition.
As an understatement, we have to look at the context of the verse: Abraham has chosen to leave his father’s house in Ur and pursue a path that will lead him to Jehovah. If we remember that Abraham had narrowly escaped being sacrificed to his own father’s gods—a fate that apparently Abraham’s brother suffered—then we might say that for Abraham, things could only get easier. So "greater happiness and peace and rest" might simply mean "getting away from my filicidal dad."
But this is not how Abraham is thinking. First, he takes his father with him. Second, he is clearly not referring to getting away from a rotten former life but instead he is describing how he views the life that lay ahead. What I find so interesting is that Abraham makes this statement after living the post-Ur life; i.e. this is Abraham looking back over his life and calling it happy, peaceful, and restful.
A reminder of some of the events in Abraham’s life will show why this is noteworthy. During Abraham's life he:
• Flees from drought
• Wanders as a stranger in Canaan
• Fears he will be killed in Egypt
• Goes to battle against a huge army
• Sees his son-in-law’s family get nearly destroyed
• Goes without children until he is well over 60 years old
• Is told to sacrifice his own son
• Toils to make a living where he owns no land
• Expels one of his own sons from his household
Abraham’s life was filled with events that we would normally call hardships, trials, or challenges, yet he remembers the walk up the mount with Isaac and the expulsion of Ishmael as "happy"; he looks back on the conflicts with Pharaoh, Abimelech, and the conquerors of Sodom and calls it "peace"; he recalls the miles and miles of travel, travel, travel in search of the land of his inheritance and he calls it "rest." Was Abraham crazy, or was he just blessed with wisdom to see the good in the bad he had experienced?
"Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid" (John 14:27).Incidentally, there is only one other verse in the scriptures that uses this combination of words (Alma 40: 12):
"And then shall it come to pass, that the spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness, which is called paradise, a state of rest, a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their troubles and from all care, and sorrow."
This concludes my series on Abraham 1:2. If you followed the series and liked the way it was published, please let me know. If you found it annoying (ie. you would have preferred to have it all at once) let me know as well. Thanks.
15 October 2006
Abraham Part VI: Defining the Priesthood
Sought:
"...sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same..."Abraham states what he desires, but it is not the same as what he seeks. This is not a foreign concept for those who have read Matthew 6:23:
"But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you."In this manner, Abraham does not seek learning so that he can "possess a greater knowledge," he does not seek personal enrichment so that he can be a "greater follower of righteousness," and so on. In order to obtain the blessings he desires, he seeks the priesthood.
This gives us interesting insight into how Abraham viewed the priesthood and its effect on those who exercise it. If asked to define the priesthood, Abraham might agree with some of the answers we commonly hear: The power of God, An eternal principle, A form of government, An opportunity to serve. But this verse suggests that Abraham might give a different definition: The means by which God’s blessings are realized.
Thinking of the priesthood in this way brings new understanding to the promise made to Abraham in the following chapter (Abraham 2:9,11):
"And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations;
"And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, in thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal."
13 October 2006
Abraham Part V: Commandments as Rewards
...continued from Part IV:
4) Abraham understands the purpose of commandments: Many people mistakenly think that a relationship with God should progress in the same way as a relationship with parents; ie. in childhood there are numerous rules to follow, but as one grows older and proves oneself more responsible, fewer and fewer rules are imposed as they eventually become unnecessary. Abraham, however, desires to more "instructions." Rather than view commandments as restrictions, Abraham sees them as rewards for good behavior.
Adam and Eve exemplify this pattern (Moses 5:1-11):"And it came to pass that after I, the Lord God, had driven them out, that Adam began to till the earth, and to have dominion over all the beasts of the field, and to eat his bread by the sweat of his brow, as I the Lord had commanded him. And Eve, also, his wife, did labor with him. And Adam knew his wife, and she bare unto him sons and daughters, and they began to multiply and to replenish the earth."
They were obedient to the commandments they had been given (Moses 4:22, 25, 28) and then pray to God:"And Adam and Eve, his wife, called upon the name of the Lord..."
And what did they pray for? We do not know, but we see how they were rewarded for their obedience:"...And he gave unto them commandments..."
Once again, Adam and Eve were obedient:"...that they should worship the Lord their God, and should offer the firstlings of their flocks, for an offering unto the Lord. And Adam was obedient unto the commandments of the Lord."
And how were they rewarded this time? With knowledge:"And after many days an angel of the Lord appeared unto Adam…saying: This thing is a similitude of the sacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father, which is full of grace and truth."
...and more commandments:"Wherefore, thou shalt do all that thou doest in the name of the Son, and thou shalt repent and call upon God in the name of the Son forevermore."
Which ultimately leads to the greatest (in my opinion; because it was without precedent) moment of revelation in human history:"And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam...saying: I am the Only Begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will.
"And in that day Adam blessed God and was filled, and began to prophesy concerning all the families of the earth, saying: Blessed be the name of God, for because of my transgression my eyes are opened, and in this life I shall have joy, and again in the flesh I shall see God.
"And Eve, his wife, heard all these things and was glad, saying: Were it not for our transgression we never should have had seed, and never should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient."
11 October 2006
Abraham Part IV: Order One of Everything
...continued from Part III:
3) Abraham is ambitious: or some may say, "audacious." Abraham—without qualification (stipulation)—wants to be "a father of many nations" and "a prince of peace." Several questions come to mind, none of which I have answers to: Was this the standard dream for men in ancient times, or was Abraham really thinking big? Was Abraham the exception, or should all of us ask for truly great rewards? What does Abraham mean by "prince of peace"? Was Abraham promised this before or because he desired it?
Alma 29:3 seems relevant:"But behold, I am a man, and do sin in my wish; for I ought to be content with the things which the Lord hath allotted unto me."
06 October 2006
Abraham Part III: Obedience & Righteousness
...continued from Part II:
2) Abraham seems repetitive (again): he wants to be a "follower of righteousness" and also “to keep the commandments”. This may not seem repetitive until one tries to define “righteousness”—which must include some mention of keeping the commandments. The difference between the two can be explained by Matthew 24:45-46:“Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season? Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing.”
...and D&C 58:26:“For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.”
Abraham sees the difference between patiently serving by one’s actions (keeping the commandments) and taking the initiative to serve with one’s whole heart, mind, and body (following righteousness).
05 October 2006
Abraham Part II: Depth & Breadth of Knowledge
...continued from Part I:
Abraham tells us, in reverse order, what he desired, how he went about obtaining it, and what it brought him:
Desired:
"…desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God…"There are several interesting points here:
1) Abraham seems repetitive: he mentions "great knowledge" and then "greater knowledge." The difference Abraham saw between these two gifts is possibly explained in D&C 42:61:
"If thou shalt ask, thou shalt receive revelation upon revelation, knowledge upon knowledge, that thou mayest know the mysteries and peaceable things—that which bringeth joy, that which bringeth life eternal."In other words, Abraham wanted to understand what was already understood by the prophets of God and the sages of the world, but he also wanted to extend his understanding beyond what was already known. (We see in Chapter 3-5 some of the fulfillment of this wish.)
04 October 2006
Abraham Part I: Desired -> Sought -> Found
The Book of Abraham begins with a personal statement from the patriarch himself. In a single verse, Abraham teaches an incredible amount:“And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers.”
The verse could be broken into three parts: what Abraham desired, what he sought, and what he found. What is the relationship of these three terms? I have hinted at my answer in the title of this post. “Desire” implies craving, yearning, or wishing, but does not necessitate any action on the desirer’s part to obtain the object of his attention. “Seeking” means that action is being taken to reach the goal. Finally, “found” means that the efforts were successful. Abraham tells us, in reverse order, what he desired, how he went about obtaining it, and what it brought him.
continue to Part II...
Over the next several days, I will post the remainder of my thoughts on this verse. Please feel free to jump ahead of me in your comments; if I don't want to discuss something "early" I will say so.
If this format seems a bit "Moggetish" (a la Faith-Promoting Rumor), that's not entirely accidental. Which is not to say that it was intentional or that it remotely approaches what Mogget would publish.
06 September 2006
Three-fold Expression of Patience
A few months ago, a woman in my ward gave a talk on patience that I found enlightening. I have been meaning to post a summary ever since.
Patience is demonstrated by how we act toward others, oneself, and God:
Patience with others: Patience with others manifests as love or charity. We await their repentance, assist throughout trials, and walk the “extra mile.”
Patience with oneself: When we recognize our weakness and our seeming inability to change, we show patience with ourselves by maintaining hope. Moroni said that we can “hope for a better world”; patience despite our weakness reveals a hope that we will one day prevail.
Patience with God: Through times of trial we may doubt God’s promises or morality. By being patient, we show that we have faith in him—in his power to deliver, his integrity, and his wisdom.
So there you have it: the three enduring gifts of the Spirit spoken of by Paul—faith, hope, charity—each expressed through patience.
03 September 2006
Taken in Adultery, In the Very Act
Hosea uses the analogy of a husband and his adulterous wife to illustrate the unfaithfulness of Israel to its covenants with the Lord. One of the consequences of Israel’s wayward worship was that they contaminated Judaism with elements of paganism.
As I studied Hosea this week, I thought about another story of adultery, this time from the New Testament. Jesus is in the temple and some scribes and Pharisees bring him a woman “taken in adultery, in the very act” (John 8:4). The men challenge Jesus to judge what should be done with her, seeking an opportunity “to accuse him” (8:6). Jesus’ response is famous: “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (8:7).
We see the men slowly disperse, none of them willing to cast a stone, “being convicted by their own conscience” (8:9). The question I have is, of what were they convicted?
I had always assumed that each of them recalled his own particular sin before walking away. But can’t help but wonder if any of them, masters of the writings of the prophets themselves, remembered the writings of Hosea. Had they considered its teachings, they would have understood the accusation Jesus made of them elsewhere: that the brand of godliness these men practiced and taught was an adulterated version (Matthew 23:13-15,23,25,27,29 ) of the one taught by the prophets.
The scribes’ and Pharisees’ willingness to misuse the temple as the site to lay their trap, heartlessly using the woman as bait, is representative of their abuse of the gospel in general. To them, the law and the prophets were useful for personal gain, not personal righteousness. Jesus’ answer to them disarms the trap in the manner it had been set: they had been caught adulterating the law, in the very act.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
