Answers to Prayers

Most of what follows was inspired by thoughts provided in Brant A. Gardner’s Second Witness series.

At the end of 1 Nephi chapter 2, Nephi has had a vision that shows him that he will become a ruler and a leader over his brethren.  Nephi continually makes parallels between his and Joseph in Egypt’s life to help support the unusual calling for a younger brother to rule over his siblings.  His vision came as a result of “being grieved because of the hardness of [his brothers’] hearts” and so he  “[cried] unto the Lord.”  

Chapter 3 then starts with him excited to tell Lehi about the vision and ensuing comfort received, but Lehi speaks first.  Interestingly, Lehi has also had a vision.  We’re not told about what prompted Lehi’s praying or if the vision came on it’s own.  I’d like to think that Lehi, as a parent, was aware of his son’s concerns about them leaving Jerusalem.  He likely was aware of Nephi’s attempt to soften their hearts and provide a second witness to the truthfulness of their father’s words.  Naturally, this seems like something Lehi would be praying to the Lord about.

The directive to retrieve the brass plates seems like a perfect answer to what Nephi and possibly Lehi were praying about.  The plates, we are told, were necessary so that they and their posterity would not “dwindle in unbelief.”

The Lord doesn’t always give us everything we need to start off with.  He didn’t provide the plates, liahona, sword of Laban, etc. at the outset of their journey to the promised land.  He waited for the opportune time to provide each, emphasizing important principles to them and the millions of people who have since read their words.

To circumcise or not to circumcize?

This weeks Sunday School lesson is on Acts 16-18 and both epistles to the Thessalonians. Reading/listening to it first off was very difficult, I didn't get much out of it. I decided to watch the episode on the BYU Broadcasting site where professors of religion ("the professors" from here on out) discuss these chapters for about 25 minutes to help broaden my perspective on these chapters. I was reminded how little I know and how much more effort I need to give to understanding the scriptures and applying them to my life.

As a preface to this reading, I also listened to the discussion that included Acts 15 that discusses the question the members of the Church had with regards to circumcision, and if the newly baptized Gentiles needed to be circumcised. The professors deemed this as one of the most important chapters of the New Testament, paritally because it had to do with a major change in the tradition of the Jews that was a part of the Law of Moses, and was a move toward shedding that "burden." The outcome was that the leaders of the Church didn't feel like it was necessary to burden the newly baptized Gentiles with any aspect of the Law of Moses, that it was sufficient to admonish them to "abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood."  Oddly enough, and pointed out by the professors, the Gentiles received this message, but it wasn't taught to the Jews - which was something Paul probably was hoping for.

This brings us to chapter 16 where Paul and Silas meet Timothy, who is the son of a Greek father and believes and is converted to the faith. Verse 3 states, "Him [Timothy] would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek." So even though the entire previous chapter told of the step forward of the Church to not require the newly baptized to follow the Law of Moses, why does Paul take a step back and have Timothy circumcised? The scripture says "because of the Jews...for they knew all that his father was a Greek." The professors point out that the because it was widely known among the Jews that Timothy was a Greek he was circumcised to make it easier on them to accept him as a member of the Church.

So sometimes, even though times have changed and the Church progresses forward, shedding old traditions, it's important to not expect everyone or force everyone to expect those changes to be immediate. Had he not been circumcised, the Jews would have known, and it could have hampered any success Paul and Silas tried to achieve. I understand the concept, but it still is odd to me. Did the Church not encourage Blacks to hold certain priesthood positions for a while after they were first given the priesthood, to make it easier for the Saints to accept? Or was it an issue that most Saints were ready to accept? I can't think of any other major changes. Does anybody have any comments on this process and maybe more current instances that illustrate the wisdom in this practice of not implementing new practices/doctrine from one day to the other?

Studying the Bible

I received a new study bible for my birthday, and while this may seem weird to some, I am loving it. My scripture study has been rejuvenated and I'm discovering lots of connections that I otherwise wouldn't. Here's a few of the interesting tidbits, so far.

Moses is a type [1] for Christ:

• Matthew 1:1 - "generation". The Greek word here is "genesis," translated elsewhere as "origin."
  
• Matthew 2:15 - "Out of Egypt I have called my son." is a quote from Hosea 11:1. In Hosea, "son" refers to Israel. This quotation recalls Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt.
• Matthew 2: 16-18 footnote - "The massacre echoes Pharaoh's ruling at the birth of Moses."
• Matthew 4:2 - Moses also fasted for 40 days/nights, when he communed with the Lord and wrote the 10 commandments (Exodus 34:28).
  

Elijah is a type for Christ:

• Matthew 3:1 - "wilderness of Judea" is associated with Elijah stories
• Matthew 4:2 - Elijah did not eat for 40 days after being fed by an angel (1 Kings 19:8)
• Matthew 4:11 - what the KJV renders as "ministered to" is translated in the NRSV as "waited on," reminiscent of Elijah's being fed by an angel

Allusions to Jacob

• John 1:47 - Jesus says of Nathanael "Here is truly an Israelite in whom there is no deceit!" Now, I have to admit, I've read this a dozen times without ever thinking about why Jesus said this, or why John felt to record it. To the best of my knowledge, there is no anecdote of Nathanael elsewhere in the New Testament where his lack of guile becomes significant. One could argue that it is simply to prompt Nathanael's next question, but I also like this thought: "Israel was the name given to Jacob, who had been deceitful (Gen. 27:34-36)." Or as the Scripture Scouts sing "Jacob, Jacob do come quick. We will play a little trick." However, this allusion would be glancing without the next one.
  
• John 1:51 - "you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man." Again, as far as I know, Nathanael witnesses no such thing. But Jacob did (Gen. 28:12). [2]
  

Thus we see that Matthew and John framed their testimonies of Jesus in the context of the scriptures they had at the time.
_________________________

[1] Defined here as "a symbol of something in the future, as an Old Testament event serving as a prefiguration of a new testament event."
[2] I always regarded the dream of Jacob's ladder as of little significance. Hopefully, due to scripture scouts, my kids won't make the same mistake. They sing, "Jacob had a ladder, so high! Jacob had a ladder, oh my! Jacob had a ladder, that's true. But you and I have ladders, too."

Obtaining His Word

Being a fifth Sunday today, we had a combined meeting.  The topic was missionary work and in the end we were given some challenges to complete by the end of the year.  The focus of the challenges and the lesson was on our own preparation prior to sharing the gospel, or rather, to quote scripture, "to obtain [the] word" (D&C 11:21).  There was a brief discussion about pitfalls in our personal scripture study and how to overcome them.  There were two comments that I really liked and wanted to share.  Interestingly enough, the first came from the previous seminary teacher and the second came from her replacement.

The first sister talked about our desire to read and that really that's what we need to pray for instead of help finding time.  We read John 7:17 about "doing" and the teacher mentioned that our desire is increased by the actual act of reading.  This is so true for me.  A lot of the times I read only because I'm supposed to and really I don't want to because I only have a little bit of time before the kids wake up and I really need to do this or that.  But I often find that as I read, I really get into it and can get lost in my study, forgetting all the other stuff that I had wanted to do.  My desire to keep reading is increased while I'm in the act of doing it.

What hit me the most was the next comment.  He told us that with his new calling to teach the youth, he feels an obligation to study and prepare and somehow manages to find 3 or 4 hours a day to read the scriptures.  He expressed his sadness that it used to be difficult to find 15 or 20 minutes because he didn't feel that same obligation to the Lord.  It is so true.  The times I really get in a good study are when I have some sort of obligation such as to teach a lesson or give a talk.  I think the original intent of this blog was to help us have more motivation to get in a good study and have an obligation to regularly share our insights.  Clearly this objective has not been met.  I hope to have a renewed obligation to the Lord to "obtain [His] word." That doesn't mean I'll write daily on this blog, but hopefully it will lead to an increased desire to share the things I have learned, whether by way of this blog or in some other form.

Natural Consequences or Blessings?

Being the Preparedness Specialist in my ward has helped me ponder spiritual matters from a different perspective lately.   A major focus of my calling is on food storage, an obviously temporal matter.  When I received this calling, I was blessed that it would help increase my testimony of the Savior, which thing I had recently been praying for.  Seeing as how the Lord seemingly answered my prayer, I have sought to discover just how food storage could accomplish my spiritual goal.  It is a long journey, to be sure, but in the process, I have come to look at blessings from the Lord in a new light.

Imagine that you have done your duty and responded to the counsel of the Prophets by storing food when a disaster hits.  The natural consequence of your actions is that you will have food to eat and your life will be sustained or prolonged.  Those who did not listen will unfortunately find themselves unprepared and thus will not be able to survive.  These are simply natural and logical consequences.  If you have food to eat, you will live.  If you don't have food, you will die.

This is often compared to Noah's ark.  Only his family listened and were prepared for the massive flood that took place.  Those who did not hearken to the prophet and prepare for the disaster were lost.  Once again, preparation literally led to life and being unprepared led to death.

Noah's ark is often compared to our salvation.  The Lord gives commandments to us through our prophets and if we obey, we are saved; we receive life.  If we do not, we are lost.  Sometimes this can be seen as harsh and many question how a loving God could deliver such a cruel punishment.  Corianton, the son of Alma, was concerned about this very matter (Alma 42).  Yet Alma, in the previous chapter, has just finished explaining the doctrine of restoration, which could also be called "natural consequences."  Read it; it's a good one.

Then there are the multiple references to reaping what you sow, two of which are found in Gal. 6: 7-9 and D&C 6 :3-4, 33.

What is my point with all of this?  In all these examples it is clear to see that the results of our actions are natural consequences.  Just as storing food will result in life, keeping the commandments of God will naturally result in salvation (to put it briefly).  Or in other words, we will have the tools and the character that we need in order to be in the presence of a holy and perfect Being.

This can be carried out to explain all blessings since Doctrine and Covenants 130:20-21 tells us that any blessing we receive is because we have obeyed a particular law.  It makes perfect sense that if we obey the word of wisdom, we will be blessed with better health than had we not obeyed it.  God is bound when we do what He says simply because of the natural consequences resulting from our actions.  

There are certainly deeper points to ponder on this issue.  Why is it that the Pioneers seemed to suffer so much heartache and so many trials when they were being so faithful?  There is no easy answer, but the discussion could go into the fact that God is not bound in timing his blessings.  I also am aware that amidst all the suffering, the early Saints recognized many blessings in their lives in spite of (or maybe because of) their trials.  It has also been said that trials can be a form of blessings.  Another route we could go off on is the fact that things happen to us, good or bad, as a result of others actions and may have had nothing to do with our own actions.  Just some things to ponder.  

What do you think?  Are blessings merely natural consequences to our obedience?

Prayer, King Benjamin, and Children

I don't know how well my thoughts will come out in writing because they're just kind of several little ideas floating around in my brain right now!

Background:  So I have been thinking about prayers a bit lately, connected to some new insights on Alma 37:36-37.  Then I've been reading King Benjamin's speech to his people in the beginning chapters of Mosiah (which is one of my favorite passages of scripture).  In chapter 4, he reiterates what he said previously about remembering our unworthiness and God's greatness.  He emphasizes the need to acknowledge our complete dependence on God.  This connected to my thoughts on prayers in the sense that praying constantly is a way to recognize that dependence.  When we don't pray before doing something, it's like we are telling God that we don't need His help; we can do it on our own. 

This then lead me to thoughts about my children.

We are probably all familiar with the scripture Mosiah 3:19 that gives attributes of a child and the way we should be.  I don't know whose children that scripture is talking about, but it's sure not mine!  Submissive?  Patient? Ya right!  It seems like I'm always trying to teach them to be independent and how to do things, yet they just want me to do it for them.  They whine and say they can't do it and that they need help.  Then, in the moments when I'm in a hurry and it will be like 100 times faster for me to just do it myself (put shoes on, buckle seat belts, etc.), that is the time they suddenly decide to be independent!  "I can do it by myself!" 

How often are we like those little kids?  When Heavenly Father lets us try things on our own, we go whining to Him for help saying we can't do it!  Yet, times when He is ready and willing, we just walk away without asking for help in prayer and essentially tell Him "I can do it by myself!"  Praying constantly is admitting our complete dependence on Him.  That doesn't mean He will do everything for us, but just that He will be with us.  And why would we not want Him with us all the time?  Even in our sleep?  As King Benjamin reminds us, we could not even breathe from day to day if not for Him.  Let's not be the children born into the natural man, but rather the kind of child the Lord refers to in the scripture mentioned above.  Let's "always retain in remembrance, the greatness of God, and your own nothingness, and his goodness and long-suffering towards you, unworthy creatures, and humble yourselves even in the depths of humility, calling on the name of the Lord daily..."  What is the reward for this?  We will "always rejoice, and be filled with the love of God, and always retain a remission of your sins..."  There are even more beautiful promises, but I just wanted to emphasize the fact that we can always remain clean of our sins and God can always be with us, if only we don't refuse His help by calling on Him in constant prayer.

What does the word "Mormon" mean?

I've heard the definition attributed to Joseph Smith that the word "Mormon" literally means "more good."  That's nice, but it probably doesn't mean much to people outside the church.  On my mission I would tell people that the name came from an ancient prophet who compiled the teachings and history of an ancient American people that knew about Christ, similar to what the Bible is.  But the fact that it was just some guys name also doesn't seem to be all that great. 

I read an article by Garth Norman and Alan Miner the other day on the site of the Book of Mormon Archaeological Forum about the baptism at the Waters of Mormon.  I was familiar with a lot of what was written (where Alma got his authority, why he baptized himself at the same time he did Helam, etc.) but was intrigued by his analysis of the word Mormon.

In 3 Nephi 5:12 it says,

"And behold, I am called Mormon, being called after the land of Mormon, the land in which Alma did establish the church among the people, yea, the first church which was established among them after their transgression." 

Miner and Alan further explain,

"Today, we associate the name of the Book of Mormon as did the Nephites of old, with the restoring of the covenant among the people.  The name of the book is a type for its purpose: to restore a knowledge of the covenants to the remnant of the seed of Lehi.  Therefore the name, Book of Mormon, symbolically means the Book of the Restoration of the Covenants.  [Raymond C. Treat, "Covenants: Key to the Restoration of the House of Israel," in Recent Book of Mormon Developments , Vol. 2, pp. 52-53]"

"A study of the title page of the Book of Mormon tells us its main purpose is to restore a knowledge of the covenants to the house of Israel.  This adds weight to the understanding that the name Mormon was always associated with the place of the restoration of the covenant to the Nephites.  In fact, the name Mormon may have become synonymous with the concept of the restoration of the covenants.  [David Lamb, "The Meaning of the Name Mormon," in Recent Book of Mormon Developments , Vol 2., p. 45]"

So, the next time someone asks you what the word "Mormon" means (or better yet, the next time you ask someone if they know what it means), I think this definition is the best one, IMHO.