"And then will I remember my covenant which I have made unto my people, O house of Israel, and I will bring my gospel unto them."
When the Gentiles have rejected the fullness of the Gospel, the Lord's memory will be stirred. He will "remember His covenant" again.
Notice the covenant He will remember is for "His people," whose interests and inheritance will now be vindicated. His words will be fulfilled. The Father's promises will all be realized. But "His people" are not the Gentiles. His people are the remnant to whom the Gospel will come as a matter of covenant and inheritance to reclaim a fallen people. This is the re-grafting of the natural branches referred to in Jacob 5: 67-75. It is important to note that the Lord of the vineyard was directly involved with the few servants assigned to accomplish this final work of gathering together. (Jacob 5: 72.)
This is to be done after the Gentiles (who are the European Latter-day Saints who descend from the bloodlines that overran and dispossessed the native people in North America), have rejected the fullness of the Gospel. Therefore, you should not expect that the institutional church, controlled as it is by those very same bloodlines, will be the means through which this final effort will be accomplished.
When the time comes, the Lord will "bring [His] gospel to them." How will He do this? What "laborers" should we expect to be sent? How, if the Gentiles have rejected the fullness of His Gospel, will the Gentiles be involved?
Can Gentiles who are lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations of the earth assist? If not, then what Gentiles can assist?
Isn't Ephriam to be involved? After all, they have the birthright. Are they not involved?
If they are, who will it be from among Ephriam?
How can the remnant to whom these blessings are promised, have still among them a few descendants of Ephriam? Why will Mannassah, through the remnant, build the New Jerusalem, yet it will be Ephriam through whom the blessings are conferred upon the returning Lost Tribes? (D&C 133: 26-34.)
How can the New Jerusalem be the property of the remnant, but there be a group of Ephiamites who bestow crowns? What must these Ephriamites possess to be able to accomplish this task? How can they possess it and not be lifted up in pride above all other people of the whole earth? How can such power be put upon some group and they remain willing to ever bend the knee and confess before Him whose right it is to rule?
How can the Gentiles both reject the fullness of the Gospel, yet there be some who are of Ephriam who are able to bestow crowns?
What an interesting picture begins to emerge. Gentile rejection, but a tiny group of Ephriamite servants whose lives are lived so as to bestow blessings upon others.
The main body in the New Jerusalem coming from the remnant, who are to build the City of the New Jerusalem, yet within that City a functioning group of Ephriamites who will crown others with glory. All this preparatory to the Lord's return to a City set upon a hill which cannot be hid. To a location in the tops of the everlasting mountains, where all will gather from every nation.
Well, let's keep going to see how much we can figure out from the scriptures to correct our foolish traditions about these future roles and perhaps gain an even better idea of locations.
Interesting timing... I just got an email for Education Week. Lots of great speakers, inspirational music and the latest LDS vendors' products. All for $60 or less!
ReplyDeleteWill we have to redefine our interpretation of Daniel 2:44 as well, then? It looks like it more and more...
ReplyDeletehttp://scriptures.lds.org/en/search?type=references&last=Jacob+5%3A+67-75&help=&ro=checked&search=Daniel+2%3A44&do=Search&show=%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A
All who live in Babylon are vendors, bar none; I've yet to meet even one person who isn't. We use our gifts and our talents and we make a living. Does anybody here not sell services, or merchandise of some kind? If not, whose money do you use to subsist and did he/she or someone before them labor for that money? If your particular talents are suitable for BYU education week, are you then a laborer who is unworthy of his/her hire? It seems we ought to be in this together, rather than be so quick to criticize each other. If it is wrong to sell books and other worthwhile stuff at BYU education week, it is probably wrong to write legal briefs, sell computers, sell milk, or sell any of God's gifts for money. Rather than label and pick at our brothers and sisters who earn a living, perhaps we could ask God to help us find a way to subsist and serve one another without the need of money. I'm all over that one. Until then, it is a bit nauseating to lift ourselves up above one another or to hold ourselves above those who also must subsist. Hey wait a minute, I just read something about that earlier today. Something about Gentiles who think they are more special than the rest of the world. Scary, we really do that don't we? Hmmm...
ReplyDeleteI have been a vendor as well as a participant of Education Week. My experience has been mostly positive, and I usually come away uplifted and edified. That being said, it never tasted nearly as sweet as the last month on this blog have.
ReplyDeleteDoug
This is getting really interesting. I have loved all this verse by verse instruction for the last several weeks. I knew the day of the Gentile was either over or quickly coming to a close...but now I'm excited to finally get more understanding of what that means exactly and how it potentially plays out. So many questions....I can't wait for each new blog...how will I ever sleep tonight?! :)
ReplyDeleteThanks JDS.
ReplyDeleteJDS - I like a lot of where you're coming from, but I still don't think you're judgment that others are being critical holds much water. But I'm not looking for a debate...I think it just brings up the point that there is a wide range of opinion about what is called criticism and what is not. That would be an interesting blog post. Or is it "evil speaking" that we don't have defined well enough? Anonymous' comment at the top may've been tongue in cheek, but if you take it to underscore the abuse of such an event and a worship of the vendor mentality in place of the Gospel, then it fits in really well as an abomination done in the name of religion. Obviously there are vendors whose hearts may be right. Laboring for money is quite different than receiving money for your labor. Of course, trends towards priest-craft are alarming. What can you do with a system like that? I think I will go buy my virgin Mary statue from the Basilica of St. Peter's now.
ReplyDeleteAmen Doug. This has been a delicious experience and my heart goes out to every Latter-day Saint, and all men everywhere. I believe the Savior is eager to bless us and to enable us to receive Him.
ReplyDeleteThis is probably just another case of my not knowing enough, but I have a confusion that maybe someone could help me clear up.
ReplyDelete1) From where do we know that it will be Mannassah building the New Jerusalem? I know that it will be the Remnant, but it seems that we are always assuming that the Book of Mormon descendants are from the tribe of Mannassah just because Lehi was from Mannassah.
We know from Joseph Smith that Ishmael was an Ephraimite, so that means that every single descendant of Lehi from his grandchildren on down could be from either Mannassah or Ephraim, since they would have had both tribes marrying each other as Lehi's children married Ishmael's children.
I was talking with a good friend in my HP group this evening about these things. He was not so sure we were "gentiles"....I suggested we take a look at section 109 and see what we could learn.
ReplyDelete60 Now these words, O Lord, we have spoken before thee, concerning the revelations and commandments which thou hast given unto us, who are identified with the Gentiles.
He asked how he could be a gentile when his patriarchal blessing declared his lineage was through Ephraim? I told him mine was too... never-the-less, it sounded like the Prophet Joseph was revealing that we are identified with the gentiles.
Section 109 is really remarkable.... some other verses:
38 Put upon thy servants the testimony of the covenant, that when they go out and proclaim thy word they may seal up the law, and prepare the hearts of thy saints for all those judgments thou art about to send, in thy wrath, upon the inhabitants of the cearth, because of their transgressions, that thy people may not faint in the day of trouble.
46 Therefore, O Lord, deliver thy people from the calamity of the wicked; enable thy servants to seal up the law, and bind up the testimony, that they may be prepared against the day of burning.
61 But thou knowest that thou hast a great love for the children of Jacob, who have been scattered upon the mountains for a long time, in a cloudy and dark day.
62 We therefore ask thee to have mercy upon the children of Jacob, that Jerusalem, from this hour, may begin to be redeemed;
63 And the yoke of bondage may begin to be broken off from the house of David;
64 And the children of Judah may begin to return to the lands which thou didst give to Abraham, their father.
65 And cause that the remnants of Jacob, who have been cursed and smitten because of their transgression, be converted from their wild and savage condition to the fulness of the everlasting gospel;
66 That they may lay down their weapons of bloodshed, and cease their rebellions.
67 And may all the scattered remnants of Israel, who have been driven to the ends of the earth, come to a knowledge of the truth, believe in the Messiah, and be redeemed from oppression, and rejoice before thee.
Snuffer queried, "How can the Gentiles both reject the fullness of the Gospel, yet there be some who are of Ephriam who are able to bestow crowns?"
ReplyDeleteLeavening in the bread would be a good option. Different loaves another.
As Snuffer suggests, there are those in the greater that have maintained correct doctrines, principles, and practices and have overcome by faith to receive a crown [DC 76:56]. Some the silver crown, some the gold crown, yet others both crowns [Zech. 6:11].
Snuffer states, "a tiny group of Ephriamite servants whose lives are lived so as to bestow blessings upon others".
Kingly and Priestly power and authority rest in the doctrines of the Priesthood. Where and from whom do these servants receive their power and authority to "bestow blessings upon others" if the "fullness of the Gospel" have been lost [taken]? Is the institutional church the sole repository of priesthood?
J. Reuben Clark's summation [loosely quoted] of, "the priesthood can exist without the church, but the church can not exist without the priesthood" carries some heavy and chilling implications.
In early Hebraic times we have independent prophets in the northern and southern Kingdoms (Google times of the minor prophets).
In the meridian of time we have independent "priesthood" authority in the eastern and western hemispheres.
According to the Book of Mormon, this will occur in the last days. The question is, "Has it already occurred and what are the ramifications"?
Scratching the brow, the question is asked, "Who are the servants whose lives are lived so as to bestow blessings upon others and how may they be found"?
JDS [June 24, 2010 4:50 PM] suggests all who are vendors are Babylon.
ReplyDeleteI dissent.
If that which is on the earth is patterned after that which is in heaven, do you think there are "vendors" in the society of the Gods?
If God became God by the same plan that is being executed here, where are His siblings that also became Gods and what 'commercial' concerns do you suppose they participate in? [Exactly what is the 'coin of the realm' in heaven anyway? Intelligence?]
I hold there is commerce in heaven, just like there is on earth. There is "good" and "bad" commerce in heaven, just like we find here (there are those who would believe otherwise; and if their holdings were true, there would be no eternal battle of "good" and "evil").
The heavenly model of commerce is called a United Order. Sadly correct knowledge of a united order, let alone the laws governing and it's workings, are understood by very few.
As I have posted before, understanding of a united order can only be comprehended when one correctly understands what "no poor among them" and "having all things in common" represents.
A United Order is not a religious order--but a commerce order. Commerce has vendors and vendees, hence not all vendors live in Babylon..
Stone, as I've said before, I don't believe the notion that there is buying and selling in the Celestial Kingdom. The pattern I see in nature, which is the pattern Brigham Young said most closely reflects the Celestial Kingdom, does not include hanging a shingle, placing a fence around one's stuff, and charging admission for its use or consumption.
ReplyDeleteMy point earlier is we are each vendors after some fashion and we each need money to subsist in Babylon. While there is natural gas in them there hills, a gift from God with enough to spare, somehow we manage to corrupt God's gifts and no matter how free they are to us, someone builds a fence calls the gift theirs, and becomes a vendor of God's gifts.
Your gifts and talents, my gifts and talents, and the natural resources of this earth are all gifts from God to His children. I simply don't believe Zion will have one ounce of Babylonian vending going on. I've never spoke face to face with Christ or God about this subject. I don't feel inclined to debate or defend my beliefs; however, my beliefs concerning this subject feel right to me.
As long as we are stuck in Babylon, why waste time pointing a finger at writers and teachers who are not seeking to set themselves up as a light unto the world, but who diligently point others to Christ or who diligently help others resolve problems they cannot seem to resolve themselves.
Not all seek to have followings; some love to teach but detest recognition. Some love to use their gifts to help make a substantial difference in the lives of others, but don't want to have to make a living as they do so, even though there is no way around it presently.
We must subsist and by-in-large there is no other universal exchange than money in Babylon; hence we all become vendors of God's gifts.
So the point is why would we desire to find fault with anyone who must subsist in Babylon, or seek to classify anyone who must "earn a living"; rather, our efforts would be better spent becoming a Zion people and living according to Celestial Law--where again, I doubt we will need a purse or pocketbook anymore than the animals in nature need such things.
My deepest feeling is that we are in this together, and need to help come out of it together. I believe we can as we follow the Code Conduct Nephi and Christ subscribe to. Christ is eager to help all of us; perhaps we can become as eager to help each other.
Finally, we often get what we want. if you earnestly desire a money exchange and commerce in the next life, you might get it. I have no desire for such an eternal existence and I hope to achieve my desires. In the meantime, I feel unclean when I personally label brothers and sisters who must subsist and who seek to do so honestly.
JDS, I really like this last statement of yours, myself. I currently think the Lord detailing an economic system to teach a principle doesn't mean the principle can't be learned in other ways. A shame we couldn't live it when we had the chance, but no blessing denied us now if we are faithful, right? Stone could also have a broad view of the terms vendor and vendee to include exchange of goods while sharing, and you too may be talking more of the same thing than you think.
ReplyDeleteDenver and Stephanie, thanks for letting all of us have a voice here! I think in this topic, a large cross-section of what we encounter in LDS opinion is represented. I believe we can all be uplifted, edified, and learn something from this. It's proof that we can all differ in opinion and still belong together in a congregation. We should allow more in our Church settings without taking offense. I think the blog lets us do that easier, and see, everyone? We can still be friends! We don't have to debate if we can all respect that everyone can be heard and understood from where they are coming from, even if we disagree. We don't have to come to a consensus on the doctrine here and make some council out of it. We can simply learn where each of us is coming from, and sometimes take something away from it if we choose, no pressure, no heretics.
JDS...everyone of your comments are SO refreshing! Thank you!
ReplyDeleteJDS, I, along with Joseph, say we are all allowed to worship, how, where or what we may--I guess I just take a more deep and solemn and ponderous view of the expansive depths of eternity, of Heaven and Earth, of the Gods and men, and reject traditions based on Greek philosophical concepts that are contrary to Biblical constructs. I do not believe in certain idyllic portrayals of a God--who has a physical body, but is outside time and space--with a "magic" wand or any analogous metaphorical, archetypal words of art.
ReplyDeleteThe distinguishing mark between my views, and apparently the majority on the blog, is my active belief [and hence my paradigm] in a God, who is a member of a society, who is governed by the laws of that society. Although it is accepted in the LDS world of multiple Gods, I find few who think in terms of "many" or a "society" of Gods. Using the "society paradigm" alters how one understands certain scriptures.
For instance, we often tender the idea of God's law as being the pervasive law of the universe. When used in the context of the "society paradigm" it becomes the law of the Gods. Hence when we say "God is bound by law" it is not "His law," but "Their Law".
Using this paradigm, we see the necessity of the "atonement" for "sins" against the laws of the society of the Gods (Gods law, not God's law). As a father, I can forgive my children when they do, or do not do, according to my rules (law), but I can not offer forgiveness for and in behalf "of society" if they were to violate a law "of society". Hence the arising of the need for a "Saviour and Redeemer" to be an intercessory who can mitigate "paying the price".
Finally, it clarifies our understanding of the "priesthood" of God and the "priesthoods" of the Gods and the different "orders", not only of our own Father and God, but of the society of the Gods as well.
Using the "society paradigm" D&C 130:10-11 (about a higher order above the celestial kingdom) becomes perfectly clear.
Upon successful completion of "time" (mortality is time, all else is eternity) and the course of training (gospel) one is prepared to become a "God", or in other words, a member of full standing in the society of Gods. Here we can see "why" the outward ordinances occur: they are the publishing of our completion of a certain milestone of our training to Gods as well as men.
On a more grand scale, there are good Gods and bad Gods, hence not all Gods get along. Therefore Their society is not all "love and peace".
Each "warring" faction is determined to overcome the opponent by stratagem and largess of number. We call this the "War in Heaven" (which know only in part) and it has come to earth.
For anyone interested, they should read Richard Hopkin's book How Greek Philosophy Corrupted the Christian Concept of God.
Stone, good thoughts.
ReplyDeletePlease shoot me an email at MattyLo1321@gmail.com
Matt
Now that last post, Stone, I liked. Not that my two cents matters for your beliefs, but just felt like saying it.
ReplyDeleteAn in-house attorney who worked for me had razor-sharp analytical skills. He saw himself as a clear superior intellect to me and often disdained my decision-making process. His logic was generally faultless. However, I often found that after all data and logic was considered, my heart would take me places my mind couldn't go alone.
ReplyDeleteInitially he would wait for what he considered to be inevitable failure--when I did not follow his advice. When the opposite was achieved time after time he eventually quit trying to second guess me and began asking how I did it. I told him that I hire smart guys like him to help me go as far as sound reasoning can take me and then I allow my heart to take me the rest of the way:)
My heart and mind are clear concerning beliefs I've expressed previously on this post. I won't be selling stuff to subsist in Zion or in heaven. Good luck with that, especially if you are looking forward to a life of commerce for eternity!
Dearest JDS,
ReplyDeleteJust how does God "subsist" as you call it? Does God does, just sit there listening to harps?
How do you suppose you will "subsist" in the eternities, listen to harps?
Do you suppose, since he has a physical body that laws of physics apply? Does he waive his wand, or snap his fingers and all things mysteriously and magically appear? Some form of Divine fiat?
Do you suppose, since he has a physical body that laws of physics do not apply?
How can He sit in yonder heaven, a man like us [with something mysterious called "spirit" flowing in His veins--O, BTW, exactly what is this "spirit"?] and not be subject to the laws of physics?
Belief does not require the suspension of reason, as Brigham Young says, "everything that is revealed is logical, reasonable, has common sense, and tastes good to the spirit".
And if He wants something from another God, do you think there is quid pro quo?
My posts are meant to broaden prospective; you are at liberty to reject they or accept them; and you may maintain as narrow or wide a view as you desire. I accept, as Joseph did, all "truth" from whatever source.
Are you suggesting my dirt-farmer background doesn't hold a candle to your business acumen, either in heart or head, that I neither think nor feel, or follow the "spirit"; but that I blindly follow the dictates of logic?
Again I say, as I did before, that both Joseph and I allow anyone to believe as they may; nor do I, or have I attempt[ed] to disparage one for their belief system.
You say you wont take any part in "heavenly commerce," in Zion or in heaven, that leaves only one place.
I shall surely enjoy the "commerce" of a United Order in a heavenly Zion, whether on earth or in the heavens.
We have more in common than I imagined; I love farming and have spent more far more time farming than in business. As my son wrote his talk on patience last night, we discussed how interesting it was to drive a hay swather 15 hours a day, when approached in a manner that included patience. I live in a city now, but everyday desire to go back to the farm.
ReplyDeleteIn Dever's Ten Parables I really like the comparison of the two towns, Hope and Tarwater. I grew up in a Tarwater-like community. I was the Nimrod of our valley and a great slayer of beasts. Eventually I found another way of life that resonated with me far differently and more beautifully. I haven't gone soft in the head; I simply see life much differently now.
You and I, like those two towns, simply have a different way of viewing a similar subject. I would no sooner go back to my former views on this subject than cut off an arm. Nor would I want to force any person to my way of reasoning. If I must live in hell to fully embrace the desires of my heart, then I would gladly live there, if it means I don't have to go back to my former views, which were hellish to me. I truly feel hope in my beliefs. Would you deny me of my beliefs?
The story of the attorney was to suggest to you, that just because I don't see this topic the same way you see it, it certainly doesn't mean I haven't reasoned through the same data you are considering. What is reasonable to the town Hope is not reasonable to the town Tarwater, yet both enjoy the same forest. I see this topic differently and am content. Hopefully my contentedness is not offensive to you.
This has been entertaining and delightful. Thank you for such a spirited debate. Jim
JDS,
ReplyDeleteYou are welcome. I deny no man his right.
I, like you, would find myself in the depths of hell if I were forced to go back to the views I held in my past.
I can say, from experience, no matter what the speed, it is rather hard to read the Bible (and other books) while chopping corn < grin >.
I agree with you, one must be comfortable with their own "truth", as one placed in the Celestial Kingdom, who in their heart felt they should be in a different Kingdom, would be in Hell ...
I, like you, would not willingly consign anyone to Hell.