I have always loved the scripture in John 9 and especially verses 1-3. In these verses Christ and his apostles walk past a blind man and Christ is asked, "who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?" (vs 2) This didn't seem like an unusual question to be asked back then when it was commonly thought that people with physical or mental handicaps were somehow cursed by God and that people with physical disabilities also had mental disabilities. Christ answered the apostles question saying, "neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him" (vs. 3). I can imagine the apostles being really confused by this response but then the Savior spat in the dirt and made a clay with which he covered the man's eyes. The blind man went and washed his eyes and returned with his sight in tact.
The part of this that I find interesting is the Savior's response to the apostles question. This blind man was born blind so the "works of God should be made manifest in him", but what about the thousands of people before and after Christ's mortal ministry who were born blind? For what purpose were they born with this physically limiting disability, not to mention the hundreds of other physical and mental disaabilities people are born with everyday? Through study and thought I believe that these other people were born blind for the same reason as this man that was healed by the savior.
Now, you're probably wondering how people can be born blind and, for the most part, never be healed and still be born for the works of God to be made manifest? There are other instances in the scriptures where people have physically limiting hanidcaps are weaknesses that cause them to believe they are limited. Moses and Enoch both make mention that they are "slow of speech" and that this would probably make it hard for them to lead God's children as a prophet (Exo 4:10-12; Moses 6:31). Paul mentioned that he had been given a "thorn in the flesh" that he "besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart" from him (2 Cor 12:7-8). Moroni felt as if his perceived weakness (awkwardness of hand and weakness in writing) would lessen the effectivness of The Book of Mormon amongst the gentiles (Ether 12:23-24).
In each of the above cases the Lord comforted of strengthened them. In responce to Enoch the Lord said, "go forth and do as I have commanded thee. . . Open thy mouth, and it shall be filled, and I will give thee utterance, for all flesh is in my hands, and I will do as seemeth me good" Moses 6:32). It is interesting to me that the Lord didn't tell Enoch to spit in the dirt, make a clay, anoint his tongue with the clay, go wash it off and he wouldn't have to deal with the problem again. Afterall, that is what he did for the blind man in John 9. Moses' case is a little different. Right before Moses brought his physical weakness up to the Lord he had witnessed the Lord seemingly effortlessly manipulate physical objects. The Lord turned Moses' rod into a serpent and then back into a rod and then he made Moses' hand leprous and then healed it (Exo 4:1-9). After witnessing such an impressive display of power of physical objecys you'd think that Moses would have not even had a second thought about his weakness. The Lord has the same response to Moses as He did to Enoch but Moses complains and is given Aaron as his spokesman. Once again, after hearing the future prophet's concern the Lord chooses to provide comfort but does not heal him.
In Moroni's case the Lord says, "fools mock, but they shall mourn; and my grace is sufficient for the meek, that they shall take no advantage of your weakness. (Ether 12:26)" Here the Lord tells Moroni to not worry about his weakness in writing and that the Lord's grace will cover his weakness. After hearing this Moroni says, "and I, Moroni, having heard these words, was comforted". The Lord did not say that he would make Moroni mighty in writing but that His grace would cover whatever Moroni lacked. In 2 Corinthians 12 Paul intorduces the idea that sometimes we are given "thorns in the flesh" to humble us so we don't become "exalted above measure" (vs. 7). As was brought up earlier, Paul asked God three times that his "thorn" would leave him and the Lord responded, "my grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness" (vs. 9). Again the Lord hears the plea from Paul to heal him but he chooses not to heal him and instead teaches Paul that His grace will cover what he is incapable of accomplishing due to his "thorn". Really isn't this saying that with God's grace we are capable of anything?
So how does this apply to the blind from John 9? One difference that I could observe is that the blind man did not go to God complaining of his disability. Christ came to him and choose to heal him instead of saying that whatever the man lacked, the grace of God would make up for. So what about the other blind men? Why were they born blind? Like I said before, I believe that they were born blind for the same reason. . . .that "the works of God should be made manifest in [them]". I believe that there is something holy about enduring trials or temptations whether it is physical, mental, emotional, etc. To endure a trial doesn't mean that we just sit around and wait for it pass all the while complaining about it. Enduring means that we are constantly striving to improve and learn from the situations we find ourselves in, even if sometimes a noticable improvement cannot be recognized. Elder D. Todd Christopherson said, "perhaps. . .we should pray for time and opportunity to work and strive and overcome. Surely the Lord smiles upon one who desires to come to judgement worthily, who resolutely day by day to replace weakness with strength. Real repentance, real change may require repeated attempts, but there is something refining and holy in such striving" (Ensign. Nov 2011 pg 39).
I think that as we strive to overcome, or even just endure, something that we gain a special appreciation for others that have to endure similar things. Elder Hugh B. Brown said, "If we banish hardship , we banish hardihood. One man's dissolution may be another's inspiration. The same exposure to pain, misery and sorrow that coursens the mind and callouses the soul of one may give to another the power of compassionate understanding and humility without which mere acheivement becomes primititve." This is not saying that we need trials and handicaps to develop compassionate understanding and humility. Christ had sympathy if not empathy for the bling man, lepers, widows, and the homeless even though he didn't go through all of those things during his mortality. That is like saying that we can learn certain things only by living a life of rebellion and then coming back to the fold. The problem with that logic is how would Christ know all things never having led that life of sin? Christ learned all things by the Spirit and by the atonement. He knows how hard it is to repent of sins; he knows how hard it is to have a child die; he knows how hard it is to suffer with a severe physical abnormality. And He knows these things through the Spirit.
I believe that there are certain things that the Lord wants certain people to learn in this life and I think that giving someone a particular trial is one of the ways that he accomplishes it. We certainly can learn it by the Spirit but if the Lord wants someone to develop compassion or empathy he can give them something to struggle with and in turn they can learn to have compassion for someone is a similar circumstance. Elder Neil A. Maxwell said, "there are some things allotted to us in our life that have been divinly fashioned according to our ability and capacity. When we see individuals coping with what seems to be a tragedy, and making of it an opportunity, then we begin to partake of the Savior's deep wisom in his response concerning the blind man." This takes us back to the blind man. What about developing this "compassionate understanding" is making God's work manifest in that person? God's "work and glory is to bring to pass the imortality and eternal life of man" (Moses 1:39). One way that this can make manifest the works of God is by helping the 'blind man' to become charitable. Having charity is one of the most important things that we can develop in this life and we can even think of it as being an essential attribute for exaltation (see 1 Cor 13 and Moroni 7). Having to deal with trials in this life can help a person develop the qualities necessary to live with God.
Having charity can be such a blessing to others as well. Christ blessed countless lifes simply by feeling love for the unfortunate people of the world. Christ, of course, sacrificed his life for all of us so that he would know how to succor his people, but what we sometimes overlook is that he spent his life doing the same, learning how to succor his people. Arthur R. Bassett said, "though the socially elite of his time sometimes sought him, he did not exclusively seek them. His interest seemed to be in the down-trodden, the unfortunates of his world. . . .I marveled at his great personal resource, at his strength demonstrated in his willingness to be stripped of all power, prestige or position so that he might more fully comprehend human experience at its humblest levels. . . .How appropriate that the Savior of mankind should understand life at its most basic level, that he should know intimately the soul of the suffering one". Christ humbled himself to understand the soul of the suffering one but sometimes the Lord feels so inclined to humble us to force us to learn a lesson that came so naturally to the Savior of mankind. When we have charity and love for others we can play that role that the Savior would play in people's lifes if he were here.
Another way that this principle can make God's work manifest is that when we have these limitations we feel as though it is impossible for us to be saved. It humbles us. It makes us realize that we are absolutely dependant on God for our own salvation. This is a beautiful and life-saving realization. We can only do so much and God will make up the rest. In Doc&Cov 121-122 we hear a lot the trials that Joseph Smith and the saints have been going through. The Lord does not say that in order for them to gain exaltation that they need to overcome all of these things but he says that if they endure their trials well, God shall exalt them on high. If we endure these sometimes "divinely fashioned" trials well then God's grace steps in, for God has already overcome all things. Is there a better example of God's work being made manifest than his grace being used by his children to overcome trials by enduring well?
-janson
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Maher-shalal-hash-baz vs. Immanuel
In the 7th and 8th chapter of Isaiah is one of the first prophesies of the Savior (about 734 B.C.). Jerusalem has always been a sought after place (see entire Old Testament and read a current newspaper). Besides it being a place that everyone thinks was promised to them by God, it is a port city and so if you wanted to travel to or from Europe, Africa or the middle east, you probably had to stop in Jerusalem. At this time Jerusalem was being threatened by Syria and Israel and the only alliance they had, and a shaky one at that, was with Assyria.
Ahaz, king of Judah, was troubled about the impending war upon his people and at the time the LORD sent Isaiah to comfort him (Isaiah 7:4). Isaiah tries to tell Ahaz that the LORD will intervene and that he has nothing to worry about other that the faith and righteousness of his people. In verses 10-13 Isaiah attempts to get Ahaz to ask for a sign (this does not seem like the type of sign that the Savior condemned in Matt 12:29 but rather it was a test of Ahaz's faith to see if he was confident in the LORD's promise and ablity to deliver his people) but Ahaz is very relectant to follow this council. Regardless of Ahaz's willingness to ask the LORD gives an incredible prophesy!
1) a young woman/virgin would conceive - vs. 14
2) she will have a son - vs. 14
3) she will call him Immanuel (God is with us) - vs. 14
4) before her son is able to tell right from wrong the land of Syria/Israel will be 'laid waste' - vs. 15-16
If you are thinking to yourself, "these verses sound familiar", then you would be correct. Not only did Nephi choose to quote these two chapters but Matthew uses some similar language when he is describing the prophesy of Christ to Joseph in Matt 1:21-23. The rest of shapter 7 talks about the specific destruction and humiliation the Judah's enemies would face in the coming years.
In the begining of chapter 8 we are told about a son that Isaiah has names Maher-shalal-hash-baz. This name has significance. In Hebrew it is translated to mean 'to speed to the spoil, he hasteneth the prey', this basically means that trouble is coming and coming fast. This phrase would be written on a large tablet to warn the people of Judah that an Assyrian attack was imminent! In verse 9 the LORD is further warning them of putting their trust in the arm of flesh (the Assyrians) and telling them to trust in God (2 Nephi 4:34). He says, 'gird yourselves and and ye shall be broken in peices', or in another translation, 'prepare for battle and be shattered'. The LORD didn't want Judah to even prepare for battle! He told them through Isaiah that he would intervene for them and he wanted them to believe that! Verses 12-13 teaches us to not fear what men can do to us but that we should fear God! People in the New Testament as a whole really seemed to never understand this concept very well. They were always looking out for their immediate needs and not looking forward to eternity. I guess if you boil it down that is our problem too. A lot of sins we commit and probably be traced back to us wanting something now and not having an eternal perspective (2 Nephi 9:39, Doc&Cov 101:37). The LORD then tells us what will happen to us if we don't put our trust in Him. It is a 5 step downward spiralin verse 15: stumble - falter on their faith; fall - commit sin; are broken - suffer the consequences of their sins; snared - enticed by Satan's temptations; and captured - turned over to Satan's buffetings.
One of my favorite parts of this prophesy is the smbolism behind the names. It's not fully understood if Maher-shalal-hash-baz's name was separate from Immanuel's or if it was the same person and they were just called by two different names. Maher-shalal-hash-baz is the promise of invasion. This should have a personal meaning to us all. With the fall of Adam and Eve we were assured that trails and temptations would come and we deal with them everyday of our lives. There are a few different ways that we can react to this fact. One way is to panic. To feel afraid and to run away from everything because we feel like we don't stand a chance. Another way is to just give in to the temptations that are guaranteed to come our way. The correct response is to look forward to the promise that we have all been given that a savior would come. I bet you can't find a place in The Book of Mormon that it talks about the fall and then doesn't, almost immediately, talk about our redemption. We will be redeemed! Immanuel! God is with us!
I imagine us in the place of Ahaz being told to not worry because the LORD will intervene. It seemed like Ahaz was skeptical of that the whole time, and how often do we fail to put our total faith and trust in God to guide us on the right path? Too often. I'd like to imagine that I would have great faith if I had Isaiah whispering Immanuel (God is with us) in my ear all of the time. It makes me almost jealous that Ahaz had that constant reminder to have faith. But do we not have that same promise!? The Book of Mormon is riddled with the phrase, ' if you keep the commandments you shall prosper in the land', and more recently/importantly we have our prophet and the apostles making specific promises to us each conference! If we feel like we need a constant reminder like Ahaz had in Isaiah then read the scriptures and the conference reports! We will find incredible promises for us in the words of God.
We will be tempted and tried and then we will be redeemed. Maher-shalal-hash-baz then Immanuel.
-janson
Ahaz, king of Judah, was troubled about the impending war upon his people and at the time the LORD sent Isaiah to comfort him (Isaiah 7:4). Isaiah tries to tell Ahaz that the LORD will intervene and that he has nothing to worry about other that the faith and righteousness of his people. In verses 10-13 Isaiah attempts to get Ahaz to ask for a sign (this does not seem like the type of sign that the Savior condemned in Matt 12:29 but rather it was a test of Ahaz's faith to see if he was confident in the LORD's promise and ablity to deliver his people) but Ahaz is very relectant to follow this council. Regardless of Ahaz's willingness to ask the LORD gives an incredible prophesy!
1) a young woman/virgin would conceive - vs. 14
2) she will have a son - vs. 14
3) she will call him Immanuel (God is with us) - vs. 14
4) before her son is able to tell right from wrong the land of Syria/Israel will be 'laid waste' - vs. 15-16
If you are thinking to yourself, "these verses sound familiar", then you would be correct. Not only did Nephi choose to quote these two chapters but Matthew uses some similar language when he is describing the prophesy of Christ to Joseph in Matt 1:21-23. The rest of shapter 7 talks about the specific destruction and humiliation the Judah's enemies would face in the coming years.
In the begining of chapter 8 we are told about a son that Isaiah has names Maher-shalal-hash-baz. This name has significance. In Hebrew it is translated to mean 'to speed to the spoil, he hasteneth the prey', this basically means that trouble is coming and coming fast. This phrase would be written on a large tablet to warn the people of Judah that an Assyrian attack was imminent! In verse 9 the LORD is further warning them of putting their trust in the arm of flesh (the Assyrians) and telling them to trust in God (2 Nephi 4:34). He says, 'gird yourselves and and ye shall be broken in peices', or in another translation, 'prepare for battle and be shattered'. The LORD didn't want Judah to even prepare for battle! He told them through Isaiah that he would intervene for them and he wanted them to believe that! Verses 12-13 teaches us to not fear what men can do to us but that we should fear God! People in the New Testament as a whole really seemed to never understand this concept very well. They were always looking out for their immediate needs and not looking forward to eternity. I guess if you boil it down that is our problem too. A lot of sins we commit and probably be traced back to us wanting something now and not having an eternal perspective (2 Nephi 9:39, Doc&Cov 101:37). The LORD then tells us what will happen to us if we don't put our trust in Him. It is a 5 step downward spiralin verse 15: stumble - falter on their faith; fall - commit sin; are broken - suffer the consequences of their sins; snared - enticed by Satan's temptations; and captured - turned over to Satan's buffetings.
One of my favorite parts of this prophesy is the smbolism behind the names. It's not fully understood if Maher-shalal-hash-baz's name was separate from Immanuel's or if it was the same person and they were just called by two different names. Maher-shalal-hash-baz is the promise of invasion. This should have a personal meaning to us all. With the fall of Adam and Eve we were assured that trails and temptations would come and we deal with them everyday of our lives. There are a few different ways that we can react to this fact. One way is to panic. To feel afraid and to run away from everything because we feel like we don't stand a chance. Another way is to just give in to the temptations that are guaranteed to come our way. The correct response is to look forward to the promise that we have all been given that a savior would come. I bet you can't find a place in The Book of Mormon that it talks about the fall and then doesn't, almost immediately, talk about our redemption. We will be redeemed! Immanuel! God is with us!
I imagine us in the place of Ahaz being told to not worry because the LORD will intervene. It seemed like Ahaz was skeptical of that the whole time, and how often do we fail to put our total faith and trust in God to guide us on the right path? Too often. I'd like to imagine that I would have great faith if I had Isaiah whispering Immanuel (God is with us) in my ear all of the time. It makes me almost jealous that Ahaz had that constant reminder to have faith. But do we not have that same promise!? The Book of Mormon is riddled with the phrase, ' if you keep the commandments you shall prosper in the land', and more recently/importantly we have our prophet and the apostles making specific promises to us each conference! If we feel like we need a constant reminder like Ahaz had in Isaiah then read the scriptures and the conference reports! We will find incredible promises for us in the words of God.
We will be tempted and tried and then we will be redeemed. Maher-shalal-hash-baz then Immanuel.
-janson
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Resurrection
I think that we can agree that there are two aspects to the atonement. First, we have the ability to change/repent and grow spiritually and second part being the physical part, or the resurrection. With the spiritual part of the atonement there is an accoutibility. We are accountable for our own sins (Article of Faith 1:2). If we dont repent there is no forgivness, so even though Christ has suffered for our sins it is our choice whether or not we want to 'use' it. I have always thought that the resurrection was a free gift that everyone received. But after further studyi believe that there is an accountability with the resurrection, and it is not totally free. In Alma 41 it talks about the resurrection being a restoration. Read Alma 41:2,10-14 (especially 12 and 13). In Alma 11:43 it says that "both limb and joint shall be restored to its proper and perfect frame, even as we are at this time". Verse 44 also mentions this - "as it is now".
"As concerning the resurrection, i will surely say that all men will come from the grave as they are laid down. Whether old or young; there will not be added unto their stature one cubit, neither taken from it; all will be raised by the power of God, having spirit in their bodies and not blood." - Joseph Smith. History of the Church, 4:555-556
The quote really just reaffirmes what Alma says.
"Of course, children who die do not grow in the grave. They will come forth with their bodies as they were laid down, and they will grow to the full stature of manhood after the resurrection, but all will have their bodies fully restored" - Joseph Fielding Smith. Doctrines of Salvation, 2:293
So, when do we get our perfect body?
"The same person, the same form and likeness will come forth even to the wounds in the flesh. Not that a person will always be marred by scars, wounds, deformities, defects or infirmities. They will be removed in their course, in their proper time, according to the merciful provendence of God." Joseph F. Smith. Gospel Doctrine, pg 30.
"Deformity will be removed; defects will be eliminated, and men and women shall attain to the perfection of their spirits. What else would satisfy the desire of the immortal soul? Would we be satisfied to be imperfect? No!.....From the day of resurrection, the body will develop until it reaches the full measure of the stature of the spirit." Ibid
This sounded a lot like Doc & Cov 88:28-29
When we are resurrected will we be governed by time though? From these next few quotes it sounds like it will be come sort of process not necessarily related to time.
"President Smith never intended to convey the thought that it would require weeks or months of time in order for the defects to be removed. These changes will come naturally, or course, but almost instantly. He did not intend to teach that the adult who loses a leg will come forth without that leguntil it can be grafted on after the resurrection. Rather, his body will come forth complete in every part. Deformities and the like will be corrected, if not immediately at the time of the united of the spirit and body, so soon thereafter that it will make no difference. Scars will be removed. No one will be bent or wrinkled. If the Savior could restore withered hands, eyes that had never had sight, in this mortal life, surely the Father will not permit bodies that are not physically perfect to come forth in the resurrection." Joseph Feilding Smith. Doctrines of Salvation, 2:292.
"This body will come forth in the resurrection. It will be free form all imperfections and scars and infirmities which came to it in mortality which were not self-inflicted. Would we have a right to expect a perfect body if we carelessly or intentionally damage it?" - Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 36
So, I think that if we abuse our body in any way (drinking, smoking, tattoos, over-eating) that there will have to be some sort of repentance process to gain a 'perfect' body. An immortal body and a perfect/Celestial body are different things. everyone will recieve a body but not a Celestial body unless we live the Celestial law. It's funny to even think that we can do whatever we want to our bodies and expect no consequence. That's not how it works with the spiritual aspect of the atonement and I dont think its how it works with the physical aspect of the atonement either.
-janson
"As concerning the resurrection, i will surely say that all men will come from the grave as they are laid down. Whether old or young; there will not be added unto their stature one cubit, neither taken from it; all will be raised by the power of God, having spirit in their bodies and not blood." - Joseph Smith. History of the Church, 4:555-556
The quote really just reaffirmes what Alma says.
"Of course, children who die do not grow in the grave. They will come forth with their bodies as they were laid down, and they will grow to the full stature of manhood after the resurrection, but all will have their bodies fully restored" - Joseph Fielding Smith. Doctrines of Salvation, 2:293
So, when do we get our perfect body?
"The same person, the same form and likeness will come forth even to the wounds in the flesh. Not that a person will always be marred by scars, wounds, deformities, defects or infirmities. They will be removed in their course, in their proper time, according to the merciful provendence of God." Joseph F. Smith. Gospel Doctrine, pg 30.
"Deformity will be removed; defects will be eliminated, and men and women shall attain to the perfection of their spirits. What else would satisfy the desire of the immortal soul? Would we be satisfied to be imperfect? No!.....From the day of resurrection, the body will develop until it reaches the full measure of the stature of the spirit." Ibid
This sounded a lot like Doc & Cov 88:28-29
When we are resurrected will we be governed by time though? From these next few quotes it sounds like it will be come sort of process not necessarily related to time.
"President Smith never intended to convey the thought that it would require weeks or months of time in order for the defects to be removed. These changes will come naturally, or course, but almost instantly. He did not intend to teach that the adult who loses a leg will come forth without that leguntil it can be grafted on after the resurrection. Rather, his body will come forth complete in every part. Deformities and the like will be corrected, if not immediately at the time of the united of the spirit and body, so soon thereafter that it will make no difference. Scars will be removed. No one will be bent or wrinkled. If the Savior could restore withered hands, eyes that had never had sight, in this mortal life, surely the Father will not permit bodies that are not physically perfect to come forth in the resurrection." Joseph Feilding Smith. Doctrines of Salvation, 2:292.
"This body will come forth in the resurrection. It will be free form all imperfections and scars and infirmities which came to it in mortality which were not self-inflicted. Would we have a right to expect a perfect body if we carelessly or intentionally damage it?" - Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 36
So, I think that if we abuse our body in any way (drinking, smoking, tattoos, over-eating) that there will have to be some sort of repentance process to gain a 'perfect' body. An immortal body and a perfect/Celestial body are different things. everyone will recieve a body but not a Celestial body unless we live the Celestial law. It's funny to even think that we can do whatever we want to our bodies and expect no consequence. That's not how it works with the spiritual aspect of the atonement and I dont think its how it works with the physical aspect of the atonement either.
-janson
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Satan's Plan
First of all, before you read on, what would you say that satans plan is?
This past fast Sunday there was a lady in the ward that bore her testimony about one of her sons who had strayed from the Gospel and she talked about all of her attempts to bring him back and how she just wanted to force the Gospel on her son then she said that she could see why Satan's plan (forcing people to choose right) would have been so tempting. I thought that was interesting, and then later that day i overheard someone consoling the same lady by saying something like, "you'll be suprised at how many chances every person will get to turn to Christ" and that she thought that many if not all people would be redeemed in someway. The woman was almost offended at her comment and said, "be careful, remember that it was Satans plan to save all of God's children".
These comments really caused me to think. First of all, the idea that Satan was trying to force people to choose right did not seem to fit his modus operandi here on Earth. Secondly, can we really trace the goal of saving all of God's children back to Lucifer!? I think that people wrongfully trace it back to Moses 4. In the first verse of the fourth chapter it quotes Satan as saying, "Behold, here I am send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it". I think that this statement is more reiterative rather that declarative. When I picture the Grand Council, I imagine Heavenly Father presenting His goal, saving all of His children, and saying, "who will volunteer for this assignment and how will you accomplish it". I don't think that Heavenly Father went into it saying, "alright, any ideas for what to do and how to do it?" I believe that it was a prerequisite, for any proposed plan, that all of God's children be saved. We know from Moses 1:39 that God's plan is to save His children. All of His Children. If we don't believe that it is God's ultimate goal to save all of us then I we undoubtedly have miss the boat.
"The eternal plan of the Lord, the gospel, is to save and exalt all of his children, from the first to the last man. Any other view is of a merciless, cold divinity. presenting an insurmountable handicap in life's efforts. True religion is marked by the doctrine that salvation, that is, unedning happiness and joy, is within the reach of all men and will be measurably reached by all. The gospel offers eternal hope to every soul, in spite of weakness and failure and folly." - John A. Widtsoe
So, what made Satan's plan so rebellious was not his desire to save all of God's children, but that he wanted all of the glory for doing it (Moses 4:1, Doc & Cov 29:36). It's also funny that if a person assumes that it was Satan's plan to save all mankind, what do they think Christ's plan was!? To save only a select few!?
To address the second issue, many members of the Church believe that Satan's idea was to force all of God's children to follow the commandments during mortality (Moses 4:3). So, if nobody sins, everbody makes it back to God's presence? Doctrinally, that is an impossiblity because we needed to be lifted above the state we were in in pre-mortality and in mortality...redemption is the only way and that wasn't part of Satan's plan. J. Reuban Clark Jr. said, "Satan's plan required one of two things: Either the compulsion of the mind, the spirit, the intelligence of man, or else saving man in sin." In other words, Satan's plan may not have been to force us to choose right. Instead, his plan may have been one of allowing people to do whatever they want without consequence or accountability. President Clark said elsewhere, " Lucifer is back where he was at the time of the Grand Council when he would have taken away the agency of man, save them in their sins, indeed there would have been no sin." 2 Nephi 2 - especially verse 13 refutes this possibility. According to Lehi, oppostion is what makes agency, progression and growth possible. If Satan's proposal was to do away with right and wrong, then it also must have consisted of altering or eliminating the eternal forces of oppostion and therefore change the dynamics of eternity. Satan was attempting become a law unto himself (Doc &Cov 88:34-35).
I also thought that if Lucifer's plan in pre-mortality was to take away our agency by making us believe there is no consequence for sin then wouldn't that be his same tactic now? I looked at three of the anti-christs in The Book of Mormon to see if their strategy was the same as Lucifers in the Grand Council.
Sherem - denied the necessity of a Savior. (Jacob 7:9)
Nehor - rejected the notion of accountability and consequences for our actions when he taught that "all mankind should be saved" regardless of their choices. (Alma 1:3-6)
Korihor - claimed that "there should be Christ" and that "whatsoever a man did was no crime". (Alma 30:12,17)
Elder Spencer J. Condie said, "There was an additional selfish flaw in Satan's plan. Because his plan allowed for no mistakes it required no atonement for sin, and thus he could save his own satanic skin from any suffering." Satan's plan could never produce the faith necessary to save us.
I hope this gives you a new view of Lucifer's plan then and now.
-janson
This past fast Sunday there was a lady in the ward that bore her testimony about one of her sons who had strayed from the Gospel and she talked about all of her attempts to bring him back and how she just wanted to force the Gospel on her son then she said that she could see why Satan's plan (forcing people to choose right) would have been so tempting. I thought that was interesting, and then later that day i overheard someone consoling the same lady by saying something like, "you'll be suprised at how many chances every person will get to turn to Christ" and that she thought that many if not all people would be redeemed in someway. The woman was almost offended at her comment and said, "be careful, remember that it was Satans plan to save all of God's children".
These comments really caused me to think. First of all, the idea that Satan was trying to force people to choose right did not seem to fit his modus operandi here on Earth. Secondly, can we really trace the goal of saving all of God's children back to Lucifer!? I think that people wrongfully trace it back to Moses 4. In the first verse of the fourth chapter it quotes Satan as saying, "Behold, here I am send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it". I think that this statement is more reiterative rather that declarative. When I picture the Grand Council, I imagine Heavenly Father presenting His goal, saving all of His children, and saying, "who will volunteer for this assignment and how will you accomplish it". I don't think that Heavenly Father went into it saying, "alright, any ideas for what to do and how to do it?" I believe that it was a prerequisite, for any proposed plan, that all of God's children be saved. We know from Moses 1:39 that God's plan is to save His children. All of His Children. If we don't believe that it is God's ultimate goal to save all of us then I we undoubtedly have miss the boat.
"The eternal plan of the Lord, the gospel, is to save and exalt all of his children, from the first to the last man. Any other view is of a merciless, cold divinity. presenting an insurmountable handicap in life's efforts. True religion is marked by the doctrine that salvation, that is, unedning happiness and joy, is within the reach of all men and will be measurably reached by all. The gospel offers eternal hope to every soul, in spite of weakness and failure and folly." - John A. Widtsoe
So, what made Satan's plan so rebellious was not his desire to save all of God's children, but that he wanted all of the glory for doing it (Moses 4:1, Doc & Cov 29:36). It's also funny that if a person assumes that it was Satan's plan to save all mankind, what do they think Christ's plan was!? To save only a select few!?
To address the second issue, many members of the Church believe that Satan's idea was to force all of God's children to follow the commandments during mortality (Moses 4:3). So, if nobody sins, everbody makes it back to God's presence? Doctrinally, that is an impossiblity because we needed to be lifted above the state we were in in pre-mortality and in mortality...redemption is the only way and that wasn't part of Satan's plan. J. Reuban Clark Jr. said, "Satan's plan required one of two things: Either the compulsion of the mind, the spirit, the intelligence of man, or else saving man in sin." In other words, Satan's plan may not have been to force us to choose right. Instead, his plan may have been one of allowing people to do whatever they want without consequence or accountability. President Clark said elsewhere, " Lucifer is back where he was at the time of the Grand Council when he would have taken away the agency of man, save them in their sins, indeed there would have been no sin." 2 Nephi 2 - especially verse 13 refutes this possibility. According to Lehi, oppostion is what makes agency, progression and growth possible. If Satan's proposal was to do away with right and wrong, then it also must have consisted of altering or eliminating the eternal forces of oppostion and therefore change the dynamics of eternity. Satan was attempting become a law unto himself (Doc &Cov 88:34-35).
I also thought that if Lucifer's plan in pre-mortality was to take away our agency by making us believe there is no consequence for sin then wouldn't that be his same tactic now? I looked at three of the anti-christs in The Book of Mormon to see if their strategy was the same as Lucifers in the Grand Council.
Sherem - denied the necessity of a Savior. (Jacob 7:9)
Nehor - rejected the notion of accountability and consequences for our actions when he taught that "all mankind should be saved" regardless of their choices. (Alma 1:3-6)
Korihor - claimed that "there should be Christ" and that "whatsoever a man did was no crime". (Alma 30:12,17)
Elder Spencer J. Condie said, "There was an additional selfish flaw in Satan's plan. Because his plan allowed for no mistakes it required no atonement for sin, and thus he could save his own satanic skin from any suffering." Satan's plan could never produce the faith necessary to save us.
I hope this gives you a new view of Lucifer's plan then and now.
-janson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)