How is the Holy Ghost always to be with each of us when there are many of us?

You may have heard someone ask this question, or you may have asked it yourself--

"How can each member always have the Holy Ghost to be with them when there are so many members of the church?"

This is a good question, and there are probably things the Holy Ghost can do as a spirit that we don’t know much about, and I think we need more revelation on how it is done, but I can share a metaphor that has satisfied me so far so that I have faith that he is with worthy members, each and all.

When I was in high school, we got to go see a laser light show.  At the beginning, they showed us a single green dot on the screen and explained this was the only laser they used.  They moved the dot back and forth slowly in a line, then faster and faster until the path of the dot blurred together and appeared to become a solid line.  To our perception that single dot was everywhere on the line at once.  Then they took that line and began to form it into all kinds of curving shapes and designs that morphed from one thing to the next, and the whole show consisted of this kind of thing set to music.  As I considered that all of that laser animation was made of a green dot moving faster than my eye could follow, my brain just about exploded.

http://karenducey.photoshelter.com/gallery/Laser-Lights-by-John-Borcherding/G00005dL26uXRWAc/

Perhaps the Holy Ghost moves among us faster than we can detect.  Yes, this is speculation, and the mechanics by which the Holy Ghost can be simultaneously with us may be something different, but this metaphor helps me have faith that the promise about having the presence of the Holy Ghost can be fulfilled.  If a laser dot can seem to be everywhere in a line, it’s definitely a cinch for the Holy Ghost to be everywhere the members are.

KJV versus JST: All Things Delivered to the Son, Luke 10:22

-->

KJV:

All things are delivered to me of my Father:

and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father;

and who the Father is, but the Son,

and he to whom the Son will reveal him. (Luke 10:22)

JST:

All things are delivered to me of my Father:

and no man knoweth that the Son is the Father,

and the Father is the Son,

but him to whom the Son will reveal it. (JST Luke 10:22)

Of course we can see that the KJV is nonsensical; the Father is not the only one to know who the Son is (otherwise how could we ever have a testimony that Jesus was the Christ?).

But then the JST seems to open a huge can of worms for Latter-day Saints because it seems to go back to the sectarian notion that the Father and the Son are one and the same person.  Yet we know they are separate, distinct beings because of the First Vision, so this bit about them being each other can’t be literal.

So in what sense are we to understand it?  The first part of the verse gives a clue. “All things are delivered to me of my Father.”  It seems to speak of authority handed over to the Son, such that the Son acts like the Father while the Father takes second place for a while like a son would.  This is confirmed by Joseph Smith’s account of the First Vision in which He saw the Father point to Jesus and say, “This is my beloved Son; hear him,” and Jesus took over from there.  It is a concept we’ve given the name “divine investiture of authority.”

Does this happen because Heavenly Father is lazy or weak?  No, of course not.  I think maybe it was part of giving Jesus the chance to act on the Father’s behalf.  There’s no chance to use authority if the Father uses it all the time and does everything Himself.  I suppose the Father gets pleasure out of seeing His Beloved lead in the same righteous way He would.  I don’t think the Father is threatened by His Son wielding His power because they are one in purpose.

The Old and New Baptismal Prayers

And when he [Alma] had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world. (Mosiah 18:13)

These words are different from the baptismal prayer that we say today, but I think we can benefit by studying the difference between this one and our current one.

Alma’s baptismal prayer is valuable to know about because it shows that the covenant of baptism used to be explicitly stated during the prayer. The terms of the covenant are simple.

We:

• serve God until our mortal life ends,

and He will:

• pour out His Spirit upon us and
• grants us eternal life through the redemption of Christ.

We quote Mosiah 18:8-10 with all that stuff about bearing each other’s burdens, mourning with the sad, standing as a witness of God, etc. because it makes it easier to see what kinds of specific acts are meant by the phrase “serving God.” (I don't think that list was meant to be an all-inclusive list, but rather a list of examples.)

It is not known whether the prayer Alma used was a traditional one passed down over generations, but the one we use now is similar to another one in the Book of Mormon that was given by Christ to the Nephites after His resurrection.

23 Verily I say unto you, that whoso repenteth of his sins through your words, and desireth to be baptized in my name, on this wise shall ye baptize them—Behold, ye shall go down and stand in the water, and in my name shall ye baptize them.
24 And now behold, these are the words which ye shall say, calling them by name, saying:
25 Having authority given me of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
26 And then shall ye immerse them in the water, and come forth again out of the water.
27 And after this manner shall ye baptize in my name; for behold, verily I say unto you, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one; and I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one. (3 Nephi 11:23-27)

The baptismal prayer that Jesus gave is much shorter (and thus much more easily memorized). It covers the authority of the baptizer, where that authority comes from, what the act is, and to whom one is being baptized. Since it doesn't explicitly state the covenant, it is assumed that the baptized person understands they are participating in a covenantal act, whereas in Alma's baptismal prayer, baptism is referred to as a testimony that a covenant has already been made with God earlier. (Innnnnteresting...)

The baptismal prayer we use today is slightly different from the one Jesus gave to the Nephites, but in most particulars it is the same. The one we use today was still revealed from Jesus, but it was given to Joseph Smith.

The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name: Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. (Doctrine and Covenants 20:73)

Here the words were changed from "having authority from" to "having been commissioned of." To me, this adds a layer of meaning. "Having authority from" to me evokes the idea of someone being given a badge to act, like police officers. "Having been commissioned" adds the idea of an artist who is given a commission to do a particular work for someone. This is conveys how people who baptize do it under presiding authority that emanates up the chain of priesthood all the way to Jesus Christ.

Something that is interesting about the newer Nephite baptismal prayer is that Jesus says it is in His name, but when He gives it, He says, “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” It is odd that the specific name of Jesus Christ is not in that list, and instead He is “the Son.” I wondered why. After thinking about it for a while, it seemed to me that “the Son” was being made into a name just as important as the name “Jesus Christ.” (This reminded me of the temple.) Perhaps it is used in the baptism prayer to subtly reinforce the principle that baptism is a rebirth to become a son (or daughter) of God and also to show that Jesus submitted to be baptized as an example.

It is notable that Jesus explains to the Nephites why the Father and the Holy Ghost are included in the “in the name of” clause of the prayer. He says it is because He is one with the Father. What a neat thing it would be to be one and united like that in purpose, will, and action with the Godhead! Ultimately that is what we’re aiming for—to return to be united with them in heaven. We won’t be able to stay unless we also become united with their purpose, will, and action. So maybe the naming of all three members of the Godhead is a promise of eternal life with them. Being born again to "sonship" by baptism is the first step to becoming re-united with them.

Alma's baptismal prayer also mentions all members of the Godhead, but they are scattered throughout. The authority comes from “Almighty God,” which I assume must be the Father, and the Spirit of the Lord is promised, and the redemption of Christ is mentioned as the way to eternal life. The newer baptismal prayer unites the members of the Godhead into one clause. Could this be another way of expressing how they are united in purpose?

In Alma's baptismal prayer, the authority comes from "Almighty God," but in the new prayer, the authority and commission is from Jesus Christ. I think this is meant to show how Christ had ascended up and gained the power to draw all men unto Him.

Is there anything that you notice about the difference between the baptismal prayers? What do you learn from those difference?