Some thoughts on Lazarus’ rising from the dead and awkwardness in the sacred

43 And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.

44 And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with graveclothes: and his face was bound about with a napkin. Jesus saith unto them, Loose him, and let him go. (John 11:43-44)

We often envision this scene with Lazarus walking out of the grave doorway, but the reality was probably a lot weirder.

The text says Lazarus was bound hand and foot, which probably means his feet were wrapped tight together and his hands were wrapped tight to his body. Also his face was covered up. It’s really hard to move under those conditions. (How would you have done it if you were wrapped up tight like a mummy?)

How did he get out? Lazarus probably had to roll and inch around to exit the cave where he’d been put. It probably looked really strange, like an enormous cloth-covered inch worm thrashing around. (It may have even looked a little frightening too.) Jesus had to tell people to loose Lazarus so he could move better.

When we read this story, it reads like a dramatic and spiritual event, but it may have looked strange or silly, or weird, or scary for a small period to those who saw it.

I think this is probably true more often than we realize. We may experience miracles that seem strange, silly, weird, or even scary when we’re going through them, but which sound a lot better in the telling. 

We’re used to slick, carefully-edited media, with nothing incongruous or out of place. We’re used to church videos that deliberately infuse the sacred into the smallest gestures to achieve a polished, shiny view of holiness. And yet, we love amateur videos that show the touch of “awkward” because they are so human and genuine. There’s love and truth there.

Maybe we need to remember that in real life, there is awkward in the sacred, and the sacred in the awkward.  Let’s learn to find gratitude for that in our lives. It can heal tendencies toward perfectionism.

Some of Jesus’s Interesting Instructions to the Twelve about Missionary Work

In Matthew 10, Jesus gives His disciples instructions about missionary work. I found v26-28 particularly interesting this time through.

26 Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known.

27 What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light: and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the housetops. (Matt. 10:26-27)

Why emphasize this thing about secrets being revealed? And how is that supposed to help them with their missionary work?

I realized this was a promise that Heavenly Father would reveal to them (the disciples) ahead of time secret things about their listeners. They were to talk about those things and teach principles about those things. That divinely-given knowledge was to be a sign to their hearers that Heavenly Father knew them intimately and that what they were hearing was the truth.

We see a specimen of this in the story of the woman at the well. Jesus told her, “thou has had five husbands, and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband…” (John 4:18).

How would these things be revealed?

·      “what I tell you in darkness” – This was an oblique reference to dreams. Heavenly Father can use dreams to reveal things to His disciples.

·      “what ye hear in the ear” – This is an oblique reference to the still, small voice of the Spirit, which can reveal things as well.

Heavenly Father knows all the details of our lives. He can reveal those things to His servants when He deems it will bring us closer to Him and help us repent.

That Good Part

Here we have some of Lehi’s last words to his sons:

I have spoken these few words unto you all, my sons, in the last days of my probation; and I have chosen the good part, according to the words of the prophet. And I have none other object save it be the everlasting welfare of your souls. (2 Ne. 2:30)

I like when Lehi says, “I have chosen the good part, according to the words of the prophet.” I don’t think we have the prophet’s words he was referring to, but it is interesting that we do have the words of Jesus to Martha as Mary heard him and Martha was cumbered with much serving—“ Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her” (Luke 10:42). It could be that Jesus was quoting the same prophet Lehi was, and we just don’t have that source text anymore.

Beside those textual things, it also makes you think about choices. When we think about our choices and priorities in life, can we say that we are choosing that good part? Are there any good parts we leave on the table, or are there bad parts we could let go of to make room for more good parts? Are there useless things we could get rid of?

I’m grateful for the Atonement of Christ that changes me so that I can choose the good parts and let go of the bad parts. He makes us free to do that so we aren’t stuck. He makes it possible for us to fight the natural man or woman and win.

How Jesus handles a question about His authority

27 ¶ And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders,

28 And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?

29 And Jesus answered and said unto them, I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.

30 The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me.

31 And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then did ye not believe him?

32 But if we shall say, Of men; they feared the people: for all men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed.

33 And they answered and said unto Jesus, We cannot tell. And Jesus answering saith unto them, Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things. (Mark 11:27-33)

Many commentators like to go into great depth about the trap laid for Jesus in their question. They also usually point to Jesus’s counter-question as a brilliant defense by which He puts them all in their place.

Yet something about it struck me as odd. I began to wonder what we are supposed to learn from this incident that can help us. Are we to learn that Jesus can unequivocally win arguments and devastate the opposition? Is winning the argument His goal?  Does this help us in our conversations about the gospel? 

It seems to me that when faced with a question about His authority, Jesus’s major goal would be persuading someone to recognize His power to redeem. The question in His mind would be, If I tell you, will you acknowledge my authority and allow me to save you? He might want to know if they were asking sincerely or out of bad faith. Because He wants to save everyone, He has to assume sincerity until they prove bad faith. 

He asks a question to learn from them. I see this incident as instance in which Christ demonstrated His meekness and lowliness of heart. He didn’t ask, “Why do you want to know?” He asked whether they thought John’s baptism was from heaven or of men. His question is meant to discern their level of sincerity and belief. He knew their ability to respond positively to a prophet in their day would determine their ability to respond to the Messiah. 

It is interesting that the reasoning of the chief priests, scribes, and elders was captured in the record in verses 31-32. (As an exercise, just try reading the account without that reasoning inserted, and you’ll see how it might have looked to everyone else who wasn’t privy to the motivation coloring the answer of those leaders.)

Their reasoning indicates that they thought His question was a trap. This was pure projection on their part. They thought Jesus was doing to them what they were trying to do to Him. If they had been sincere, they might have seen His question for what it really was. And I hardly think they’d want such a blatantly self-interested politically-obsessed thought process to get about, but someone overheard, and now it is memorialized for all time. 

Since they claimed they couldn’t tell whether John’s baptism was from heaven or men, Jesus knew then that they’d be similarly obtuse in public about Jesus’s authority. He probably said to Himself, I can’t do anything with people who ‘can’t tell,’ when it’s so obvious, so I guess I can’t tell them anything about my authority either because they won’t get it. And He wouldn’t push His authority on them; He wouldn’t want to condemn them so quickly. He’d want to give them more time in hopes that He could save them later.

One thing I learn from this incident is that Jesus chooses whether to answer a question based upon the receptiveness of the hearer. Even though those leaders thought they were saving face by refusing to commit, they actually disqualified themselves from receiving a real answer. Seeming wishy-washy or obtuse marked them as having spiritual problems, even if they concealed for a time that their problem was outright hostility. It is particularly sad that these were chief priests, scribes, and elders, men who should have been most spiritually mature and receptive.

Jesus’s test question is still a good one for today. How we respond to a modern prophet determines how receptive we’d be to Jesus Himself. If we ‘can’t tell’ if a modern prophet is from God, when his goodness has been demonstrated over years, then our ability to receive revelation is diminished. On the positive side, if we respond to the modern prophet and apostles, we will be receptive to revelation and receptive to Jesus Himself.

I also think that Jesus’s willingness to take time and ask questions of the questioner to gauge where they were at is a good pattern to follow in gospel conversations. If people ask us questions about the church or the gospel, maybe it would be wise to first take time to ask them questions about what experiences have brought them to us or what they believe so that we can better meet them where they are spiritually.

A Preview of One of the Lord’s Servants

In 3 Nephi 20, Jesus gives a lot of prophecy of things to come—of the establishment of the New Jerusalem, of the Lord’s people being given the land of Jerusalem.

Then there is something else about the Lord’s servant in these days.

43 Behold, my servant shall deal prudently; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high.

44 As many were astonished at thee—his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men—

45 So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him, for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.

46 Verily, verily, I say unto you, all these things shall surely come, even as the Father hath commanded me. Then shall this covenant which the Father hath covenanted with his people be fulfilled; and then shall Jerusalem be inhabited again with my people, and it shall be the land of their inheritance. (3 Nephi 20:43-46)

I had always thought the marred servant was Jesus Christ, because of the crucifixion and all that. After all, this comes from a quotation of Isaiah 52:13-15, and we are used to being told to read these things with our testimony of Christ. But was Jesus’s face and body really marred more than any man? Yes, He suffered, but we don’t think of him as being disfigured like “marred” seems to imply.     Or, I had thought it represented Joseph Smith because of how our church extolls him to such an extent that his name is like a gem to the sanctified. But was Joseph Smith marred or disfigured? No.

It is my personal opinion (non-official, not doctrine) that these verses foretell a particular prophet to come.*  We are told his visage is so marred, more than any man, and that indicates this is no handsome figure of masculinity. He is going to have an ugly mug. His form is marred too—so he may be badly handicapped, perhaps missing limbs, perhaps suffering from some disfiguring syndrome. But he will be the Lord’s servant!

This man is the Lord’s servant, and he leads with the Spirit, dealing prudently and wisely, and he will be highly extolled for that. And when he meets with kings and presidents, they will be absolutely shocked. I speculate this shock arises from seeing that this servant has come to such prominence with his physical disadvantages. They will realize the Lord can work through even the weak. They will say to themselves, There is no way this man has gotten anywhere on his looks because he doesn’t have any. And charm isn’t enough, with his condition. And he doesn’t have the physical power either.

In short, this servant of God will be able sprinkle (or gather) many nations because of how the Lord works through him to touch others, in part through his physical deficits. In a world of “survival of the fittest,” the Lord can take his servants from among the weakest to demonstrate His power. While men tend to choose leaders among the handsome and strong, disfigurement makes this servant of the Lord all the more distinctive. The Lord’s choice demands that people look deeper than the surface. Even if this servant’s authority is questioned, his condition will call forth compassion in others’ hearts, softening them, allowing them to feel the Holy Ghost.

Why does the Lord share this information? Perhaps it prepares us to receive this servant. Perhaps it is to encourage the servant in moments of discouragement. Perhaps it is a sign we can look forward to that will tell us how close the Lord’s covenants are to fulfillment.

At any rate, if we can’t receive and obey the Lord’s servants now, we won’t be ready for the Lord’s future servants.

So, if we keep a look-out for a man who is more handicapped or ugly or disfigured than you’d ever expect a man to be, be sure to sustain the prophets and apostles of today.

*Prophets who are prophesied of are extra special. Remember Jesus said John the Baptist was “much more than a prophet” because John was the one Isaiah spoke of as the voice of one crying in the wilderness.

Big problems among the Scribes, as Jesus points out

After Jesus answers some questions meant to entrap him, we get this bit:

45 ¶ Then in the audience of all the people he said unto his disciples,

46 Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;

47 Which devour widows’ houses, and for a shew make long prayers: the same shall receive greater damnation. (Luke 20:45-47)

What exactly is Jesus saying here?

He’s warning the disciples to beware of the scribes who do certain things. It seems to me He’s not telling the disciples to shun them necessarily, but to beware of becoming like them.

So what exactly is wrong with this behavior, and are there modern equivalents that must be avoided?

They desire to walk in long robes – Long robes are not easy to move in, and they get dirty easy. I get the impression that long robes were a sign of status, and hard work was not done in them. People in long robes don’t gird up their loins to serve others; they are usually the ones being served. The modern equivalent might be people who desire to wear suits all day.

They love greetings in the markets – This seems pretty benign at first. Who doesn’t love to run into friends at the market? The problem, I think, is when it becomes a point of pride, when one preens over one’s connectedness and how all those greetings by all one’s acquaintances lead one to say, “Look how important I am! Everyone knows me and loves me! Even people who don’t know me can see I must be special because of all the people who greet me!” It is hard to focus on others, when others are so focused on you.

They love the highest seats in the synagogues and the chief rooms at feasts – High seats in the synagogue are probably leadership seats. They love the best places and aspire to importance and status. They love the visibility more than the opportunity to serve.

They devour widows’ houses – Here’s a sad thing. These scribes will visit widows (thinking they are charitably bestowing their attention and encouraging presence) and then the widows are obligated by the rules of hospitality to feed them a big fancy dinner, so the widows have to spend beyond their means to do it, and of course, those scribes have to do justice to the spread, so they eat it all, and thus the widow is far worse off financially after the scribe’s visit than she was before. The scribe is devouring her house. And she lives at poverty level, anyway, so it is all very bad for her finances. At bottom, this is a lack of awareness of how hospitality is going to affect one’s host. It is inconsiderate, and a lack of charity. If these scribes had any real charity, they would host the widow and not obligate the widow to host them. Or they’d bring a nice big present of grain or something to make up for the burden of their visit.

For a show, they make long prayers – Their prayers aren’t doing them any good if it just a show to impress other people. If there is no real desire or repentance or gratitude behind the words, the prayers mean nothing.

The thing that is the greatest warning is that Jesus says, “the same shall receive the greater damnation.” To me, this is saying these characteristics get disciples more spiritually stuck and stop progression more than some others.

To summarize:

Long robes >> status clothing that precludes service and work

Loving greetings >> status and such connectedness that prevents one from forgetting oneself and focusing on others

Loving high seats and the best rooms at feasts >> obsessed with public shows of status at religious events and gatherings. Preoccupation with position and visibility more than opportunities for service and ministering.

Devouring widow’s houses >> Lack of consideration and charity for those who really need it. Making a show of attention that doesn’t really help and leaves the widow worse off afterward.

Making long prayers for show >> Desire to look holy has overcome any desire to actually be holy.

So, the pattern I see here is that status and show for these scribes has become the most important thing, such that they completely miss the increased opportunities for service and charity and ministering that come with a leadership position. They are stopped in their spiritual progress from becoming more like Christ.

Can we draw any conclusions from what one should do instead?

1)    Wear clothes you can help people in

2)    Focus on others and appreciate the humility of anonymity

3)    Care more for the opportunities to serve than position, status, or visibility

4)    Find ways to give notice and charity without taxing others’ resources to give hospitality

5)    Pray with sincerity

These things tell us that Jesus was strongly aware that if leaders weren’t careful, some of the earthly advantages of status created awful spiritual disadvantages with eternal negative consequences. He wanted His disciples to be aware of those problems and do all they could to avoid those behaviors and attitudes so that their position could be a real blessing to them and to all those around them.

The disciples reason who should be the greatest

Then there arose a reasoning among them, which of them should be greatest. (Luke 9:46)

The way the scriptures talk about this incident we learn from Jesus’s response that it was kind of an egotistical thing for them to do to reason who of them should be greatest.  But I suppose if we were to think about it, we’d probably see it came out of a different place than ego and then turned into ego.

I bet that it first came out of the consciousness of the amazing things Jesus did and their knowledge that He was the Messiah, the anointed one.  From this they would begin to ponder the high privileged role they each filled in being so close to Him, being of that inner circle.   They knew Jesus was going to be remembered and I suppose they wondered if any of them would be remembered too.  This would cause them to ponder which of them deserved to be remembered for being the greatest, next to Jesus of course.

This is when Jesus tells them that the greatest will be the least, or the servant of all.  I guess one shouldn’t spend time thinking about one’s legacy, but rather concentrating on finding ways to be of service to others.

Jesus on children of prophet-killers

29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.

31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.

32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. (Matt 23:29-32)

In Matthew 23 Jesus delivers a list of woes to the scribes and pharisees for the hypocrisy and towards the end, he pronounces this line “ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.” But it isn’t quite clear why it applied so well, especially when He also points out how they seem to distance themselves from the people who killed the prophets before.

How do they distance themselves?  First they say, “If we had been in the days of our fathers..”  This shows they knew their genealogy.  They knew their ancestors had been part of mob action or individual persecution or tyrannical oppression or injustice against prophets and righteous mean.

Then they say, “…we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.”  The fact that the descendants now distanced themselves from the acts of their ancestors shows that at some point along the way the message of the prophets and the cause of the righteous who had suffered had finally been publicly vindicated.  In order to try to show they had learned from it, the people made a public show of honoring those dead worthies. 

However, by claiming they would not have partaken of the blood of the prophets, they demonstrated they did not know the nature of the circumstances and the pressures surrounding those prophets and righteous people when they were alive.  When pressures are that great that prophets and righteous are killed for their beliefs and message, those less steadfast change to the side of the persecutors out of self-preservation. 

Further, their distancing statements were done solely for the praise of the world, which is a position that is opposite that which prophets and righteous people have to take.  So the reality is that all statements to the contrary, these people would have partaken in the blood of the prophets to continue receiving the praise of the world.  Once the world turned against the current prophets and Christ, these people would too, in order to preserve that general good opinion they craved.

The consequences of this are terrible:

33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

34 ¶Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.  (Matt 23:33-36)

While this isn’t the most cheerful of messages, I think it helps us today to understand how important it is to be independent of the praise of the world.  I appreciate how Jesus is clear about the consequences and does not mince words.

Jesus on the Tenuous Satisfaction of Parenting

27 ¶And it came to pass, as he [Jesus] spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked.

28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it. (Luke 11:27-28)

What is going on here?  Why is this woman praising the womb that bore Jesus and the breasts that suckled Him? 

I think this must have been her way of saying, “If you are so wonderful, your mother must have been amazing, and she must be one of the happiest of women to see how you turned out.”

Jesus briefly acknowledges that yes, His mother is blessed, but He seems to want to emphasize the blessed state of those that hear and obey God’s words.

I was thinking about this and I realized that Jesus knew that not all mothers would have the blessedness of seeing their children be good.  Some would ache over disobedient children.  Some women wouldn’t get to have children at all.  The blessedness of having good children is unstable because after all the teaching and nurturing, it is dependent upon a child’s agency. 

On the other hand, blessedness that comes from one’s own good choices and one’s own agency is more in one’s own control.

Jesus wasn’t denying the satisfaction from raising children who make good choices, but He wanted mothers (and fathers) to remember their own good choices could bring them happiness and they had control over that.

I hope I can remember that when I have children.

Jesus’s charged Nazareth sermon

16¶ And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.
17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
20 And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
21 And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.
22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph’s son?
23 And he said unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this proverb, Physician, heal thyself: whatsoever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also here in thy country.
24 And he said, Verily I say unto you, No prophet is accepted in his own country.
25 But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land;
26 But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow.
27 And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian.
28 And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath,
29 And rose up, and thrust him out of the city, and led him unto the brow of the hill whereon their city was built, that they might cast him down headlong.
30 But he passing through the midst of them went his way,
31 And came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath days. (Luke 4:16-31)

Here are some questions I have about this story that I have tried to answer for myself.

Why does Jesus start with the Isaiah scripture? I think it is because it announces who He is and what He can do for the people. I notice that verse 22 says that “all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth.” This makes me think that He further expounded on the scriptures and His role to the people.

Why do the people say “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” It seems to me that they wonder what power Jesus has to fulfill the scripture that He says is about Himself. They know His upbringing, so they think He is Joseph’s son, not God’s Son. If they believed He was God’s Son, they would not doubt that He could do what He said. They also take refuge in a strategy (which happens to be the favorite strategy of all anti-Christs), which is to find fault with (or manufacture fault against) the messenger as an excuse to ignore the message.

Jesus responds to this in kind of a strange way. He doesn’t make a direct defense based on argument; He makes a prediction about what they are going to say to Him in the future. Why does Jesus predict what they will say to Him? First, His prophecy is a demonstration that He is who He says He is. (Do they notice this or not? I don't know.) Second, I think He understood the spiritual implications of their doubting question and He was pointing out that if they couldn’t grasp that little bit about His divinity, it would get in the way of them understanding the power that He would demonstrate so they would make all kinds of inaccurate assumptions about what He would do. He gives them a sample of two inaccurate assumptions they would make:

• “Physician, heal thyself” - The people would think that Jesus was just a powerful healer, rather than understanding that He was using the priesthood power of God that came as part of His divine identity as Son of God. They would also see Him becoming subject to all manner of diseases of mortality and they would think that He should just use His healing abilities to benefit Himself. (If Jesus were just a healer, He could, but because He used the power of God, He wouldn’t use it in a self-serving way because the power of God can only be controlled or handled in principles of righteousness.)
• “whatsoever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also here in thy country” - The people would think Jesus was some sort of magician who did miracles regardless of need or the faith of others. It shows they would not be willing to believe what good they heard about His works or what they knew of His early life and character. They would demand to see it themselves. They expected that being of His homeland should give them privileges above all others.

Why does Jesus refer to the stories of the non-Israelites? Is this an expansion on proclaiming liberty to the captive? It seems no. They already disbelieved that part, so He couldn’t go any farther. It seems it is a warning about unbelief. He cites two important examples from the Old Testament to illustrate. He points out that no widows in Israel were miraculously fed during a famine, only a widow of Sidon. (He was highlighting how Israelite widows’ unbelief in Elijah hurt them and kept them from being fed.) He points out that no Israelite lepers were healed, only a Syrian. (He was highlighting how Israelite lepers’ unbelief in Eliseus hurt them and prevented them from being cleansed.) Jesus cites these examples* to teach that just like belief in the living prophets was required for feeding and cleansing healing, belief in Jesus was necessary to be healed, delivered, to see, be liberated, and taught, according to Isaiah's prophecy. If they didn’t believe in Him, none of them would enjoy any of those miracles and they would stay in captivity.

What does this story teach us? In it Jesus seems to make it pretty clear that if we do not believe Jesus Christ can save us, we will not be saved, even if we are a member of the church. (This charged message had to have been exactly what angered the hidebound Nazareth people to the point that they tried to kill Jesus.)

* Jesus’s perspective of these stories and the lesson He drew from them also gives us an insight into His character and spiritual penetration. Think of how many times He must have heard those stories read in the synagogue and discussed in a certain way. Usually when those stories are discussed in our Sunday school classes, we focus exclusively on the people who were the beneficiaries of those miracles. But it seems that Jesus also thought very carefully about those who DIDN’T experience those miracles (yet needed them badly) and realized that the stories were an indictment on the Israelites for unbelief just as much as they were instructive about the belief of those who were blessed by the miracles. He also must have decided that the only thing that could make those stories truly applicable to the lives of the people in His day was if those miracles were within reach of anyone who would believe. Otherwise, why talk about them over and over again if they are only for a chosen few? I think it is the same for us today. If we really believe that the priesthood power is the same power that Jesus has, then we may be healed of all manner of diseases and be cleansed from our sins and escape captivity. We may enjoy the same miracles manifested to believers in all ages of the world.