God will destroy the wisdom of the wise

18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.

20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

29 That no flesh should glory in his presence. (1 Cor. 1:18-29)

Paul recognized that preaching salvation through Christ and the testimony thereof did not fit with the convincing methods of rhetoric and logic of the Greeks in his day. The Greeks required something logical, and the Jews required a convincing miracle (a sign).  All Paul could do was testify and allow the Spirit to work on his hearers.    Naturally, those looking for logic or miracles would not accept that, but those who could recognize the witness of the Spirit and accept it, would be saved.

I love that Paul calls this “the foolishness of God” and “the weakness of God” that is “stronger than men.”  With the Spirit, even the most unlearned could preach the gospel. Which makes it possible for the Lord to use far more people than just the learned. World history has far more ignoramuses than learned people.

Further, Paul points out that not very many wise, learned, mighty, or noble had accepted the gospel. They depended too much on the wisdom of the world, and on their own capabilities to be able to accept the whisperings of the still, small voice. The wise, learned, mighty noble too often have their appearance and reputation to keep up, and they’d have to leave that all behind.  Paul knows what he’s talking about here, since he had been of the most zealous sect of Pharisees before his converting vision. He had to leave that all behind too, and no doubt he noticed how hard it was when he likely tried to get his friends to accept it too.

I love that Paul says, “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise.” Doesn’t that give you hope? It does me. It tells me God could work through me or you.  The poster child for foolish things confounding the wise is the story of Joseph Smith, a poor, ignorant, young farm boy who was given a vision of God and Jesus Christ and was given a mission to translate the golden plates.  He had none of the advantages of learning or wealth or connections that one would expect someone called by God would need to have to complete such a mission, and yet he did it with God’s help.

Why does God do this sort of thing?  “That no flesh should glory in his presence.”  It shows us God can do His own work and use even the most ignorant and disadvantaged of us to do the most startling things.

Re-examining Revelation 12

1 And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars:

2 And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered.

3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.

4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.

6 And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

14 And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.

16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. (Revelation 12)

Our traditional interpretation of Revelation 12 in the church is according to the chapter heading: “John sees the imminent apostasy of the Church—He also sees the War in Heaven in the beginning when Satan was cast out—He sees the continuation of that war on earth.”

This interpretation basically reduces Revelation 12 to an interlude wherein the Lord backtracks and shares with John various bits of information that He wants the Saints to know about what has happened before the frame of the events set up in the Book of Revelation.  With our understanding of the three degrees of glory, we may interpret the sun-clothed women as the church, and the man child as Christ, who ascended to heaven, and then the fleeing of the church into the wilderness as the apostasy.

However, there are some things in the text that subtly create problems with this interpretation.  For instance, v1 speaks of the appearance of a great wonder in heaven (the woman). The location is a little odd. If the woman represents the church, why is the woman located in heaven and not on the earth? 

Or if the woman is in heaven (in the spirit realm), how do those on the earth see her to wonder over her? The text seems to suggest that this wonder will be generally visible. 

For another example, if the woman represents the church and the child represents Christ, why speak of this woman and the man child before recounting the war in heaven when Michael and his angels fought the devil and his angels and cast them out, which is something we identify with premortality? Why skip around so much in the timeline?  

Or, if the woman represents the church and the child represents the political kingdom of God, what good does the child do to anyone if it is caught up to the throne of God? That seems to put it in a place where it won’t have much influence, since there are a lot of people that prefer to ignore Jesus, who also ascended into heaven. If the political kingdom of God is formed then removed from earth by God, that would be demoralizing to those righteous who remain. (It would be like restoring the priesthood, creating the offices, and then translating all priesthood holders so they don’t remain to bless the church.)

Another question I had over this interpretation in the chapter is what function it serves to help the Saints in the last days, either with instruction or with reassurance. What does it tell us prophetically that we can’t get elsewhere?

 It tells us the church will be persecuted. Okay, we already know that.

It tells us there was a war in heaven. Okay, we already know that too, from the Pearl of Great Price. Also from Isaiah.

It tells us the Saints overcome Satan with the atonement, their testimony, and their willingness to sacrifice their lives. Okay, but how does that help us know what’s to come?

Suddenly, after considering these things, I started to ask myself, “ What if it is NOT about the past, but actually about the future? What if this chapter is actually still telling us about events to come on the earth? What if we’ve all misunderstood this chapter?

Ooo! Excitement! I read the chapter again. But then I was puzzled. If these events are in the future, what then are we to make of how it speaks of a war in heaven with Michael casting out the devil and his angels?  And if there will be war in heaven, how would we on the earth know it?

That’s when I realized heaven must be used symbolically as a term for something high up, something ruling. And in fact, it is a very good symbol for government. So if there is war in heaven, it can be telling us of a war in the government between forces of good and forces of evil.

Ooo! Definitely re-examination is needed!

(Fair warning: This interpretation is going to go into completely uncharted territory. You don’t have to believe it. It is completely unofficial, nontraditional, and possibly even kooky, but I’m going to run with it as far as it takes me and see where it goes and see we can get anything useful or helpful from it.  I reserve the right to change my mind about it at any time on it in the future and interpret it to mean something different from what follows.)

So then, when the beginning tells us of the woman that appeared as a wonder in heaven, that may tell us that there are righteous forces that appear in government at this difficult time. (The woman can’t be the church, because the church as a whole body can’t be elected to government, kids and all. But it could be a group of righteous members who are elected or appointed.)   Then the second wonder in heaven—the great red dragon—appears to oppose the woman. When the dragon draws a third part of the stars and casts them to earth, that could represent the evil forces somehow firing or impeaching or forcing resignation of part of the government that opposes them.

The woman is in labor and about to be delivered of a man child that will rule the nations with a rod of iron, and the dragon waits for the birth, wanting to devour the child as soon as it is born. This says to me that the good forces of government are trying to figure out who is the best one to rule over them. It could be an election caucus.  A woman in labor sounds like a great symbol for the messy nomination and choosing process of politics. But the dragon waits to see who comes out of it so they know who to target. The dragon wants to devour the man child, possibly meaning it wants to absorb him into the beast’s network by getting it to switch sides or making agreements that will restrict him from moving against the dragon, or by corrupting him, or whatever.

So the woman brings forth the man child who is to rule all nations with a rod of iron, and he is caught up to God and to his throne. 

What?

All along, we have assumed this being caught up to God’s throne represents Christ, His ascension, and His rule from the heavens. But if this man child is supposed to be someone in the future who rules, how will he really rule if he’s literally caught up to heaven? It is as if he is taken away before he can actually do anything to help.   HOWEVER. If this is actually symbolically talking about a political situation, then a man child caught up to the throne of God has actually ascended to power on earth and has been put into office!  And if he rules all nations, then calling that political position of power “the throne of God” seems like a pretty accurate term, even if it sounds a little blasphemous to us.

But if so, then why would the woman then flee into the wilderness? It will seem as though she has won, if her man child is in power.  Hmmm.  I don’t know… I would guess that perhaps those who put the man child in power anticipate some sort of backlash, so they hide from it.  At any rate, wherever they flee to, it has been prepared as a nourishing place, even though they are on the margins, outside of the main population centers.

Then there is a war in heaven, or a war in the government between Michael and his angels and the dragon and his angels. The upshot is that the great dragon is cast out with his angels. We are told they deceived the whole world, so they did a lot of lying to everyone. We are also told they were an “accuser of our brethren…which accused them before our God day and night,” so that hints the forces of evil have been prosecuting attorneys who tried to swamp the government with false accusations and with frivolous, malicious lawsuits and paperwork that wasted time and persecuted the righteous who were the defendants of said lawsuits. 

(Such a battle is not without precedent in history. There is the story in the Book of Mormon of Alma and Amulek who were put on trial by Zeezrom in Ammonihah and who warned the people the unrighteousness of their judges and lawyers were bringing destruction upon them. There is also a brief story of a time before the coming of Christ when judges were unlawfully condemning the righteous and there was an attempt to try them for their crimes.)

We are told the Saints overcome the dragon with the atonement, with their testimony, and with their willingness to suffer even to death for their beliefs. So this tells us the Saints need to stand strong. (This interpretation makes religious liberty very important, doesn’t it?)

The result of the war is that the devil (or the beast) is cast down to the earth along with his followers, meaning they are removed from power. (Hooray!) No wonder the Saints celebrate. But the dragon is mad and he persecutes the woman, since that was the source of his loss of power. The woman flees to the wilderness and is nourished, and the earth helps the woman when the dragon pours floods out of his mouth after her. (The floods may represent lies.)  So it seems there are two exits into the wilderness by forces of good.

And then the dragon is still angry, so he goes to make war against the remnant of the woman’s seed who keep the commandments and the testimony of Jesus. This tells me that the dragon targets the children. How does he target the children? The next chapter Revelation 13 tells of a beast (nearly identical to the dragon) that rises out of the sea and demands worship from everyone. It is possible the war against the woman’s children consists of trying to usurp their admiration and draw their wonder so that they stop worshiping God and worship the beast instead.

So… how does this interpretation of Revelation 12 help us? It shows us a struggle in government between good and evil. It shows us the dragon can be cast out, and it shows us that for that to happen, we have to have firm testimonies and be willing to sacrifice our lives for the truth, even if it gets us in legal trouble. (This is another reason why we need to defend religious freedom.) It also tells us it is important for us to teach our children right and protect them.

Final note #1: Probably some of Trump's enthusiastic followers would like to associate this situation with Trump. I don't though, especially since he doesn't rule all nations. I think the situation is still to come.

Final note #2: On the topic of religious freedom, I think it is important for us to defend it today because we have a whole generation of children who are starting to grow up in this time of incivility. We don’t want them to get the idea that this general atmosphere of negativity and hate is normal.  We don’t want it to be all they have ever known.  If they think that kind of thing is normal, they will do it too, and worse. We don’t want that.

An interesting topic shift in Nephi’s record

5 And an account of my making these plates shall be given hereafter; and then, behold, I proceed according to that which I have spoken; and this I do that the more sacred things may be kept for the knowledge of my people.

6 Nevertheless, I do not write anything upon plates save it be that I think it be sacred. And now, if I do err, even did they err of old; not that I would excuse myself because of other men, but because of the weakness which is in me, according to the flesh, I would excuse myself.

7 For the things which some men esteem to be of great worth, both to the body and soul, others set at naught and trample under their feet. Yea, even the very God of Israel do men trample under their feet; I say, trample under their feet but I would speak in other words—they set him at naught, and hearken not to the voice of his counsels. (1 Nephi 19:5-7)

I am struck by these verses for a few reasons. First, because I am a writer myself, I know what it is like to write about the scriptures and then feel like others may not appreciate those things how I do. Even in the church I think we struggle against an inner lassitude about it. I wonder if it is common to not quite appreciate something in the scriptures unless you are in quite the right frame of mind or dealing with a challenge that a particular text touches on. Then there is an “Aha!” moment, and ever after it means something special.

Second, the way Nephi shifts from thinking about how his own writing might be rejected or set at naught to thinking about how the Messiah would suffer and be set at naught. He shifts pretty quickly between those two topics and spends so much time writing about that that I wonder if that was what he meant to spend time on in the first place or whether his thoughts were pulled there so strongly that he had to go at length. (Because he does go on for six more verses about the Messiah.)

At any rate, when I read this section and what follows, part of me starts thinking, “How did we get on this topic of prophecies of Christ from the topic of record-keeping?” But it shows how Nephi uses his own experiences and worries as jumping-off points to think about Christ, and that is a mentally sanctifying skill, I think. As we go through life, if in our trials we can think about how Christ experienced or suffered something similar, we can gain a greater sense that we can ask for Christ’s atonement to be applied in our behalf.

Third, I notice Nephi says he will give an account of making those plates, but I’m not sure he ever gets around to including that, just like we don’t get an extended account of how he builds the ship to get to the promised land. But the fact that he wanted to include an account of making the plates says that it must have been spiritually faith-promoting to him, with challenges to overcome, revelation gained, the way prepared by the Lord, and so on. He certainly couldn’t go out and buy them at the corner drugstore. He had to find ore (or buy it), melt it out, beat it into plates, pierce them, make rings to connect them, and engrave them.

Some interesting ancillary material gathered while preparing my talk on the First Vision

When preparing my talk on the First Vision of Joseph Smith, I went searching all over the place. I looked on LDS.org for conference talks. I also used the Citation Index app to look at what had been said in the Journal of Discourses about the First Vision as well.  I gathered a lot of interesting quotes that in some way touched on Joseph Smith's experience, and I used hardly any of them in my talk, but they are so interesting that I felt they were worth sharing here.  So I will put them here and discuss.

-->

Conditions of camp meeting revivals

Elder Daniel H. Wells JD 12:71  (an apostle)

“The days of my youth were days of religious excitement—the days of revivals…—and I can well apprehend the effect these things must have had on the mind of Joseph; he was a young man, I was but a boy, and I know how those revivals affected young minds…. Some of those preachers would hold their protracted meetings for days and weeks, and sometimes for a month, one meeting after another, every day and every evening, getting around the young with their influences, and concentrating their prayers, perhaps, on a single individual, and praying for no other, until he would say he had got religion and was converted. Suffice it to say, that I was disgusted with it, and did not believe in any of it, and rested my chance, so far as religion was concerned, on trying to do that which was right as near as I could, and running the risk.”

 No wonder it was such religious excitement. Elder Wells eventually joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Nauvoo, so he found what he was looking for, and it didn't involve emotional manipulation or social pressure tactics.

-->  --> -->

Sterling W. Sill:  (1956)

[Christendom] is divided into some 250 contending sects, all claiming to accept the Bible as the inspired word of God and the only authoritative rule of faith and doctrine. Their confusion on even the most simple points of doctrine is indicated by the report that some seventy-eight of these baptize by immersion, many sprinkle, sixty-eight have optional forms, sixty-seven practice infant baptism, many have no baptism. Thirty-nine require no adherent to creed or doctrine of any kind.

Almost every Protestant church came into existence because of “a protest” or an “argument.” The division of opinion caused by the Civil War was responsible for the formation of many new churches. The Church of England was organized because the Pope refused to give Henry VIII a divorce. There are many “state churches.” It was Emperor Constantine, not the servants of the Lord, that made Christianity the church of the Roman Empire.(Conference Report, April 1956, First Day—Morning Meeting 16)

The Bible says there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism. 

-->

Brigham Young (JD 14:109)

“I read the Bible, diligently and faithfully, and if I could have found a church and people organized according to the pattern contained in its pages I should have been satisfied that that was God’s Church and people, and that would have been witness enough for me. But I will give you a little of my experience in my early days with regard to the religious sects. From my youth up their cry was, “Lo, here is Christ; lo, there is Christ;” no, “Yonder is Christ,” “Christ is not there, he is here,” and so on, each claiming that it had the Savior, and that others were wrong. I used to think to myself, “Some one of you may be right, but hold on, wait awhile! When I reach the years of judgment and discretion I can judge for myself; and in the meanwhile take no course either with one party or the other.” When I would make known my views and feelings with regard to their confused state they would call me an infidel. I would say to them, “All right, I am an infidel in a great many things.” I read the Bible, and especially the New Testament, which was given as a pattern for the life of Christians, whether as a church or individuals, and this was my inward inquiry, "Is there a church on the earth organized according to the pattern Jesus left?” No. Is there an Apostle left on the earth? Not one. Is there a prophet, which the Scriptures inform us were placed in the Church for its edification? Not one. Is there an evangelist? No. Is there the gift of healing? We cannot find any such thing, with all their cries of “Lo here, lo there, and lo yonder.” “Are there any who speak with tongues?” No. Any that prophesy? No, we do not believe in prophecy. Any one who has received the Holy Ghost, and speaks and preaches by its influence? “Why the Holy Ghost is not given in these days,” say all those who say, “Lo, here is Christ,” and “Lo, there is Christ!” Well, I used to say, “I am an infidel, for I do not believe anything of this; when you bring me a people built up and believing according to the New Testament I will believe that they are right. When you find such a people you will find the people and the Church of God, with all the gifts and graces of the Gospel in their midst; and you will find the kingdom of God on the earth.” They labored with me, but finally declared that I was an infidel, for I could not believe in their doctrines and principles. Yet I have been at many of their meetings and seen their modes of conversion.”

 Brigham Young and others, by reading the Bible could compare its teachings and practices with that practiced by churches in their day and see plainly that the true church was not on the earth at that time.  And yet, they had to wait for the truth to appear.  Joseph, did not read hardly any of the Bible, and he was confused by the things people said.  So he took the extraordinary step of asking God to tell him which church was true.   

I also note that Brigham Young didn't let the label "infidel" intimidate him; he would not bow to social pressure to join a church he didn't believe in. He had the courage of his convictions.

This also gives me a sense of how socially alienating it might have been to join no church in those days. 

-->

Men would try to excite the public mind against Joseph Smith

Mrs. Palmer:

"I remember the excitement stirred up among some of the people over Joseph's First Vision, and of hearing my father contend that it was only the sweet dream of a pure minded boy. One of our church leaders came to my father to remonstrate against his allowing such close friendship between his family and the "Smith Boy," as he called him. My father defended his own position by saying that Joseph was the best help he had ever found. He told the churchman that he always fixed the time of hoeing his large field to that when he could secure the services of Joseph Smith, because of the influence that boy had over the wild boys of the neighborhood, and explained that when these boys, or young men, worked by themselves much time would be spent in arguing and quarreling, which often ended in a ring fight. But when Joseph Smith worked with them, the work went steadily forward, and he got the full worth of the wages he paid.

I remember the churchman saying, in a very solemn and impressive tone, that the very influence the boy carried was the danger they feared for the coming generation, that not only the young men, but all who came in contact with him, would follow him, and he must be put down." (Hyrum L. Andrus and Helen Mae Andrus, comps., They Knew the Prophet [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1974], 2)

-->

-->

Priesthood authority needed

John Taylor:

“Supposing a man was to come here as Governor or Secretary, or holding any other office under the government of the United States; he comes in the name of the United States, or by the power or authority of the United States, does he not? Yes. But supposing some of you were to set up here as Governor, they would want to see your credentials and know by what authority you came here and whether you were appointed by the legitimate authorities of the United States or not. If not, they would pay no attention to you; they would look upon you as a very commonplace, foolish individual, and moreover, they would also look upon you as a fraud. Well, then, if God does not send men, of course they cannot act under the authority of God; if they do, they act fraudulently. Now, how can men go in the name of God when they tell you that God has never spoken for the last eighteen hundred years, and that he does not now reveal himself? That being the case, how then can they go forth in the name of God? I do not know; it is a mystery to me.” (JD 21:155)

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has priesthood authority. Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were ordained by John the Baptist, and by the ancient apostles Peter, James, and John, who appeared to him as resurrected beings. 

Fear of revelation and priesthood?

George Q. Cannon:

“…if a man comes forward claiming that he has this authority he is met with the accusations: “You are deluded, you are an imposter, you preach false doctrine, we will have none of your teaching. Men who believe in prophecy and revelation are liable to be deceived, and we are afraid of you, we do not know but you will deceive us. Jesus said there should be false prophets, we believe you are one of them.”

And thus they fortify and encase themselves in their unbelief and reject the word of God, and if Paul or Peter were to rise from the dead, and go amongst them and proclaim the principles they taught anciently, they would close their churches and chapels, and would say, “We will have none of you, you will deceive us, you are one of the false prophets spoken of,” forgetting that, if there are false prophets, there will, in all probability, also be true ones;” (JD 14:163)

I have also noticed this even today. When I share the story of the First Vision with people of other faiths or talk to them about how we can receive personal revelation, they invariably ask me questions like, "How do you know you won't be deceived?"  Easy answer from the Bible: "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God or whether I speak of myself." The question then becomes whether someone is willing to try the experiment to do God's will or not. 

-->

Prejudice of the people

George A. Smith:

“Elder Parley P. Pratt, before receiving the Gospel, was a minister of the Reformed Baptist, or Campbelite, Church in Ohio. This sect had a brick meetinghouse in Mentor, Geauga, now Lake Co. The people who owned this house had prided themselves on their great liberality, they would give everybody a chance to preach. Bro. Pratt, wishing to preach to them went there but found the door shut against him, and the congregation assembled outside. He preached on the door step. Quite a number of his former Christian brethren had gone to a neighboring grocery and qualified the inner man with something stimulating, and having supplied themselves with eggs, and procured a drum and fife they marched backwards and forwards in front of the speaker, throwing their eggs at him until their supply—five dozen—was exhausted. Elder Pratt kept on preaching and bearing testimony of the truth of the Gospel. Among those present who seemed to enjoy the scene was a Campbellite, a grave looking deacon, to whom a young man, a stranger, who happened to be present said, “Is this the way you worship God in this country?” “Oh, no Sir!” answered the deacon, “that man is a ‘Mormon.’”  The stranger then remarked, “his talk is very reasonable.” “Yes,” said the old gentleman, “but he is a ‘Mormon,’ and we do not intend that he shall preach here.” “He appears very cool,” remarked the stranger. “Yes,” said the deacon, “he is used to it, he has been in such scrapes before.”

This circumstance illustrates the manner in which the Elders were received when they went forth to preach the Gospel, and it required the testimony of the Holy Spirit, a strong sense of duty, and revelation from the Almighty to stir them up to go forth under such circumstances. Not only did this persecution extend to those who preached the Gospel, but to all believers, for, although the Saints were industrious, peaceable, and virtuous, every kind of falsehood was told against them, their houses were torn down, their property destroyed and every species of injustice and cruelty was heaped upon them.” (JD 12:332)

Daniel H. Wells:    (back in 1882)

“When a person embraces the everlasting Gospel—which, by the way, seems to be very unpopular now, as in other ages; whether it will continue to be so I do not know—it requires a good deal of moral courage to sacrifice his associations in life, his property, social standing and good name, and everything that pertains to this life that is considered worth having. Still there are those spirits in the flesh that have the courage to do it; those that have the honesty of heart to receive this testimony and to stand up and bear it in the face of every opposing obstacle and every opposing foe.” (JD 23:303)

-->

BY had to overcome fear to preach

Brigham Young:

“About the time I was preparing myself to embrace the gospel, there were great reformation meetings, and many professed to be converted. Those were very stirring times. The cause of religion was the great topic and theme of conversation, and preachers were full of zeal to bring souls to Christ through repentance and faith in his name. I recollect very distinctly that if I permitted myself to speak in any of their meetings, the spirit forbade me mentioning or referring to the testimony of Jesus, only in a superficial way. A few who believed in the everlasting gospel which had been revealed through Joseph, the prophet, testified in their meetings that they knew by the spirit of revelation that God had done thus and so, and they were hooted at immediately by those reformers. If I spoke at all in their meetings, I had to guard every word I uttered, lest I should offend those who professed to understand the gospel of life and salvation, but who did not. Gradually we broke through this fear, and ventured to utter the sentiments of our hearts, in faith before God, delivering that to the people which the Lord had revealed to us….Unless we are willing to be guided by the revelations of the spirit of the Almighty, by obeying and living up to the principles of His gospel, we are as apt to believe one thing as another, and to be influenced by, and follow the dictations of a bad spirit as a good one.” (JD 12:99)

Need for personal revelation

Elder L. Aldin Porter :

“Some years ago I enjoyed a stake conference assignment as a junior companion to Elder LeGrand Richards, who had, under the influence of this directing Spirit, reorganized a stake presidency. We were driving home; he was very pensive. After a rather long period of silence, I asked him if there was something he would like to teach me. Quietly he said, “We have too many in the Church who deny the spirit of prophecy and of revelation.” That was it—he said no more about it. As I reminisced about the calling of the new stake president that day, it occurred to me then that this Church could not function for even one day without the spirit of prophecy and revelation.

But ours is a day of dwindling faith and increasing skepticism about sacred things. Our time reminds me of the period just prior to the coming of the resurrected Savior to this continent. They were very dark days.

Mormon recorded the roots of the problems that beset the Nephite society when he said, “And it was because of the pride of their hearts, because of their exceeding riches, yea, it was because of their oppression to the poor, withholding their food from the hungry, withholding their clothing from the naked, and smiting their humble brethren upon the cheek, making a mock of that which was sacred, denying the spirit of prophecy and of revelation.”

Later Mormon continues: “And because of their iniquity the church had begun to dwindle; and they began to disbelieve in the spirit of prophecy and in the spirit of revelation; and the judgments of God did stare them in the face.”….

When the appointed servants of this Church speak under the influence of the Holy Ghost as ambassadors of the Lord Jesus Christ, their words are carried by the power of the spirit to those whose hearts are open to revelation.

When, with heavenly power, that witness comes to a person, he or she will soon understand that personal sacrifice is its constant companion. The spiritual witness of these sacred things and the demands of sacrifice inevitably walk the road together. In time, one comes to understand the necessity of this and is filled with gratitude that it is so.” (1996 October conference)

An Amalekite’s Unbelief and Attempts at Self-justification

While the four sons of Mosiah are on their mission to the Lamanites, Aaron has this interesting experience while trying to teach the Amalekites and Amulonites about the need to repent.

5 Therefore, as Aaron entered into one of their synagogues to preach unto the people, and as he was speaking unto them, behold there arose an Amalekite and began to contend with him, saying: What is that thou hast testified? Hast thou seen an angel? Why do not angels appear unto us? Behold are not this people as good as thy people?

6 Thou also sayest, except we repent we shall perish. How knowest thou the thought and intent of our hearts? How knowest thou that we have cause to repent? How knowest thou that we are not a righteous people? Behold, we have built sanctuaries, and we do assemble ourselves together to worship God. We do believe that God will save all men.

7 Now Aaron said unto him: Believest thou that the Son of God shall come to redeem mankind from their sins?

8 And the man said unto him: We do not believe that thou knowest any such thing. We do not believe in these foolish traditions. We do not believe that thou knowest of things to come, neither do we believe that thy fathers and also that our fathers did know concerning the things which they spake, of that which is to come.

9 Now Aaron began to open the scriptures unto them concerning the coming of Christ, and also concerning the resurrection of the dead, and that there could be no redemption for mankind save it were through the death and sufferings of Christ, and the atonement of his blood.

10 And it came to pass as he began to expound these things unto them they were angry with him, and began to mock him; and they would not hear the words which he spake. (Alma 21:5-10)

I thought it was interesting that Mormon included this little conversation between Aaron and the Amalekite because the rest of the chapter greatly summarizes Aaron’s teaching. So it seems there was something about the Amalekite’s objections and Aaron’s responses that Mormon thought worth recording.

I think the Amalekite represents a pattern of unbelief that is very entrenched and will not receive the gospel. Perhaps Mormon met people in his day that expressed the same sentiments. Probably we will see the same in our day, if we haven’t already.

The Amalekite starts out with incredulous questions about why his people don’t have angelic visitations, while at the same time he contends his people are as good as Aaron’s people.  Then he asks a bunch of “How do you know” questions challenging Aaron’s knowledge:

--How do you know the thought and intent of our hearts?

--How do you know we have cause to repent?

--How do you know we’re not a righteous people?

Then the Amalekite tries to prove the Amalekites’s righteousness on the grounds that they have build churches and gather to worship God and that they believe God will save all men.

But when Aaron asks him if he believes in Christ’s redemption, then the Amalekite spouts a torrent of “we don’t believe” statements!

--We don’t believe you know God will redeem mankind from their sins.

--We don’t believe these foolish traditions.

--We don’t believe you know of things to come.

--We don’t believe your fathers or ours knew what they were talking about concerning things to come.

Then when Aaron tries to show through the scriptures that there is grounds for belief in the redemption of Christ, all his listeners get angry, mock him, and don’t want to hear.

So the Amalekite essentially answers his own questions, even though he doesn’t realize it: The Amalekites don’t see angels because they don’t believe in the prophecies of what’s to come that angels and scriptures would give.  (Much of what angels do is quote scripture and prophesy, after all.)  If a person has made it clear that they don’t believe in Christ when a mortal messenger declares it, is that message going to be any easier to swallow if an angel gives it?   The Amalekite has grounds to repent because he doesn’t believe Christ will come to redeem men. He’s cut off from the atonement. His people have cause to repent because their unbelief is the same.

It is quite fascinating that the Amalekites believe God will save all men, and yet they don’t believe Aaron or their ancestors could know of things to come.  But then, what grounds for belief do they have that God will save all men, something that would require revelation and prophecy to know at all?  To affirm a belief in a future event while denying the future can be known is contradictory.  Beliefs based on that kind of thought process seem more like wishful thinking.

The Amalekite seems insulted by Aaron’s teaching the truth, which hints he feels rebuked and insecure in his own spirituality. So he tries to cover it by painting Aaron as a sort of religious imperialist and by arguing that church attendance makes the Amalekites as good as the Nephites.  But if that is all the Amalekite can point to, he doesn’t understand the full extent of what righteousness is, since it goes far beyond just going to church.  In trying to justify himself as righteous, the Amalekite actually reveals that he is not.  Again, if he doesn’t believe Christ will redeem humanity from their sins, he is stuck in his sins and can’t escape them.

There are several principles that can be got from this exchange.

1)    A dearth of spiritual gifts and privileges arises out of unbelief.  We may not even know what we disbelieve until someone challenges us on it. 

2)    When unbelief is challenged, it easily turns into noisy self-justification. 

3)    Self-justification tends to be contradictory, and it is obvious to others. (It’s also pathetic.)

4)    Self-justification is not possible.  (Christ is the only one who can justify us through His grace, and that can only happen when we repent.)

Aaron knew that he couldn’t force the Amalekite to believe differently, so after trying to present his grounds for testimony and being rejected, he simply left. Likewise, when people around us reject our testimonies, we can’t do anything to change that. 

But looking at it from a different perspective, what if we find that in some respect we are like the unbelieving Amalekite?  Thinking about how the Amalekite should have responded if he had been meek is an interesting exercise.  How could this Amalekite have turned the exchange into a learning experience?

What do you think?