How the Godhead bears record

I’ve been reading recently about Christ’s visit to the Americas and I ran across this bit that Jesus says:

35 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto him will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost.

36 And thus will the Father bear record of me, and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto him of the Father and me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one. (3 Nephi 11:35-36)

If you’re like me, you probably read those verses and everything just sort of flows together in a swirling mass and at the end you just kind of find yourself thinking, “Huh? Okay, the Godhead is unified. Moving on.”

I read it recently and started realizing it was a statement about how all the Godhead bears witness of the others. So I started wondering how the Father bears record.  On occasion the Father has borne record with His voice, but here it also says that the other way is to send fire and the Holy Ghost. 

We are not used to thinking of the Holy Ghost’s witness like this. We think the Holy Ghost comes on his own to bear record of the truth, but this tells us that the Father sends the Holy Ghost and fire as part of the Father’s witness, and then the Holy Ghost bears record and that’s the Holy Ghost’s witness.  So the presence of the Holy Ghost represents the witness of the Father, and the message, the bearing record is the witness of the Holy Ghost.

When I grasped this, immediately thought of another puzzling scripture that this clarified.  In John 5:37-38, Jesus tells the Jews at Jerusalem this:

37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.

38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.

Jesus was telling the Jews that the Father had borne witness to them of Jesus and the Jews hadn’t accepted that witness.  The Father had sent the Holy Ghost, but they hadn’t accepted it, or its witness.

It is interesting there is a little promise in the 3 Nephi verses. “whoso believeth in me. . .unto him will the Father bear record of me”.  Those who believe in Christ will get that witness.  So if the Jews did not believe in Christ, they would not hear the witness of the Father sent of fire and the Holy Ghost. 

I personally think the promise teaches a neat principle that we can practice. When we hear the truth, we can choose to believe and rejoice in the truth, even if we’ve heard it many times before, and then look for the Father’s witness in the presence of the Holy Ghost.

It is neat to me to know that the witness of the Holy Ghost is both the Father’s witness and the Holy Ghost’s witness.  It reminds me the Holy Ghost is so tightly integrated with the Godhead that they are all unified with each other.  It’s hard to explain why that is so cool, but it is.   They are so at one with each other, and our goal is to seek that at-one-ment as well.

Jesus says, “whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also.” I’ve wondered how that belief in the Father is so folded into a belief in Christ. But I’ve realized that to believe in the Son of God, implies He has a Father who is God.  To believe the Son was sent is to believe in the Father who sent Him and to whom the Son would return and to whom we want to return. To believe in the Son who would take away the sins of the world is to also believe in the Father who is not only just and holy (requiring sins to be paid for and removed), but loving and merciful (desiring everyone’s return and providing a way for sins to be removed).

Re-examining Jesus’s appearance on the road to Emmaus

When Jesus visited two disciples walking on the road to Emmaus, they were talking of the events of Jesus’s crucifixion and the news of the resurrection and were sad.  The main cause of their sadness seems to have been a sense of betrayal—they had trusted Jesus to be the one who would redeem Israel militarily, but contrary to their expectations He had been crucified.  They seemed to not know now where to look for redemption, and the stories of Christ’s resurrection only confused them.

When Jesus meets them, He asks them about their concerns and he listens to them, and when they’ve gotten it all out in the open, His answer is instructive: “O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?” (Luke 24:25-26)   I suspect that the term “fools” was not just an epithet meaning “unwise,” but also one expressing they were in a spiritual state bordering on apostasy.  For them to forsake Christ because He had not militarily redeemed Israel would be apostasy. 

Quick sidenote: What do you suppose was Christ’s tone and manner as he said this to them?  Was he loud and harsh?  Or was he gentle?  What would have better conveyed his concern for them?

Anyway, thinking about these things, it seems to me that Jesus’s visit was meant to pull back into the faith two disciples who were wandering because the prophesied events had not gone according to their expectations.  Through the rest of His visit with them, He shored up their knowledge through the scriptures, and when they finally recognized Him through spiritual manifestations, they had gained the foundational knowledge upon which to base their testimony.  Then, His actual presence, when they recognized Him, had much more power.

I think this has a good lesson for us.  We or others around us may struggle with testimony when prophesied events happen differently than expected.  Christ (and by extension Heavenly Father) still cares for these and desires they obtain personal witness as well.  The witness needs to be built upon a better understanding of the scriptures, spiritual witness, and also personal experience.

Thoughts on the witness of the Spirit in the four Gospels

-->

One of the things I’ve noticed recently as I have read through the four gospels is how confident Jesus is that His witness of the Father and His teachings are confirmed by the witness of the Spirit.  He taught fearlessly things that no man can know without revelation and that no man can hear and believe without the confirming witness of the Spirit. His confidence that His witness was confirmed teaches me to trust that my witness to the truth will also be confirmed. It teaches me that it is the Lord’s work to confirm witness, while my work now is to give witness.

I think we have to all learn that in order to do missionary work today.  In a secular world that denies the unseen, or among religious people who deniy the power of the Spirit or the power of godliness, it is really tempting to begin to think that it all depends on us and how smart or eloquent we are.  Thankfully it doesn’t depend on us, and that is why we all can share the gospel.

29 Ways of Writing to Learn About the Scriptures

I stumbled upon an article  by Dennis A. Wright from the Religious Educator (a magazine for seminary and institute instructors) called “Using Writing to EnhanceLearning in Religious Education: Practical Ideas for Classroom Use.”  (Religious Educator 3, no. 3 (2002): 115–121.)

In this article, Brother Wright describes a variety of different writing activities that can be used in seminary and institute classrooms to help students think about the scriptures.  He lists 29 in all. (excited noises in all the land)  Check it out!

I was delighted to find that many of these activities are ones that I have done as part of my scripture study and writing for this blog.  I was pleased to find more activities to try.

I love the perspective Brother Wright gives about the importance of writing about the gospel, since it informs my efforts to blog about the scriptures:

The Lord esteems the writings of His servants so highly that He has declared He will judge the whole world from their books (see 3 Nephi 27:25–26).

But all the books have not been written. As students and teachers of the gospel, we have our own opportunity to write the words that God speaks to us. This invitation is extended to all the Saints, not just the prophets. Paul taught, “He that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation and comfort” (1 Corinthians 14:3). As a church, we seek to edify others through our sacrament talks, via the lessons we teach, and in our missionary efforts. The process of thinking and writing enhances the service we offer. When we help our students learn how to ponder the gospel of Jesus Christ through classroom and personal writings, we teach students to act upon an important principle of edification. When we encourage students to communicate their faith through writing as well as through speaking, we provide an important opportunity for the Spirit to witness the truth.

Learning to ponder the gospel of Christ through writing is an important principle of edification (often neglected).  Often I’ve only understood a scripture passage more fully while in the middle of writing about it.  If I had only thought and not written, I would not have learned as much.

Communicating faith through writing gives additional opportunities for the Spirit to witness of the truth beyond the bounds of our personal presence or even our lifetime.  (This is a hope a cling to as I continue to blog.)   I think it was Hugh Nibley who speculated that writing was given by the Lord for that purpose.

The Manner the Twelve Choose Another Apostle in the New Testament

 Before the apostles do anything, Peter gives a little discourse about the need for a new apostle to replace Judas Iscariot and he ends with this:

21 Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us,

22 Beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.

23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.

24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.  (Acts 1:21-26)

The lot process they used is an interesting one, as it gives us an indication of how the apostles operated. 

We might think this casting their lots was a matter of choosing a name out of a container, but that wasn’t it—that is chance.  What it was was every apostle gave a lot according to who he felt God had shown him was to be apostle.   (Everyone seems to think that the apostles “cast lots,” but the wording is very particular.  It is different from everywhere else.  It says “they gave forth their lots,” meaning they each had a choice and signified it with a token of some sort and “the lot fell upon Matthias” shows the unity of those choices.)

This wasn’t a situation where majority rules.  This was a case where unanimous rules.  They had to be united, just like their testimonies had to be united.  If it were merely a choice by man, there would be all sorts of opinions, but they needed God to show them, ALL of them, who God chose, therefore there could only be one answer.

I also notice they studied the matter out first, and they got their best options as far as that went.  Peter discussed the necessity of calling a new apostle and how it must be one who could be a witness of the resurrection and they chose two men who could fill that requirement.

Then they prayed for revelation to know which one of those two men God had chosen.  I suppose that if they got no answer either way, they would have gone back to considering candidates again.

The neat thing is that the Lord doesn’t confine this confirming testimony to just the apostles.  He will give it to other members as well.  We can receive it about prophets, apostles, other general authorities, stake presidents, bishops, and so on.  Just last year our stake had a new stake presidency appointed and during the meeting as the new stake president spoke, I received a confirming witness he was called of God.  It wasn’t a dramatic rushing wind, rather it was the Spirit saying at the back of my mind, “Yes, this is the new stake president.”

Jacob’s Witness of the Future

In 2 Nephi 6 we are given a talk Nephi recorded that Jacob gave to Nephi’s people.  In it we find out Nephi requested Jacob talk about some verses of Isaiah which prophesy of how the Gentiles would carry Israel’s sons and daughters in their arms and nourish them. 

In the verses directly afterward, if we’re alert, we can notice that Jacob seems to have had his own vision of world history similar to Nephi’s.  Notice how often he says the Lord showed him or an angel spoke to him.

8 And now I, Jacob, would speak somewhat concerning these words. For behold, the Lord has shown me that those who were at Jerusalem, from whence we came, have been slain and carried away captive.

9 Nevertheless, the Lord has shown unto me that they should return again. And he also has shown unto me that the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel, should manifest himself unto them in the flesh; and after he should manifest himself they should scourge him and crucify him, according to the words of the angel who spake it unto me….

11 Wherefore, after they are driven to and fro, for thus saith the angel… (2 Nephi 6:8-9,11)

Three times Jacob says the Lord showed him events that were to happen, and twice he speaks of things an angel told him. 

It seems to me that Nephi includes Jacob’s words as yet another witness that what Nephi saw in vision about the future of the house of Israel was true.  (Nephi also summarizes his father’s prophesies earlier on the same stuff, in 1 Nephi 10, to witness the truth of his vision.)

Thus, we see that Nephi is intent upon proving the truth of his words (as he said) with as many witnesses as he can gather who have also seen the future of the house of Israel.  (Perhaps somewhere there is a full account written of Jacob’s vision, but it would probably be very much the same as Nephi’s, though perhaps with instructions targeted to Jacob’s level of comprehension, whatever that might be.)

What are we to do with these prophecies?  They are to help increase our faith in the Lord that He knows the end from the beginning and that He will bring to pass the events that are still in the future for us, just as He has brought to pass the events so far that He showed to Lehi, Nephi, Jacob (and Isaiah).

The Woman Taken in Adultery

2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

 3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

 4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

 9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. (John 8:2-11)

This is an interesting story with so many factors to think about. 

Clearly Jesus had acquired a reputation for overturning traditions about the law and this case was a test to see how He’d decide concerning serious sin.  He was known for being a friend of sinners.  “What sayest thou?” shows us that authority is at issue here, authority to pass judgment and condemn.  It might sound like they are submitting to His judgment, but they just want to draw Him out so they can find fault with His judgment. 

It appeared to be an open-and-shut case.  She was caught in the act.  The penalty for it in the Law of Moses was known. 

And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. (Lev. 20:10)

Technically the punishment couldn’t be carried out, since the Romans had taken away from the Jews the legal power to condemn malefactors to death.  If Jesus upheld the Law of Moses, He could be accused of breaking Roman law.  If He said she shouldn’t be stoned, He could be accused of not keeping the Law of Moses.  The scribes and Pharisees were trying to use the case as a means of entrapping Jesus.

It is rather odd that the accusers only brought to Jesus the woman when adultery is a sin that takes two to commit.  Where is the man?

Why did Jesus write on the ground in such a peculiar manner?  They have asked him to give His opinion and He doesn’t answer; He just stoops down and draws in the dust as if ignoring them, as if He hopes the question will go away by itself.  But with His ready answer when they keep asking Him, we know He is not ignoring them. Rather, He must be trying to teach them without them realizing it.  In other questions asked with the intent to trap Him, Jesus answers right away, yet in this incident, He doesn’t.

Imagine going into a courtroom to watch a trial and imagine that once the charges have been stated and all the arguments made, the judge bends over and starts drawing things on the carpet at the moment when they are expected to pronounce the verdict.  What kind of message does it send?   It’s not that He doesn’t care or is bored.. it is something else.  It’s a stall tactic.  I think that’s one thing Jesus was trying to teach—that He gives time before judgment.

Eventually Jesus turns the question back on the accusers with a pronouncement that dictates the requirements for executing judgment.  “He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”  He invites them to carry out the punishment IF they have a clear conscience on the matter at hand.

Some commentators think Jesus was referring to any sin, and others think He was talking about the specific sin of adultery.  I think that He was referring to the Law of Moses requirements for righteous witnesses.  If it was any sin, how could anyone bring anyone else to justice?

Here are some of laws about witnesses which they would know and which will help us understand better what was behind Jesus’ words.

2 ¶If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his covenant,

3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;

4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and inquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel:

5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.

6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.

7 The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you. (Deut. 17:2-7)

Jesus’ words about casting the first stone were directed at the witnesses first, it was their responsibility.  There had to be at least two of them.

15 ¶One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

16 ¶If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong;

17 Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;

18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;

19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you. (Deut. 19:15-19)

They were all also aware that if the witnesses were found to be false witnesses or unrighteous witnesses in any way, they would be given the same penalty of stoning. 

1 Thou shalt not raise a false report: put not thine hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.

2 ¶Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou speak in a cause to decline after many to wrest judgment:

3 ¶Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause. (Exodus 23:1-3)

(Exodus 23:1-3 basically says that witnesses were not supposed to start false reports, were not to join with the wicked and be a witness for them, were not to go along with the crowd to do evil or to subvert justice, and were not to favor the poor man and thereby blindly root for the underdog.)

These verses give us a picture of the standard to which witnesses were expected to be held, and everyone knew it.  After all, this was no ordinary penalty.  This was depriving someone of life and time to repent.  It is not done lightly or without soul-searching.

The main problem with the witnesses (and perhaps too the accusers) was their demand for the punishment to be applied to the woman with the man absent.  If she was taken in the very act, the party of accusers were not being totally above board because they had already improperly let the man go and were seeking to lay all their severity on the woman in an unequal application of justice.  This glaring injustice indicated their sympathy was all with the man, as it would be if they had committed adultery themselves before.  They wanted to be lenient to male sin themselves and then force Jesus to be severe.

The principle I get from Jesus’ words to the woman’s witnesses and accusers is that you have to really search your own soul and be sure you are untainted yourself from the sin you are about to condemn someone for.  Finding fault and seeking occasion to entrap disqualifies you as a judge (and witness) because malice will hardly allow someone to be proven innocent.  Other disqualifying factors are having a double standard (letting some go but prosecuting others to the farthest extent), and certainly so does committing the same sins oneself.

Jesus’ words to the woman, “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more” are thought by many to convey forgiveness, but I do not see forgiveness here….yet.  It is too early for it.  She was caught in the act, so she would have plenty of shame and humiliation and regret for being caught, but genuine repentance can’t be forced by these circumstances, even with a merciful verdict.  Some space is needed to realize the seriousness of the sin, to feel and demonstrate contrition, and so on.  Jesus’ words only speak of no condemnation, which is not the same as “thy sins are forgiven thee.”  Condemnation can only come at the last day when men are brought to be judged of their works, and until that day, there is hope for all.  At best, Jesus granted a stay of execution, giving her time for repentance and a chance to build up a store of days with no sin.  This is consistent with His mortal mission to save rather than condemn.  Later in the chapter, He also highlights this principle:

15 Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.

16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me. (John 8:15-16)

Jesus could judge and condemn with eternal consequences, but He refrains for a season in order to save as many as He can first.

The JST shows us the woman recognized the probationary period she’d been given because it says, “And the woman glorified God from that hour, and believed on his name.”

Have any of the apostles seen Christ?

Have any of the apostles seen Jesus?  We may wonder about this on occasion, since the apostles are supposed to be special witnesses of Christ.  I happened to run across something Elder Packer wrote on this subject in his book Teach Ye Diligently:

…as students there are some questions that we could not in propriety ask.

One question of this type I am asked occasionally, usually by someone who is curious, is, “Have you seen Him?”  That is a question that I have never asked of another.  I have not asked that question of my Brethren in the Council of the Twelve, thinking that it would be so sacred and so personal that one would have to have some special inspiration—indeed, some authorization—even to ask it.

Though I have not asked that question of others, I have heard them answer it—but not when they were asked.  I have heard one of my Brethren declare, “I know, from experiences too sacred to relate, that Jesus is the Christ,”  I have heard another testify, “I know that God lives, I know that the Lord lives, and more than that, I know the Lord.”  I repeat: they have answered this question not when they were asked, but under the prompting of the Spirit, on sacred occasions, when “the Spirit beareth record.” (D&C 1:39)

There are some things just too sacred to discuss: not secret, but sacred; not to be discussed, but to be harbored and protected and regarded with the deepest of reverence. (86-87)

When I first read this two years ago it gave me extra reason to pay close attention to apostolic testimony to see if they give just a little extra emphasis to their testimony of Christ.  I’m sure those who have seen Christ would like us to be sensitive and read between the lines.  If I were in their spot, I’d hope that members would be willing to consider that I might be testifying to something more.

Why we can be of good cheer (part 3)

Continuing on with this series of posts on what reasons the scriptures tell us we have for being of good cheer...

Part 1 

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5

Next we have Paul imprisoned in Jerusalem:

10 And when there arose a great dissension, the chief captain, fearing lest Paul should have been pulled in pieces of them, commanded the soldiers to go down, and to take him by force from among them, and to bring him into the castle.

 11 And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also at Rome. (Acts: 23:10-11, emphasis added)

Why is the prospect of testifying in Rome a reason for Paul to be of good cheer after the hubbub made over his testimony in Jerusalem?  It means that he will somehow escape from the Jews who want him dead, and their machinations will be ineffectual.  It means his work as an apostle and missionary isn't done yet, even though it may have looked to him as though it were about to end very soon.

How might this help us be of good cheer today?  Perhaps it can remind us that when we are determined to bear testimony of the gospel no matter what, the result will be one of two things: 1) we may be killed for our testimony, in which case we will have sealed our testimony with our blood and rest with God, or 2) we may be saved by the Lord to testify to others in the future. 

If that sounds really serious, that’s because it is serious.  It’s a very serious and profound kind of cheer that you can’t really appreciate until/unless you have cultivated a deep faith and trust in God.  (I’m not sure I have fully grasped it myself.)  It’s not the kind of shallow cheer that promises smooth sailing for the rest of your days, but the kind of cheer that reminds you that no hurricane will be strong enough to break your anchor cable.

Speaking of boats, on another occasion, Paul is on a boat headed for Rome and there is a terrible storm for many days:

21 But after long abstinence Paul stood forth in the midst of them, and said, Sirs, ye should have hearkened unto me, and not have loosed from Crete, and to have gained this harm and loss.

 22 And now I exhort you to be of good cheer: for there shall be no loss of any man’s life among you, but of the ship.

 23 For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I am, and whom I serve,

 24 Saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought before Cæsar: and, lo, God hath given thee all them that sail with thee.

 25 Wherefore, sirs, be of good cheer: for I believe God, that it shall be even as it was told me. (Acts 27:21-25, emphasis added)

Clearly, knowing that no one would die as a result of the storm would be a good reason for all the ship’s passengers to be of good cheer.  Knowing everything is going to work out even when it looks really bad is a great source of cheer and gives strength to do what is required to make it through.  How wonderful to know that it was a direct message from an angel.  

As a side note, I believe that the angel would not have said to Paul “God hath given thee all them that sail with thee” if Paul hadn’t been praying for the rest of the ship passengers as well as himself.  I can believe this of Paul.  Perhaps the ship’s company didn’t pick up on this, but we can. 

This suggests that we can be of good cheer because of the people who pray for us.  There may be people who care for us enough to pray for us even though we may not feel like our association with them is enough to merit their concern for us.  (Heck, I am always floored whenever my mom mentions to me that she prays for me.)  We can put our names on the temple prayer roll and have many saints pray for us; we can be of good cheer knowing that the Lord answers the prayers of the righteous.

So, to review.  We can be of good cheer because:

8. Our work is not yet finished.

9. Things will work out.

10. Righteous people are praying for us.

Christ is the savor of the scriptures

Here's something from the Joseph Smith Translation I ran across:

35 Then certain of them came to him, saying, Good Master, we have Moses and the prophets, and whosoever shall live by them, shall he not have life?
36 And Jesus answered, saying, Ye know not Moses, neither the prophets; for if ye had known them, ye would have believed on me; for to this intent they were written. For I am sent that ye might have life. Therefore I will liken it unto salt which is good;
37 But if the salt has lost its savor, wherewith shall it be seasoned? (JST Luke 14:35-37)

It is a little tricky to catch Jesus’s meaning about the salt losing its savor in this situation because we are so used to His previous teaching of “ye are the salt of the earth” about being an example. That is not what He means here.

Here Christ compares the scriptures, or the words of Moses and the prophets to salt and compares Himself to the salt’s savor. He is teaching that Moses and the prophets were teaching of Christ, and if you take Christ out of the scriptures, then the scriptures are like salt that lost its savor. Nothing but the teachings of Christ can give the scriptures that special flavor.

How have you seen this in your life?

The butterfly testimony of resurrection

I was thinking about what picture I could put with my previous post on the resurrection and for some reason I got a sudden impression to look at butterflies. And as I looked at these pictures of butterflies, the realization wacked me on the head that here was a creature whose life cycle is a witness to us of the resurrection.

Caterpillar = mortality (Caterpillars are pretty much earthbound creatures)


Cocoon = death and the grave (The inert cocoon certainly resembles something dead. It's like a little hanging shroud or a little tomb.)


Butterfly = glorious resurrection (The butterfly isn’t earthbound as it was as a caterpillar. Its wings give it greater powers than it ever had before. It also is more beautiful and glorious than a caterpillar.)


Why do we use Easter bunnies and eggs to celebrate the resurrection of Christ? We should be using butterflies!

Image #1 Copyright Dan L. Perlman, EcoLibrary.org, http://ecolibrary.org/page/DP91

Image #2 Copyright Dan L. Perlman, EcoLibrary.org,
http://ecolibrary.org/page/dp93

Image #3 Scenic Reflections, http://www.scenicreflections.com/media/276296/Blue_Morpho_Butterfly_Wallpaper/

All the facets of Christ's power over death

When we talk about Christ’s resurrection, I think we haven’t yet put together all the witnesses of His power over death. We see Christ’s power in all of its facets in the scriptures:

Christ brought the dead back to mortality while He was still mortal. He raised Lazarus and the son of the widow of Nain.

Christ voluntarily gave His own life, which no one else could take from Him without His permission, because He was the Only Begotten Son of God.

Three days later, Christ took His own body back again, this time for good. He could do this because He was the Only Begotten Son of God. He was never to die again.

Other saints were resurrected to immortality by Christ after Christ’s resurrection. Although we have no record of the names of these saints, we have two records (two witnesses) that it occurred—the New Testament and the Book of Mormon, in the old world and in the new world. This shows that distance from Christ made no difference to His power over death.

Christ gave some of His servants power over death by raising them to a higher state. They could not be killed and they had a change wrought in their bodies so that they would not experience the pains of death or disease. That this is recorded in two different records for two different peoples strengthens its witness. We know the name of at least one person who was changed in that way—John the Beloved. Now, think about the significance of Christ’s power to do that. Only someone with total power over death could give even a portion of this power to someone else. This also strengthens the promise of the resurrection to us that Christ’s power over death can be and will be shared.

Keeping all these factors in mind together gives me a more comprehensive picture that strengthens my faith.

Image: I am a Son of God blog, http://iamasonofgod.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/my-understanding-of-the-resurrection/

Destruction as massive object lesson, witness of change as prelude to Christ’s visitation

We like to learn to control our environment, so when things go terribly wrong, we spend a lot of effort and study trying to figure out what the root cause was so that we can prevent anything like it from ever happening again. There is a tendency to argue about root causes and contributing causes and debate about how much weight each cause should get. After the great destruction in the Nephite lands at the death of Christ, the voice of Christ tells the people exactly what happened, where, and why. Cities were destroyed because of their wickedness in rejecting and killing the prophets. Those that were left were told they had survived because they were more righteous than the others. (This negates any possibility of so-called “survivor’s guilt.”) Here the voice of Christ precludes any debate by going straight to the root cause so that there is no mistake. It has a spiritual cause, which is under their control, while preventing earthquakes, tempests, whirlwinds, tsunamis, and the like is not.

Then Jesus tells the people how often he had gathered them and nourished them. He says an interesting thing—“O ye people of the house of Israel who have fallen;…how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens, and ye would not” (v5, emphasis added). It is curious that Jesus speaks not only to the living, but to the disobedient dead, and that He allows the living to hear what He says to the disobedient dead. It seems that Jesus cares enough about these disobedient spirits who have just died that He takes the time to explain to them that they only have themselves to blame for their present condition because He did His best to gather them. Perhaps He allows the living to listen in because it is a sample of what the final judgment is like and it can give them extra reason to repent and prepare.

Another interesting thing is that He includes in this “ye that dwell in Jerusalem, as ye that have fallen…how oft I would have gathered you…and ye would not.” Clearly Jesus anticipates that Jerusalem will be destroyed and desolated just like the wicked Nephites cities had been, and in His mind, it is as if it has already happened because they rejected His efforts to save them. This gives a sense of impending judgment, reinforcing for the Nephite listeners the need to repent.

Then Jesus promises that He will gather oft those who repent and come to Him, and He finishes with a strong statement—“But if not, O house of Israel, the places of your dwellings shall become desolate until the time of the fulfilling of the covenant to your fathers.” (v7) This causes the multitude to weep and wail again for the loss of their kindred. Why? Jesus made all the destruction into a massive object lesson of what would happen to them if they did not repent. Their recent experience of losing their families made them feel Jesus’s words as never before. They had already experienced this desolation in mortality, and they would experience a spiritual desolation on the other side of the veil if they didn’t repent. Jesus implied a looming separation of family members from each other because of failing to repent and receive saving ordinances and celestial marriage covenants. If they were all separated from each other in spirit prison, it would be just as if their whole family was made desolate except for them. It would only be overcome (by temple work) when the covenant to Abraham that “in thy seed shall all the kindred’s of the earth be blessed” would be fulfilled.

It seems then, that the destruction among the Nephites at the crucifixion of Christ was not just a sign of that significant event, nor was it just divine justice meted out, but it was also used as a teaching tool for those who were still soft-hearted enough to listen.

After the three days, all the darkness dispersed and the destruction ceased, and the record notes “the wailing of the people who were spared alive did cease; and their mourning was turned into joy, and their lamentations into the praise and thanksgiving unto the Lord Jesus Christ, their Redeemer” (v10). I used to think that they were just happy the darkness was gone and the destruction was over. But recently, I realized that wasn’t the main cause their joy. Their joy and praise and thanksgiving was because of Jesus Christ redeeming them. They had listened to the words of the voice of Christ and obeyed the command to repent. So by the time the darkness was dispersed, they had begun to feel the joy of their redemption.

Note that the destruction and darkness happened at the very beginning of the year (see 3 Nephi 8:5), and it wasn’t until the end of the year that Christ appeared to the Nephites (see 3 Nephi 10:18). Thus, when the record tells us in 3 Nephi 11:1 that the multitude at the temple was “marveling and wondering one with another, and were showing one to another the great and marvelous change which had taken place,” they were not talking about geographic change at all, as we so often suppose. (They had plenty of time during the year for that.) They were telling each other about the great and marvelous change that had occurred in their lives since they had repented. That’s the kind of change that takes some time to manifest itself. The greatness lay in the lastingness of it. (Keep in mind that all the previous chapters of 3 Nephi show plainly that they only enjoyed righteousness two short times in between long stretches of awful wickedness.) So they were speaking of how their lives had changed and conversing about Christ who had died, which sounds a lot like they were bearing testimony. And to this environment of spiritual witness and reflection, Christ came. What better time for Him to come?

And might He still come to our testimony meetings, even if we don’t see Him? Perhaps this holds a lesson—we witness of Him spiritually before we can witness Him with our eyes.