Ask Thee A Sign

There was an occasion, I suspect one of several such, where certain of the Scribes (transcribers and interpreters of Scripture, according to their philosophical views) and the Pharisees (teachers of rigid, extra-scriptural philosophical overlays on The Law of Moses, precursors to modern Rabbis) made a request of Jesus (Matthew 12:38-42):

38: "...Master, we would seek a sign from thee. 39: But [Jesus] answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 40: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall The Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. 41: The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. 42: The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.

Even as a child I grasped the lesson, or a lesson, from this encounter: That to ask Deity to dazzle the proud, the recalcitrant, the unwilling, with displays of visual wonderment, in order for them to believe, is a reflection of the private, inner transgression of Divine law on the part of the solicitors. The Father, The Lord, talks to His children. He speaks to us on our level, which always includes having His servants, those who have already turned to Him and discovered the Truth from Him directly, share that message with others. Perhaps you noticed that the only "signs" Jesus gave these Scribes and Pharisees were two previous examples, both in scripture, of a member of the Covenant of Abraham (Jonah, Solomon) sharing the Word, the Wisdom, of God, with those outside the covenant, the people of Nineveh and the Queen of the South. In one case God sent His messenger to the outsiders, (Jonah), and in another the outsider took it upon herself to seek out The Lord's servant. In both instances the message was conveyed person-to-person. In both cases the Savior's mission was foreshadowed, death and resurrection in the example of Jonah being swallowed up and then emerging three days later, the woman from the world coming unto the Anointed King of Israel, in the example of the Queen of the South.

But, if it is an "evil and adulterous generation that seeketh after a sign", why did The Lord have Isaiah offer Ahaz the opportunity to ask a sign of Him? (Isaiah 7:9-14)

9: And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remeliah's son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be established. 10: Moreover The Lord spake again unto Ahaz, saying, 11: Ask thee sign from with The Lord thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. 12: But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt The Lord. 13: And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? 14: Therefore The Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.

This is yet another case where reading the source language text opens the reader to greater understanding. I will give a more careful rendering from the source Hebrew with one correction from the Great Isaiah Scroll from Qumran:

9: And the head of Ephraim is Samaria, and the head of Samaria is Remeliah's son. If ye will not believe, surely ye shall not be firm. 10: Moreover Jehovah spake again unto Ahaz, saying, 11: Ask for thyself a sign from with Jehovah thy Elohim; make a deep request or raise it overhead. 12: But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I test Jehovah. 13: And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my Elohim also? 14: Therefore Jehovah Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.

This is yet another case where reading the source language text opens the reader to a firmer understanding. Here I will make the steps clear.

1. Isaiah tells Ahaz that to be firm (made firm, established), one must believe (have faith). Clearly Ahaz neither believes nor is firmly established.
2. So Jehovah speaks to Ahaz, via Isaiah, and invites Ahaz, not simply to ask for a sign, but to ask a sign for himself from and with Jehovah his Elohim, The Lord his God, Heavenly Father. I will repeat as the point is powerful: The Son, Jehovah, told Ahaz to ask a sign for himself from/with his Heavenly Father. This request could only be made one way: Prayer. This is precisely the message Jesus, Jehovah, The Son of God, continued to reaffirm during His mortal ministry: "After this manner therefore pray ye, Our Father which art in Heaven..." (Matthew 6:9), "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you" (Matthew 7:7). The phrasing in Hebrew is precise: "Make a deep request or raise it overhead." And if prayer is to be perceived in this, then the request Ahaz was invited to make would be deep inside himself, a private prayer, or raised overhead, vocal prayer, or perhaps a prayer regarding something deep (perhaps personal) or high overhead (regarding something divine). 
3. Ahaz responds with stony indifference: "I will not ask", that is, "I will not ask from/with Jehovah my Elohim, My Heavenly Father", nor will I "put Jehovah's invitation to the test." Well if this is not the age-old and yet freshest cut answer from the lips of homo sapiens, "I do not believe in the message of Scripture nor will I pray to my Father in Heaven to know it, no matter what it is purported that His Son calls me to do."
4. So Jehovah (the Masoretes, Rabbinic scribes, made several changes to the Holy Texts, and this is one), yes the Lord, but not merely "Adonai" as our Hebrew source text reads but Jehovah per the Great Isaiah Scroll from Qumran, Jehovah, The Son of Jehovah our Elohim, proceeds to give Ahaz a sign, and the sign is, contrary to how we may be tempted to see this from a modern perspective (that is, "the first time this was declared or made known"), a reaffirmation of the message of Scripture. That is, the words "A virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel ['With us is El/God]" was a rehearsal of what had already been declared. After all, from the beginning we were told that the "seed of the woman" shall bruise the head [plan] of the serpent, and in Scripture only men have seed [semen], woman bear fruit [fetus], but here "the seed of the woman", that is, the Virgin Conception, would prevail (Genesis 3:15). And we were told of The Son, "Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee," (Psalm 2:7), whom we would have to kiss (honor, welcome) or "perish from the way" (Psalm 2:12). And when Jehovah appeared to Jacob and identified Himself as, "Jehovah, Elohim of Abraham thy father, and Elohim of Isaac", and further told Jacob, "I am with thee", Jacob named that place "Beth-El", the House of El, the House of God (Genesis 28:13,15,17), almost as if to say, "Immanu-El" 'With us is El'. So the sign that Jehovah, The Son of God, sent to Ahaz via Isaiah was a reaffirmation of previously received Scripture...just as Jesus later did during His mortal ministry.

There are two points I would draw the reader's mind to: (1) the sign we are to seek from and with God is a confirmation of the present oral witness of His authorized servants and a confirmation of Scripture, and (2) that confirmation is to be sought from God, The Father, and with God, The Father, via prayer.

And if I may belabor the point just one more time, consider this promise that appears in the final chapter of The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ (Moroni 10:3-5):

3: Behold, I [Moroni] would exhort you that when ye shall read these things [The Book of Mormon], if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful The Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam [via The Bible Record] even down until the time that ye shall receive these things [poss. down to your own family history], and ponder it in your hearts. 4: And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, The Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of The Holy Ghost. 5: And by the power of The Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.

Well, well, well. We have here an incredible convergence of harmonious truth in Moroni's promise. To test what you have read from The Book of Mormon, to know whether it is true, the entire Tome, ponder [read, consider, remember] The Bible too, but also consider how merciful The Lord has been to your own family, and ponder all of this (The Book of Mormon, The Bible, your own family history) in your heart. Then actually ask The Father, in the name of Christ, for a confirmation, a most holy sign we might say, but a sign "from and with The Lord our God", and if truly sincere and intent on obeying that answer, we will receive it by the power of The Holy Ghost. 

This is the same message The Lord has always, ever, singularly and without deviation given. The reader is free to take from this as he or she deems correct. But at least bear one thing in mind: Everything I have cited, the passages at least, are actually textual.

Then and Now

What does one make of this? 

August 1916: The Father and The Son

In August of 1916 The First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints clarified the relationship between our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ via an official statement, "The Father and The Son", specifically speaking, the First Presidency clarified what our Latter-day usage of the sacred name-titles they bear would be:

Scriptures embodying the ordinary signification--literally that of Parent--are too numerous and specific to require citation. The purport of these scriptures is to the effect that God the Eternal Father, whom we designate by the exalted name-title "Elohim", is the literal Parent of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and of the spirits of the human race...Jesus Christ is the Son of Elohim both as spiritual and bodily offspring; that is to say, Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh...That Jesus Christ, whom we also know as Jehovah, was the executive of the Father, Elohim, in the work of creation...

Thus the relationship, if it had not already been made very clear in the Restoration (and indeed it had been), now the doctrine was explicitly laid out, namely, that we Latter-day Saints refer to The Father by His exalted name-title in Hebrew, "Elohim", and Jesus Christ, His Only-Begotten in the flesh, was also "Jehovah", His First-Born in the spirit. 

Two By Two

The issue of Hebrew usage is very interesting because both titles, Elohim and Jehovah, are applied to both The Father and The Son. Why? Because The Son, by doing the will of His Father in Heaven perfectly, was exactly like His Father, and His Father therefore gave Him all that He had. The same promise of eternal life and exaltation is held out to all people. 

To see the name-title Elohim used in Hebrew for both The Father and The Son one may consider Genesis 1:6-7:

And Elohim said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And Elohim made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

These passages are so familiar we may not catch what is there. In verse six Elohim commanded that there be a firmament. Then in verse seven Elohim proceeded to make the firmament. I put it to the reader that The Father, Elohim, did not command Himself to make the firmament, nor did He obey Himself. He commanded His Son to make the firmament (the creation in its entirety as well, though the firmament is but a single instance), and as The Son was doing the will of The Father for The Father's objectives, The Son bore The Father's Title, "Elohim".

Consider Genesis 41:32:

And for that the dream was repeated unto Pharaoh twice; it is because the word [or "thing"] is decreed by The Elohim and The Elohim is hastening to do it.

Well, well, well, what do we have here? We again see Elohim, here with the definite article, The Elohim, 'The God', the Presiding Elohim. In this passage the prophet Joseph describes how The Elohim had decreed the periods of plenty and famine twice to Pharaoh by dream, and then, perhaps more interesting still, Joseph describes The Elohim hurrying to do it, or rather, that The Elohim is on the point or verge of executing the decree. Again, The Son does the will of The Father, and therefore The Father bestowed His title on Him.

And the same is seen with the title, Jehovah, 'Existent', as in Genesis 18:17,19:

And Jehovah said, Shall I hide from Abraham that which I do? For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of Jehovah, to do justice and judgment; that Jehovah may bring upon Abraham that which He hath spoken of him.

These two verses are powerful. We see Jehovah speaking in the first person, "I"--"Shall I hide"--and as Jehovah continues in the first person--"I know"--Jehovah then speaks of Jehovah in the third person, "they shall keep the way of Jehovah"...that "Jehovah may bring"...that which "He hath spoken". The Jehovah who is addressing Abraham directly is Jehovah, The Son of Elohim. It then appears that the Jehovah that Jehovah The Son referred to was Jehovah His Father. Elohim bears the title "Jehovah" and placed it on His Son because His Son did His will in all things. 

Pattern One

Though the usage of the name-titles Elohim and Jehovah could seem confusing let us consider the earliest usages. In the first instance of Deity acting and making addresses The Father is called Elohim and The Son is called Jehovah:

(Genesis 1:1) In a beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth.

(Genesis 1:26) And Elohim said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...

(Genesis 1:28) And Elohim blessed them, and Elohim said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it...

(Genesis 3:22) And Jehovah Elohim said, Behold, the Adam is become as one of us...

(Genesis 3:23) Therefore Jehovah Elohim sent the Adam forth from the garden...

 (Genesis 4:6) And Jehovah said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? And why is thy countenance fallen?

What we see in the earliest usage is that The Father was called "Elohim" first, then later "Jehovah Elohim" (translated to English as "The Lord God"). It was Elohim, The Father, who laid out the plan for creation, Elohim presided, and initially, before Adam and Eve fell, it was Elohim, The Father, Himself who addressed Adam and Eve, "The Adam", directly, face to face, without any intermediary. After the fall of Adam it was "Jehovah" who addressed mankind directly. So in the earliest usage "Elohim" is The Father and "Jehovah" is The Son, in their direct communications with mankind. It is worth noting, though, that along with Jehovah as an Intermediary, The Father does again address mankind directly, which is a topic for another post.

Greece the Transmission

In the centuries immediately preceding Jehovah's birth as Jesus Christ, that is, Elohim's Son's birth as Jesus Christ, and in the centuries that followed, Holy Writ came to be translated to Greek and in some instances penned in Greek autographs. Eventually Greek speakers settled upon a pattern of translating the name Jehovah as "o Kyrios" 'The Lord' or even solely as "Kyrios" '(the) Lord'. Greek speakers rendered the name-title Elohim as "o Theos" 'The God'. 

The New Testament was compiled in the fourth century AD, and when it was first bound into tomes the various Christian churches that had been forged into a union named The Roman Catholic Church under Emperor Constantine could not agree on contents of the New Testament canon. The 27 books we now have in The New Testament were eventually agreed upon, but there were other sacred books that were not universally accepted. It appears that the initial solution was to allow different Christian centers (cities) to have their regionally accepted books included in the back of the sacred volume. In this way New Testaments differed by contents from Christian center to Christian center. (It is worth noting that this variation continues to this day with the Armenian, Ethiopic and possibly the Georgian New Testaments being larger in content and, until fairly recently, the Aramaic/Syriac New Testament being shorter, which would be a topic for another blog post.) By the start of the fifth century AD in the west at least those extra books were removed from the canon. Here is an excerpt from The Epistle of Barnabas, a book purported to have been written by the Apostle Barnabas, which epistle was preserved in arguably the oldest surviving New Testament volume, The Sinaiticus: Epistle of Barnabas: 5:5-9:

(5) And furthermore, my brethren: if The Lord submitted to suffer for our souls, even though He is The Lord of the whole world, to whom The God said at the foundation of the world, "Let us make man according to our image and likeness," how is it, then, that He submitted to suffer at the hand of men? Learn! (6) The prophets, receiving grace from Him, prophesied about Him. But He Himself submitted, in order that He might destroy death and demonstrate the reality of the resurrection of the dead, because it was necessary that He be manifested in the flesh. (7) Also, He submitted in order that He might redeem the promise to the fathers and--while preparing the new people for Himself--prove, while He was still on earth, that after He has brought about the resurrection He will execute judgment. (8) Furthermore, by teaching Israel and performing extraordinary wonders and signs, He preached and loved them intensely. (9) And when He chose His own Apostles who were destined to preach His gospel (who were sinful beyond all measure in order that He might demonstrate that "He did not come to call the righteous, but sinners), then He revealed Himself to be God's Son.

In this citation (as throughout the work) Jesus Christ is referred to as "The Lord", God's Son; Jesus' Father is called "The God". The underlying Hebrew for this usage would be calling Jesus Christ "Jehovah", Elohim's Son, and calling Jesus' Father "The Elohim", The God who directed Jehovah in the work of creation and The God who sent Jehovah to suffer for the sins of the world.

What to Make of This?

The question I posed at the outset was "what is one to make of this?" Of what specifically? Of the fact that anciently, in the Hebrew records, The Father bore the name-titles "Elohim" and "Jehovah" and that The Father bestowed both on His Son, but that in particular The Father did bear the name-title "Elohim" and His Son bore the name-title "Jehovah". I mean to say, is it not interesting that in the earliest accounts written in Hebrew The Father is called Elohim and His Son is called Jehovah, that this usage becomes extremely clear and succinct in the early Apostolic era, the time while Christ's Church was still founded on the basis of living Apostles, and then that some 1700 years later when living prophets and Apostles are once again on the earth through The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the very same clarity of title usage, The Father as Elohim and Jesus as Jehovah, suddenly reappears? How is it that the earliest usage was restored in the first-century Apostolic era, and then after 1700 years of loss the same initial usage is yet again restored via the First Presidency statement, "The Father and The Son"? The reader is left to ponder that for him or herself. To me the answer is obvious: Whenever God calls Apostles and Prophets God reveals His true identity, titles, and relationship to His Son to His living oracles. This is why the relationship was clear under Moses, the clarity was restored under the first-century Apostles, and then the clarity was again restored under Joseph Smith culminating in 1916's "The Father and The Son" (by Joseph Smith's successor-Prophets and Apostles). Certainly the reader is free to make of this what he or she will, but the citations speak for themselves, and they are actually really quite textual.

Have a great day!

I Am Adam

I have stated before that, as a linguist, I see great value in defining words by their usage. Said more plainly, "any word's meaning is to be seen largely in how the word is used."

Adam 

The first mention of "Man" we have in the scriptural accounts as handed down to the world is found in Genesis 1:26: (From the Hebrew)

And Elohim said, "Let Us make Man in shape of Us, as a likeness of Us." 

Here God, "Elohim" per the Hebrew, gives us the clearest definition of "Man", and certainly the first clear definition in all scripture: "Man is a being shaped like Elohim as a likeness (or similitude) of Elohim". Said more plainly, "Man physically looks like Elohim, by shape and members, and Man has attributes or characteristics that are similar to Elohim."

To be more precise in who Elohim (God) is, in Genesis 1:1 we read the following:

In a beginning Elohim created the heavens and the earth.

Then in verse two we read as follows:

And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness upon the face of the deep. And Spirit Elohim moved upon the face of the waters.

The Hebrew "Ruakh Elohim" literally reads 'Spirit Elohim'. Though the translation adds a definite article the and a functional preposition of, "The Spirit of God", the Hebrew construction conveys a powerful meaning, namely, that "Spirit Elohim" ('The Spirit of God') was contrasted to "Elohim" ('God') by the fact that Spirit Elohim (The Spirit of God) was a Spirit only. Therefore, "Elohim" or "God" is Embodied; He has a tangible body of flesh and bones.

But there was another Being present, One who was also called "Elohim", just like His Father, only this Elohim was as yet a Spirit only, just as Spirit Elohim (The Spirit of God) was. We see this Elohim creating under the command of His Father. In verses 6 and 7:

And Elohim said, let there be a firmament in the midst of the heavens...

And Elohim made the firmament... 

Notice how Elohim (God) commands, and then Elohim obeys. God did not command Himself; God commanded His Son, and His Son obeyed Him in all things.

Also, when Adam fell, Elohim The Father says something very interesting: (Genesis 3:22)

 Behold, the Adam is become as One of Us...

So I ask the question, like which "One"? Adam, embodied, had now gained a knowledge of good and evil through his own experience, while in a body. These factors (body, life, experience via choice) now made the Adam (humanity, which at this point was Adam and Eve as a couple) like unto "One" of the Elohim. When these observations are taken in their totality it becomes evident that when Elohim The Father said, "Let us make Adam in our image" that (a) Adam was shaped like God, (b) Adam had attributes like God, and (c) just like Elohim The Father, Adam had both a body and a spirit.

Adam Plus

Most people who have even a passive acquaintance with The Bible associate the name "Adam" with the first man. But God said more than "shape" and "likeness". (Genesis 1:26)

In the image of Elohim created He him, male and female created He them.

Man, "Adam" denotes both genders. This is an often overlooked point, but more astonishing still, the narrative goes on to describe God's joining Adam (the first man) to Eve (the first woman) in matrimony by His authority in a special Garden established as a place where His Presence was revealed in great glory. Bear in mind that this union took place before death entered human experience, so the matrimony was indefinite ("eternal"), "Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion (or 'lord over') over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth". (Genesis 1:28) Thus, per usage, "Adam" means "husband and wife together", and if with this point in mind, that "Adam" per the Hebrew denotes a married couple, we return to what we have already seen, that "Adam" was made both "in shape or image" of Elohim "as a likeness or similitude" of Elohim, as "male and female", we are actually being told, in the very beginning of the Scriptural record, that God The Father is a Married Man. That is, God The Father is One with His Wife, might we say, "God The Mother". Our terminology is more tender than that, though, for we refer to God The Father as "Heavenly Father" and His Wife as "Heavenly Mother", our Heavenly Parents.

All Are Adam

The Scriptural account adds one further expansion or application of the word Adam: "Adam" means "mankind" collectively: (Genesis 6:3)

And Jehovah said, My Spirit shall not always plead in Adam...

In Hebrew all mankind is collectively known as "Adam" or as "the Adam" (with the definite article the). This usage demonstrates that God equates all people collectively as "Adam", the two children He bore to life and later joined in matrimony in the Garden. This usage also demonstrates that God treats each individual as "Adam", His firstborn son on earth. It may be with this affirmation in mind that holy prophets have said the following things about humanity:

1. (Genesis 4:6-7) "And Jehovah said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? And why is thy countenance fallen [i.e. 'very sad']? If thou doest well shalt thou not be exalted? 
2. (Malachi 2:10) Have we not all One Father? Hath not One God created us?...
3. (Acts 10:34) "Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons."
4. (2 Nephi 26:33) "For none of these iniquities come of The Lord; for He doeth that which is good among the children of men; and he doeth nothing save it be plain unto the children of men; and He inviteth them all to come unto Him and partake of His goodness; and He denieth none that come unto Him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; and He remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile." 
5. (Alma 24:14) "And the great God has had mercy on us, and made these things known unto us that we might not perish; yea, and He has made these things known unto us beforehand, because he loveth our souls as well as He loveth our children; therefore, in His mercy He doth visit us by His angels, that the plan of salvation might be made known unto us as well as unto future generations."
6. (Moses 6:64-66,68) "And it came to pass when The Lord had spoken with Adam, our father, that Adam cried unto The Lord, and was carried down into the water, and was brought forth out of the water. And thus he was baptized, and The Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he was born of the Spirit, and became quickened in the inner man. And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with fire, and with The Holy Ghost. This is the record of The Father, and The Son, from henceforth and forever. Behold, thou art one in me, a son of God; and thus may all become my sons. Amen."

Certainly I could cite more passages, but these suffice to show that God loves all His children the same. He offers us the same eternal opportunities and the same mercy. Neither gender, color, age, era, nationality or beliefs persuade The Father to see His children any other way than as all alike to Him.

I Am Adam

In conclusion, though much more can be said on these topics, I certainly do not claim to have a right to compel anyone to adopt these views. I am simply sharing the teachings of the Holy Scriptures. But I will say this, knowing who I am, a son of God, equated by Him to His first earthly son, Adam, means that God offers me the same redemption and the same blessings as He offered His first earthly Adam. I am an Adam too. This means I have it in me both to utilize my strength to do good and to open myself up to more of God's strength to do good. I am much more than one among the billions: I am Adam. The reader may similarly find great truth in the Scriptures or may differ as to interpretation. However one wishes to take this I only ask that you bear in mind that the passages I shared, at least, are actually textual.

"Turn and Face the Strange Changes: Just Gonna Have to Be a Different Man"

In 1971, when I was a wee lad of six, David Bowie, rising talent of British Glitter Rock, released an album with his soon to become iconic feature track, "Changes". The chorus has long moved me, especially the line, "Turn and face the strange ch-ch-changes, just gonna have to be a different man." The import of these words will become evident.

I consider scripture study to be communion with Deity. Whether or not I hear His actual voice or perceive His tender tones every time, just to read even a verse brings me peace and motivation. Unlike anything else, the scriptures stand out to me as a constant source of inner strength.

So it was that on Thursday last upon awaking I prayed to The Father and asked Him to guide my studies to something that would inspire me and help my brethren. I felt moved to reach for a specific tome, and the following story unraveled. Bear with, and you will be rewarded.

The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ has (among so many others) a particular recurring theme. The teaching is presented in the form of a couplet where two arguments, one positive and the other negative are juxtaposed. (2 Nephi 1:20) The form of the couplet is immediately recognizable from linear algebra: If P then Q; if not P, then not Q. 

(If P) Inasmuch as ye shall keep my commandments 
(then Q) ye shall prosper in the land;    
(If not P) but inasmuch as ye will not keep my commandments 
(then not Q) ye shall be cut off from my presence.

However, in the Semitic fashion of rendering such statements (If P then Q; if not P, then not Q), unlike the European model, there is not perfect symmetry between each argument. Rather than having one argument be positive and the second argument be the direct contrapositive, in the Semitic version one proposition in the contrapositive will differ from its equivalent proposition in the positive. The Semitic contrapositive was then not a simple restatement of the positive negated, but was a narrowing of what the equivalent positive proposition was meant to convey. Said differently, the divergent proposition in the contrapositive defines its equivalent positive proposition.. Thus,

+Keep Commandments ~ -Keep Commandments
+Prosper in the Land ~ +Be in Presence of God

In this fashion the Nephite prophets would consistently demonstrate that as the Nephites followed the commandments of The Lord they prospered, that is, they were in the Presence of The Lord. But as the Nephites would not keep His commandments, they were cut off from His Presence.

That is an Un-Biblical Book of Mormon-ism!

The aforementioned linear argument and its contrapositive are recurrent themes in The Book of Mormon. The implication of the ultimate objective of the positive argument (If ye keep my commandments ye shall prosper in the land/Be in my Presence) was made clear by the Prophet Abinadi: (Mosiah 12:33)

I know if ye keep the commandments of God
ye shall be saved.

It is at this point in particular that some of my fellow Christians raise the following charge: "That is an un-Biblical Book of Mormon-ism! The Bible clearly teaches that one need only believe to have eternal life, but Mormons teach that you need to keep the commandments."

Indeed those of my fellow Christians who object to the teachings of the aforementioned Book of Mormon passages will quote the Savior seemingly using the same linear argument as in The Book of Mormon, but to a different conclusion: (John 3:36)

(If P) He that believeth on the Son, 
(then Q) hath everlasting life:    
(If not P) and he that believeth not the Son
(then not Q) shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

I understand why some of my fellow Christians would object to the aforecited Book of Mormon passages. This direct quote from Jesus certainly does seem to convey the message that salvation or eternal life is directly dependent upon belief rather than following God's commandments. Notice, however, how this argument and its contraposition are neatly symmetrical with the contrapositive being a direct negative of the positive argument, unlike The Book of Mormon couplet where one proposition in the contrapositive diverged to define its equivalent positive proposition:

+Belief in Son ~ -Belief in Son
+Have Everlasting Life ~ -Have Everlasting Life

Turn and Face the Strange Changes (Just Gonna Have to Be a Different Man)

Allow me now to share with you something that is common knowledge among Biblical scholars. This is something that experts of textual history, textual chronology, and ancient languages know but do not seem to share with others, at least not sufficiently openly, perhaps because they approach scripture as a purely academic discipline rather than as Divine Communication meant actually to bring people to the very Presence of God: In the Greek miniscules denoted f13 (dated from the X-XV centuries AD) this verse, John 3:36, was changed. (See source noted below.) Consequently, from that point on subsequent Greek manuscripts have contained the altered variant of this teaching.

So how did the text read prior, and is this verifiable? Every previous Greek document including the earliest preserved Greek manuscripts of The Gospel According to John are harmonious in their reading of John 3:36 until the change was entered into the textual line in the Greek miniscules denoted f13 (X-XV centuries AD). The original statement of Jesus was not the crisply symmetrical European-esque statement we now have where each positive proposition is mirrored by an exact contrapositive (He that believeth hath eternal life; He that believeth not hath not life). The original statement of Jesus had a divergent proposition in the contrapositive, a divergent proposition that narrowed down or defined its equivalent positive proposition. Here is the unaltered original:

(If P) He that believeth on the Son, 
(then Q) hath everlasting life:    
(If not P) and he that disobeyeth the Son
(then not Q) shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Whoa?!! What!!! Jesus had actually taught that he who disobeys The Son of God shall not see life, however, Jesus, utilizing the Semitic model (the very model seen in The Book of Mormon where there is not exact symmetry between both positive and negative arguments, but one negative proposition differs so as to define the previous positive equivalent) actually defined what it means to believe in Him: Belief in Jesus means to keep His commandments.

Now Jesus' departing words to His faithful disciples take on added import: (Matthew 28:19-20)

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things 
whatsoever I have commanded you:
and, lo, I am with you alway,
even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Jesus' departing instructions to His Apostles were that they teach all nations and baptize them, teaching them to obey all things that He has commanded, and if so, He will always be with us. Now, what at the outset looked like an un-Biblical Book of Mormon-ism, that to be in the Presence of The Lord and ultimately to be saved we must keep the commandments, turns out to be in perfect harmony with what The Bible and Our Lord actually taught.

In case you're wondering, I certainly did, why this precious teaching of Jesus was changed in miniscules f13 (X-XV A.D), I propose the following possible explanation: In A.D. 382 St. Jerome was commissioned by the still fresh (roughly 60 years old) Catholic Church to revise the older Latin translations of portions of scriptures and produce a new and complete Latin translation of the entire Bible (remember The Bible Compilation was roughly only 50 years old at this point). St. Jerome put together the Latin translation of the entire Bible, since called the Vulgate. Either Jerome or a predecessor, both being European, may have cringed at what they saw as the lack of symmetry in Jesus' couplet and sought to "smooth" it out. Thus either Jerome or a predecessor changed "he that disobeyeth the Son" to "he that hath not believed the Son" so that the couplet would read cleanly symmetrical. In the Latin:

(If P) Qui credit in Filium 
(then Q) habet vitam aeternam:    
(If not P) qui autem incredulus est Filio 
(then not Q) non videbit vitam sed ira Dei manet super eum.

(If P) He that believeth in the Son
(then Q) hath eternal life:    
(If not P) and he that hath not believed the Son
(then not Q) shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

In St. Jerome's world, where to believe was absolutely to obey, this change of wording must have seemed harmless, and so he opted for the style that produced a cleanly symmetrical couplet as he would have been used to encountering. St. Jerome was, after all, European (nothing against my Euro-brethren and sisters!). Little could he have fathomed the impact that small alteration would have on generations of believers over a millennium and a half later.

The Lord, however, has seen fit to pour our great truths in our day to raise our understanding and confirm the truth that preceded it, namely The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ as a confirmation of The Bible, and The Lord has given other beautiful revelations as well.

Can the reader turn, turn and face the strange changes entered into Holy Writ? By so doing the reader may realize that he is just going to have to be a different man and she a different woman.

God bless all.

P.S. If the reader is unfamiliar with David Bowie's "Changes", click and have a worthwhile listening experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZAKuL8cyiAA

Source:
New Testament Greek Manuscripts, Variant Readings Arranged in Horizontal Lines Against Codex Vaticanus, John, Reuben Swanson, Editor, Sheffield Academic Press, William Carey International University Press, 1995.

I Can't Help Falling In Love With You

The Lord said:


"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light."


(Matthew 11:28-30)


Years ago I lived in Provo, Utah. Outwardly I loved life; I had friends, fun, and many great spiritual experiences.  True, and I loved many people. But inside I was riddled with angst. I knew what the issue was, but that problem terrified me. I fought hard to extinguish that part of me, but like the game of wack-a-mole, no sooner would I pound down one manifestation than the same or one like it arose elsewhere, ever recurring, and then from the same holes again as before, as if to mock what I might have thought was progress. I was so burdened, and as I feared that my standing before God depended on my extinguishing this apect of me, I anguished alone.


And every day I gazed upon ugly, ominous mountains; and every Saturday I attended an unattractive yet spiritual temple.

But I returned, recently, for a friend's wedding.  The sealing was so beautiful I cried. Later as he and his lovely bride danced to Elvis Presley's "I Can't Help Falling in Love with You", I cried. As my friend and his wonderful bride were about to ride off, my friend ran back and hugged me. As we exchanged goodbye glances I cried. Through every tear I felt a serene smile on me that I had not felt before. From the beginning of my visit to the end of it words were exchanged that I will treasure literally forever. I love my friend, and I was so happy for him.

And I gazed upon beautiful mountains, magestic and Godly. And I marveled at a Temple so beautiful in its design intricacy and coloration. These were the same ones I had once seen as ugly.


But I am no longer riddled with angst. No longer do I fear myself or hate myself. The Lord Atoned for my sins and weaknesses, and I came to understand that this realization had set in gradually. I became conscious of this inner peace there in Provo, Utah, March 18-21st. I understood that the mountains and the Provo Temple were not instrinsically unattractive, but I had somehow once projected what I felt standing between me and The Lord onto them.

Why the difference now? Well, when I bottomed out and was ready to give in and embrace the darkness, The Father reached out to me. He asked me to choose Him, He promised to be my Man, He promised to fill me. And when I told Him "Okay" only to recognize that I was in a terrible place in life, I was scared, and I told Him that I didn't know what to do, He told me "Thou hast chosen Me. So rely on Me: I will resolve this."


That was mid-2011. Now I feel such profound love and gratitude. In a way I understand some things only the way I hear beautiful classical music though I have no personal abilities in music. I do not understand how The Father and The Son are One, but I hear the melody, and I feel the change within me, and I feel peace.  I no longer fear embracing His transformation of me, however gradual and whatever the cost, this yoke is a "thin" (hence "easy") yoke [per Hebrew Matthew] or "pleasant" [per Greek Matthew] yoke, and His burden on me is light, both in weight and illumination.


I learned something from reading Hebrew Matthew, and for me it opened me up to embracing my yoke: Matthew 5:10 "Blessed are they which are persecuted ones for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." That one difference "persecuted ones" opened my eyes to its meaning: blessed are those who choose My Father's righteousness, My commandments, even when this choice leads them to bear what can only be called persecution, but from within. In so doing these persecuted internally for righteousness' sake, these will have the Celestial Kingdom.


BTW: Matthew 5:11-12 offers a blessing for bearing persecution from others (external), but to me today it almost seems like the greater blessing comes for enduring the inner persecution (verse 10): "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely: Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven."

One last point. Just before returning I met up with another dear missionary friend. As we shared our faith and The Lord's blessings on us I felt to share my struggle, when I bottomed out, but then I hestitated for a second out of shame. Then words came through my mind: "James, do not feel shame for this." And I remembered something The Lord had led me to discover earlier: When Jesus hung on the cross He was not given any loin cloth for dignity's sake, but was made to hang beaten and naked for the ultimate shame and humiliation. He thereby not only bore my sins but the shame as well. He bore it all. And I can't help falling in love with Him.

And I fell in love again with Jesus, in Provo, Utah, and thereby I fell in love with The Father again.


God bless you all.

But, behold I, Jacob, would speak unto you that are pure in heart. Look unto God with firmness of mind, and pray unto Him with exceeding faith, and He will console you in your afflictions, and He will plead your cause, and send down justice upon those who seek your destruction.
(Jacob 3:1, The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ)

Jacob's Ladder at Beth-El, "Temple"

The sacredness of the Temple is of the utmost. So I will share the Biblical half of my endowment inspiration. 

1. In Genesis 28, Jacob rested in Luz (which means "almond tree", which tree symbolized wickedness because its branches are so gnarly and crooked). 
2. As Jacob slept he saw a dream. In his dream Jacob saw a ladder that reached to heaven, per the King James. (Genesis 28:12)
3. In Hebrew "ladder" and "stairwell" are the same word. Be aware that Biblical scholars say and Rabbis say that Jacob's Ladder is a mystery which no one understands. 
4. Jacob saw angels "ascending and descending" on this staircase. (Genesis 28:12)
5. I had always assumed that some large number of angels were ascending while others were simultaneously descending, kind of like a busy New York City sidewalk, only on a massive stairwell. Now, "mlachim" is the Hebrew word for "messengers", though in English we mainly translate this term using a word of ultimately Greek origin: "angels". In Greek "angels" means "messengers". By strict Hebrew grammar "mlachim" is a plural, which in Hebrew is obligatorily 3 messengers at a minimum. What if Jacob saw, not hosts or even crowds of angels/messengers "ascending and descending" but the selfsame 3 messengers "ascending and then descending again"?
6. The Hebrew text says that "Jehovah stood on the top of the staircase" but the King James translators rendered "the Lord stood above the ladder". Either way the messengers, 3 at a minimum, were ascending to Jehovah and then descending again, which ascension and descent suggest that the messengers, 3 at a minimum, reported to Jehovah and then again got dispatched back to earth by Him again. (Genesis 28:13)
7. When Jacob awoke, per the King James he said, "this is none other than the house of God." The Hebrew says "this is none other than a house of Elohim", which we can render in English as "this is none other than a Temple/house of God."
8. If that was not clear enough Jacob changes the name of the place from Luz to "Bethel", "Beth El". Bethel is the Hebrew word for "Temple". So this vision took place in a form of Temple. 

But the story continues in chapter 31. We really need to focus on the continuation.

1. 31:3 Jehovah speaks to Jacob and tells him "I AM with thee" which was mistranslated as "I will be with thee."
2. 31:11 The King James reads "the angel of God spake unto me in a dream" but the Hebrew reads "Angel of The Elohim/The God spake unto me in a dream."
3. 31:13 Here Moses records that "Angel of The God" told Jacob "I the El of Beth El" or "I (am) the God of Beth El (Temple)."

Did we catch it? In Genesis 28 it is Jehovah who stands at the top of the messenger stairwell. In Hebrew "Jehovah" can be applied to either The Father or The Son. However, Genesis 31 clarifies that the speaker in the dream not only was Jehovah, not only the God of Bethel (God of a Temple), but He--Jehovah, God--is "Angel/Messenger of The Elohim, Messenger of The God."

So in Genesis 28:12-13 per the Hebrew text it is Jehovah The Son of Elohim who stands at the top of the angel stairwell and deals with the (possibly) 3 messengers.

I have had people tell me "where do we read of the Endowment in The Bible?" Now I know. And though I already knew that the Temple Endowment is true, this second witness sure feels good too. 

Toward a Knowledge of the Atonement from the Beginning

The Atonement of Jesus Christ is His great sacrifice, one that consisted of His suffering for the sins of the world, one that culminated with His painful death on the cross. I understand that this sacrifice has power, daily and weekly influence on me; the Atonement is the gift of Salvation. I want to understand it better.

At this moment, and for weeks, I have been searching to understand where and how this was taught from the beginning. I am certain that the need for the Atonement was revealed to Adam and Eve in the beginning:

50: But God hath made known unto our fathers that all men must repent.

51: And he called upon our father Adam by his own voice, saying: I AM God; I made the world, and men before they were in the flesh.

52: And he also said unto him: If thou wilt turn unto me, and hearken unto my voice, and believe, and repent of all thy transgressions, and be baptized, even in water, in the name of mine Only Begotten Son who is full of grace and truth, which is Jesus Christ, the only name which shall be given under heaven, whereby salvation shall come unto the children of men, ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, asking all things in his name, and whatsoever ye shall ask, it shall be given you. 

53: And our father Adam spake unto the Lord, and said: Why is it that men must repent and be baptized in water? And the Lord said unto Adam: Behold I have forgiven thee thy transgression in the Garden of Eden.

54: Hence came the saying abroad among the people, that the Son of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world.

55: And the Lord spake unto Adam, saying: Inasmuch as thy children are conceived in sin, even so when they begin to grow up, sin conceiveth in their hearts, and they taste the bitter, that they may know to prize the good.

56: And it is given unto them to know good from evil; wherefore they are agents unto themselves, and I have given unto you another law and commandment.

57: Wherefore teach it unto your children, that all men, everywhere, must repent, or they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God, for no unclean thing can dwell there, or dwell in his presence; for, in the language of Adam, Man of Holiness is his name, and the name of his Only Begotten is the Son of Man, even Jesus Christ, a righteous Judge, who shall come in the meridian of time.

58: Therefore I give unto you a commandment, to teach these things freely unto your children, saying:

59: That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory.

60: For by the water ye keep the commandment; by the Spirit ye are justified, and by the blood ye are sanctified;

(The Book of Moses 6: 50-60, The Pearl of Great Price)

Adam asked a very important question: Why is it that men must repent and be baptized in water? When the entire answer was laid out, Adam understood that as we grow sin conceives in our hearts (mind, desires), so we must "turn to the Lord" ("repent" in Hebrew means 'turn, turn around'), "hearken unto His voice" ("obey His words"), "repent of all our transgressions" ("turn away from all our transgressions"), "believe" ("have faith"), and be "baptized", then we will receive the Holy Ghost. For the first time I believe that I understand the sacred summary of this encounter: "For by the water ye keep the commandment" ("ye show that ye believe and hearken unto my voice by being baptized as I have commanded"), "by the Spirit ye are justified" ("we receive a Godly presence inside us to help us overcome our fallen nature, thus we become 'just' or 'righteous'"), and by the blood ye are sanctified" ("by the Atonement of Jesus Christ our sins are washed away").

We are told that these holy words were removed from Moses' record long ago. I have gained a testimony that, inasmuch as all truth is truly subsumed in one great total, "all connected" as I usually put it, even when unrighteous people would delete a great truth from scripture, what remained still manages to carry the imprint or mark of what had once been there, though it may take divine revelation to shine light on the traces.

Take for instance what The Lord told Isaiah about the restoration of Israel, of Zion, of His Church, in Isaiah 54: 5-6:

5: For thy Make is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

6: For the LORD hath called thee as a woman forsaken and grieved in spirit, and a wife of youth, when thou wast refused, saith thy God.

As The Lord addressed Israel He compared Israel collectively--every man, woman, and child--to a woman, a woman forsaken and grieved. With these words in mind, let us consider the following early instructions to mankind:

27: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28: And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and  over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. (Genesis 2:27-28)

When God married Adam and Eve, He gave them dominion over all living things in all spheres (water, air, earth), power to subdue the earth, and a command to fill the earth with offspring. Notice what God said after the fall:

16: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. (Genesis 3:16)

17: And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18: Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19: In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Genesis 3:17-19) 

I know that traditionally verse 16 has been taken to mean "Well, Eve, since you fell for Satan's ploy first and thereby messed up, your punishment is twofold: first you will have painful labors and deliveries, and for good measure your husband will lord over you."

But notice that originally Adam and Eve were told to replenish the earth. Notice also that after the fall no mention of having children is made to Adam (Genesis 3:17-19); Eve alone is told that she shall bring forth children. Well if Adam and Eve were to replenish the earth, and inasmuch as it was The Lord God speaking to Eve just as The Lord spoke to Isaiah, I discern that The Lord God addressed Adam and Eve together as "a woman, forsaken (cast out) and grieved (now acquainted with the consequences of sin)." Yes, our hearts now conceive of sin, but there is hope, namely, that our desire should be to our Husband, our Redeemer, the Holy One, and He should rule over us.

If my impression is correct (and I am not so much asserting that it is as I am stating that this view may be conveyed by these words), I have moved closer to seeing the Atonement of Jesus Christ and His role as the Redeemer either as preserved in a trace of the teachings or preserved overtly, but misunderstood: that originally Adam and Eve were commanded to "replenish the earth" and have dominion over it, but after their transgression, the "woman" alone would bear children, and her desire should be to her Husband who would rule over her. Adam is told that he will labor in the earth and eat its herb, yet that the earth would push up thistles and thorns despite his efforts. Also Adam alone will eat bread. Adam is dust (a spirit housed in a body), and to dust he shall return (his spirit shall return to his physical body). Eve is not told that she is of dust and will return to dust, interestingly enough.

24: Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field.

25: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.

26: But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.

27: So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?

28: He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?

29: But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

30: Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn. (Matthew13:24-30)

So The Savior is the man who performs the great work of sowing and reaping in this earth, with the service of His servants, and despite His efforts, the enemy (Satan) sows tares, but The Savior still reaps a harvest.

25: Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live. (John 11:25)

Jesus tells Martha, a woman, interestingly enough, that all who believe in Him shall live, even if they die physically. So the One person who had power over death, power to lay down His life and take it up again, (be of dust and return to being of dust), will bring all others along with Him.

51: I AM the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52: The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

53: Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

54: Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

55: For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.

56: He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.

57: As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

58: This is the bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live. (John 6:51-58)

In Genesis chapter 3 only Adam is told he shall eat bread. Jesus told the people that He was the bread that came down from Heaven, His body, and he that eats His body and drinks His blood, shall live, that He, Jesus, shall live in that person, and that as Jesus lived by The Father, we shall live by Him, The Son.

Our desire shall be to our Husband, our Redeemer, our Lord, The Holy One, and may He rule over us always. The Atonement and Redemption was taught from the beginning. You wonder how? Well, the first Adam introduced the Fall and death, but the Second Adam was going to introduce Life. In order to do so, the Second Adam would not only have to restore life, He would have to undo the effects of the Fall, of sin, Alone. The Atonement was taught from the beginning.

If Thou Doest Well, Shalt Thou Not Be Accepted?

The account of Adam and Eve in the Garden is a familiar one. Their subsequent fall is generally viewed as a tragedy that has been at the root of human ills to this day.

I wish to point out a few details in the narrative, aspects I had until now somehow not perceived. I will start with the blessing The Lord pronounced upon Adam and Eve as He married them in His garden, (which garden, by the way, is the prototype of every subsequent Temple):

Point 1: Adam and Eve Commanded to Subdue the Earth

28: And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. (Genesis 1:28)

This is where I will begin my journey: God blessed Adam and Eve to subdue the earth, and whatever that conquest is viewed as conveying, in the Hebrew its primary meaning is "to tread, trample on". The Lord may have simply instructed Adam and Eve to multiply and inhabit or tread through the earth. Why does this matter? Because Adam and Eve had not only been commanded to propagate; they had been commanded to leave Eden and tread or subdue the earth, and this departure and ambulation was a blessing placed upon them by their Father before they had fallen. I had always thought that the fall had precipitated their expulsion, but a departure to the broader earth was their blessing from the start. At least, as first prescribed, Adam and Eve would have spread out starting from Eden, and presumably would have had full access to reenter Eden at will.

Point 2: A Commandment Given with a Penalty Affixed

As the narrative continues in greater detail we see The Lord first establishing a parameter on behavior; God lays out the importance for nourishment along with a restriction on one form with a penalty for the infraction:

16: And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

17: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Genesis 2:16-17)

4: And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

5: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. (Genesis 3:4-5) 

At this point the narrative is only getting underway. Though this commandment is given in chapter 2, in the actual succession of events this commandment preceded the marriage. That is to say, in the Genesis account The Lord first prescribed behavior and also placed a limitation on behavior. Then He married His two children and pronounced upon them a huge blessing, one that included inheriting or establishing a presence throughout the entire earth. Then the serpent makes an appearance to tempt Adam and Eve to behave contrary to God's commandment.

Point 3: Recognition Only After the Fall

When discussing Adam and Eve many people speak as though Adam and Eve would have had "perfect offspring" had they only not transgressed. But what does the record indicate?

25: And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. (Genesis 2:25)

7: And they eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. (Genesis 3:7)

It is worth pointing out that inasmuch as neither Adam nor Eve even realized they were naked until they had partaken of the forbidden fruit, and this because of their state of childlike innocence, the arch patriarchs of the human family only reached the one realization ("bare anatomy") that enabled them to procreate as a consequence of their fall. Why does this matter? This aspect matters because it shows that the fall was not a thwarting of God's plan for humanity but a critical part of it; the fall did not affect how humanity came about; the fall determined that humanity would come about, which provenance was God's plan from the start, as evidenced by His blessing on Adam and Eve to replenish or "fill up" the earth before they even fell.

Point 4: God Allowed One Choice But Not the Other

The common interpretation has been that Adam and Eve "upset God's plans for them" by transgressing his prohibition on eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but there are two details that should be factored in:

8: And they heard the voice of The Lord God, [while they were] walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. (Genesis 3:8)

22: And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever:

23: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, whence he was taken.

24: So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life. (Genesis 3:22-24)

Before we conclude, as most traditionally have, that, "Sure, Adam and Eve did proceed to propagate spread out just as God commanded, but the conditions were substantially lower than they would have been had they not transgressed, and that transgression was contrary to God's plan for humanity," consider that (a) God left Adam and Eve for a time and it was during His absence that they were tempted to transgress His prohibition and fell, but that (b) God returned before they could partake of the tree of life in their fallen state, which act would have caused them to remain fallen forever, never to return to His presence. God clearly did not allow for mankind to come forward in a state of permanent and perpetual separation from Him. Rather, God did allow for the fall to happen but in a way that would produce a temporal or temporary separation from Him. God could have returned prior to Adam and Eve's partaking of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and prevented it had the prevention been His plan all along. Instead, God chose to allow a space for the transgression to occur, the one transgression that enabled Adam and Eve to propagate children, but God mercifully, we might add, chose to return and thwart that the act, partaking of immortality though in a fallen state, that would have caused mankind's complete demise.

Point 5: The Fall Did Not Annul Their Mission

Maybe this was obvious to the reader, but the fall of Adam and Eve did not annul the blessing or mission that The Lord had pronounced upon Adam and Eve. This observation is worth contemplating mainly because many people, regardless of whether they view this narrative as factual or fictional, believe that the fall "thwarted" God's intentions for mankind.

15: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

16: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

17: And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast  hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

18: Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;

19: In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. (Genesis 2:15-19)

We can see something interesting afoot: Now that it is evident that the fall of Adam of Eve was the act that precipitated their ability to have children in the first place, and God allowed for that chain of events to occur, but God was quick to prevent a chain of circumstances that would have caused His children to be born into permanent separation from Him, we must conclude that as Adam and Eve now proceeded forth from Eden the conditions that were pronounced upon them after their fall--that children would be born into an experience that would obligatorily acquaint them with painful experience and all achievements would be wrought against opposition to the contrary--were also part of the plan all along. The common belief is that, "Had Adam and Eve not transgressed, we would have pain-free pregnancies and childbirths, and work would be effortless and exponentially more profitable." This is simply not what the records teach; life was intended to be a period of growth through pain, sorrow, and constant opposition. But as we shall see, life was not meant to be miserable, simply beneficial via the gaining of experience.

Point 6: We Can Be Accepted by Overcoming Sin The Lord's Prescribed Way

There is a teaching that The Lord shared with Cain, a powerful message whose importance I had long not appreciated:

3: And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.

4: And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

5:  But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

6: And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?

7: If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. (Genesis 4:3-7)

When I was a boy I was taught that Cain's sacrifice was rejected because it was wrong type of sacrifice, to whit, vegetables, unlike Abel's proper animal sacrifice. Let us bear in mind what the record says, namely, that Abel "also" brought of the firstlings, which in Hebrew it reads "firstborns", of his flocks. Yes, Cain worked in agriculture, as Adam was commanded to do, and Abel worked in animal husbandry. I am told that per Jewish tradition Cain purchased his animals for sacrifice from Abel. Animals for sacrifice had to be raised by one holding the Priesthood, and inasmuch as Cain raised crops, a trade prescribed by The Lord, Cain, (per tradition) had to purchase his sacrificial animals from someone who raised such animals, namely Abel. Abel selected sacrificial animals from the firstborns. So the issue here may not be the "type" of sacrifice, but rather the intention. This very point is evident from Genesis. In the Pearl of Great Price, The Book of Moses, chapter 5:18 we find that intention was indeed the issue:

18: And Cain loved Satan more than God. And Satan commanded him, saying: Make an offering unto the Lord. 

So it was indeed Cain's intention, that of serving Satan, that invalidated his sacrifice before The Lord. But there is another aspect that becomes apparent here: that Satan does not just tempt people to break God's commandments, but to follow his own, even if outwardly the resultant behavior is precisely what God commanded. This event reveals an unsavory reality: that Satan's objective is to rule over us, and he will command us to break or to abide by God's laws, all in the hope of subjecting us to his will.

But look again at The Lord's counsel to Cain: "If thou doest right [by its root "good"], shalt thou not be accepted?" Now, the King James translators chose to phrase this "if thou does well, shalt thou not be accepted", but the Hebrew, I wish to note, reads even more brightly and hopefully: "If thou doest well (good), shalt thou not be exalted?" Then The Lord continues, "sin lieth at the door." Now I ask, "the door" to what? I had always read this as some idiomatic expression, like, "get one's foot in the door". As it happens, the Hebrew says "pethakh" which means 'opening' or 'gate'. So I ask, in the narrative what has been the only opening or gate that had been indicated or implied to exist? The opening that lead to the tree of life, the opening to the garden of Eden, the place where God's presence could abide even after Adam and Eve transgressed (remember how He returned to them there)? The sacrifices were animal sacrifices, shedding the blood of firstborn animals, ones that had to be selected (presumably to be without blemish), by a certain Priesthood-holder, but even then the sacrifice had to be offered in love of The Lord. The Lord taught that we cannot love God and mammon but rather that we will love God or mammon, but He taught this principle from the very beginning. And the objective was to do right The Lord's way in order to enter by the gate. Sin is lying there to prevent our entry, but as The Lord said, and as I am currently and always struggling to do, rule over it, so that I may be "accepted" or "exalted."

Also, it is a feature of ancient Hebrew to use a form of future tense to issue a command. This aspect carried through in our King James Translation, hence we read "Thou shalt not kill" rather than "Kill not" or the more modern "Do not kill." Notice now what The Lord so lovingly told Cain: "Sin lieth at the door, and unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." In more Modern English we would have "Sin is lying at the door (blocking your entry), and his desire is to have you, but rule over him instead/you can rule over him." The Lord never misses an opportunity to raise us up and encourage us. Sadly, Cain disregarded this loving counsel.

Now at this stage it would be helpful to take a step back and look at this scenario from a broader perspective. A son of God, Adam, fell, and this fall precipitated mortality but also humanity. God has not ever indicated that He would simply, by virtue of His power, disregard His own word--"in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die"--but He did allow for a mortality that would consist of learning by experience and choosing to do "right" with the promise of being "exalted". This doing right had at its center a form of sacrifice (animal offering and shedding its blood), but this sacrifice did not automatically undo the result of the fall of Adam or bring about exaltation (acceptance). Therefore this sacrifice was clearly only a similitude of what had to happen to restore mankind to God's presence: the ultimate sacrifice. And the teaching is right here if we will behold it: that as one immortal Adam fell by choice, Another Immortal Adam would have to ascend by choice. If one Adam fell ushering in a sinful nature, another Adam would have arise to usher in a restoration of a sinless nature. The fact that the firstborn of animals was sacrificed, the ultimate sacrifice would also be the "firstborn", which means He would have to have been chosen to be the Sacrifice before the world even was made. This Sacrifice was already identified by God when Adam and Eve transgressed (His promise of mercy): The "Firstborn" would be born of a woman, the "Seed of the Woman", a seed of her but not her mortal Adam. And this Seed would bruise the head of the serpent, or rather crush his plan to destroy mankind and make mankind lost and fallen forever, like he is.

As a related side note, in The Qur'an Jesus is referred to frequently as "Jesus the Son of Mary", which title has traditionally been taken to mean "Jesus is not the Son of God, but a miraculous son of Mary nonetheless". In reality "Jesus the Son of Mary", may actually mean "Jesus, the Seed of the Woman".

Point 7: The Order of Details

Among folks who view these records as the recorded myths of ancient wanderers, texts that preserve the random ramblings of those less gifted in worldly sciences, I would point out that the order of the details was also a teaching method of the ancient patriarchs.

1. God pronounced "separation" and "death" as the consequence of transgressing His prohibition on eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
2. God blessed Adam and Eve to have children and tread the entire earth.
3. God stopped Adam and Eve from partaking of the tree of life in their fallen state thereby converting their mortality from a demise to death into a period to accomplish what He commanded them to do even before they fell.
4. The conditions of their fall were not regrettable consequences but rather are the very conditions upon which any probationary state is predicated: experience with sorrows and opposition in order to grow by the efforts to overcome them. 
5. God's intervention (to prevent Adam and Eve's partaking of the tree of life in their fallen state) reveal that mercy is His overarching motivation, and it is mercy and love that motivate Him.
6. God nevertheless caused Adam and Eve to leave the garden. This act demonstrates that God cannot and will not rob justice. We are responsible for our actions, and actions carry consequences. Now, Adam and Eve would have been able to leave regardless, but now their reentry became restricted (flaming sword, Cherubim), but not forever. They would sacrifice by Eden's entry with the objective of reentering and being exalted. These sacrifices had to be prescribed by God Himself.
7. Satan would have come and tempted Adam and Eve to follow his instructions regardless of whether God had issued commandments or prohibitions. By giving commandments God and affixing a punishment God enabled repentance to take place because repentance, by covenant, would enable God to bless man and exalt him back to His presence.
8. Mercy does not rob justice, so inasmuch as from the beginning God granted repentance and required sacrifice and obedience for rebellious mankind to reenter His presence and be exalted, from the beginning the need for an ultimate sacrifice to reunite mankind with Him was being indicated.
9. Therefore, God's plan all along was to bring His children to earth into a probationary period of mortality, and this plan that leads to salvation is predicated upon choosing God over all else, a choice that is manifest not only by our actions but by our heart, our intentions. The entire plan of salvation hinges upon the Sacrifice of The Son of God, and God laid this entire plan out before the world was even made.

So I ask if the following statements that entered our modern world from the past in 1829 can be seen as anything but the bonafide truth:

1. 5: Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy. (2 Nephi 2:25)
2. 15: And now, the plan of mercy could not be brought about except an atonement should be made; therefore God himself atoneth for the sins of the world, to bring about the plan of mercy, to appease the demands of justice, that God might be a perfect, just God, and a merciful God also. 
3. 16: Now, repentance could not come unto men except there were a punishment, which also was eternal as the life of the soul should be, affixed opposite to the plan of happiness, which was as eternal also as the life of the soul. 
4. 17: Now, how could a man repent except he should sin? How could he sin if there was no law? How could there be a law save there was a punishment? 
5. 22: But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a repentance granted; which repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise, justice claimeth the creature and executeth the law, and the law inflicteth the punishment; if not so, the works of justice would destroyed, and God would cease to be God.
6. 23: But God ceaseth not to be God, and mercy claimeth the penitent, and mercy cometh because of the atonement; and the atonement bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead; and the resurrection of the dead bringeth back men into the presence of God; and thus they are restored into his presence, to be judged according to their works, according to the law and justice. (Alma 42:15-17,22-23)
7. 12: Behold, he created Adam, and by Adam came the fall of man. And because of the fall man came Jesus Christ, even the Father and the Son; and because of Jesus Christ came the redemption of man.
8. 13: And because of the redemption of man, which came by Jesus Christ, they are brought back into the presence of the Lord; yea, this is wherein all men are redeemed, because the death of Christ bringeth to pass the resurrection, which bringeth to pass the resurrection, which bringeth to pass a redemption from an endless sleep, from which sleep all men be awakened by the power of God when the trump shall sound; and the shall come forth, both small and great, and all shall stand before the bar, being redeemed and loosed from this eternal band of death, which death is a temporal death. (Mormon 9:12-13)

The Gospel of Jesus Christ was declared from the beginning. In our day it was declared again in its purity and to confirm what came before. The Holy Bible and The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ are an inseparable witness of Jesus Christ and of the prophetic mission of Joseph Smith.