Jesus of Nazareth

It's been a while since I have posted anything because I am back in school and haven't had much time to do so. This morning, however, I read something that I thought would be worthwhile to make a note of here.

The following is a passage from a paper on Margaret Baker's website that provides some insight into a pericope from John's gospel. Here is the link to the paper, and here is the section that made an impression on me:

"The Jewish religious leaders have him arrested and
killed, but according to John, the notice on his cross did not say simply ‘The King of the Jews’. It said ‘Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews’ (John 19.19). That is how the words are usually translated. But ‘of Nazareth’ here is not the usual word Nazarēnos; it is Nazōraios, and Jesus’ followers were called Nazōreans (Acts 24.5). This suggests that the Greek word did not mean ‘of Nazareth’ but came from the Hebrew nāṣar, which meant to guard, preserve or keep. In the Talmud, Jesus was called the nôṣrî. The Nazōreans would then be the preserved or guarded people, neṣûrîm, and with different vowels, they would be the guardians or preservers, nōṣrîm, which became the Hebrew name for the Christians.

"It was also the name for those people whom the Servant of the LORD would restore.
My servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel; I give you as a light to the nations... (Isa.49.6)"

Today

I was reading Isaiah 2 this afternoon and came across a passage which describes the wicked Israelites of his day but which also applies to ours. Here is what it says (Gileadi's translation):

Their land is full of silver and gold

      and there is no end to their wealth;

Their land is full of horses

      and there is no end to their chariots.

Their land is full of idols:

      they adore the works of their hands,

      things their own fingers have made.

Mankind is brought low
      when men thus debase themselves.
Forbear them not!

These are some of the distinguishing characteristics of both (i.e. ancient Israel and modern civilization) wicked societies:

1. Their land is full of silver and gold: Incomparable and unequal wealth.
2. Their land is full of horses and chariots: Horses and chariots are implements of war. Both societies are obsessed with building armies and navies and amassing guns and other instruments of death and destruction.
3. They worship (adore) the work of their hands: Materialism is rampant and acquiring wealth and objects are obsessions. 
4. Mankind is brought low when men thus debase themselves: Wickedness is so widespread that mankind as a whole is debased by it.

Our challenge is rise above this trend to wholesale and all encompassing wickedness. This description reminds me of Enoch's vision of the wickedness of Noah's day (and by extension our day) in Moses 7:

26 And he beheld Satan; and he had a great chain in his hand, and it veiled the whole face of the earth with darkness; and he looked up and laughed, and his angels rejoiced.

 28 And it came to pass that the God of heaven looked upon the residue of the people, and he wept; and Enoch bore record of it, saying: How is it that the heavens weep, and shed forth their tears as the rain upon the mountains?

 29 And Enoch said unto the Lord: How is it that thou canst weep, seeing thou art holy, and from all eternity to all eternity?

 

 32 The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency;

 33 And unto thy brethren have I said, and also given commandment, that they should love one another, and that they should choose me, their Father; but behold, they are without affection, and they hate their own blood;

 37 But behold, their sins shall be upon the heads of their fathers; Satan shall be their father, and misery shall be their doom; and the whole heavens shall weep over them, even all the workmanship of mine hands; wherefore should not the heavens weep, seeing these shall suffer?

 40 Wherefore, for this shall the heavens weep, yea, and all the workmanship of mine hands. (emphasis added)

 The result of this gross wickedness is misery - nothing more. The reason why God hates wickedness so forcefully is that it brings so much misery to the human family and he is likewise pained by witnessing this suffering.

"In the Cool of the Day"

In the Biblical account of the fall of Adam and Eve a curious detail is included in the narrative that seems somewhat out of place. After eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil Adam and Eve hear God's voice as they are walking "in the cool of the day" (see Genesis 3:8). Why does it matter what time of the day it was that the voice was heard? It may be that the phrase has not been rendered into English in the manner in which the author of Genesis intended.

Jeffrey M. Bradshaw comments on this phrase in volume one of his commentary on the book of Moses entitled In God's Image and Likeness: Ancient and Modern Perspectives On the Book of Moses. This is what he has to say:

"The phrase can be translated as 'in the wind, breeze, spirit, or direction' of the day--in other words, the voice is coming from the west, the place where the sun sinks." (259)

The word from which the word "cool" is translated is ruach (רוח) which is generally translated as "spirit", "wind" or "breath" but indeed can be translated as "cool" (as wind has a cooling effect) or as "quarter (of wind), side" (Strong's H7307), hence "direction". It seems to make the most sense that the author of the Genesis account intended "direction" for ruach as that interpretation places the account squarely in the context of the temple. Earlier in the garden of Eden story the narrator mentions that God planted a garden "eastward" in Eden (Genesis 2:8). The question that every reader should ask is: eastward from where?

It is well known that the temple was thought of as a microcosm of creation. The Holy of Holies represented God's abode and represented day one of the creation. The creation of the earth commenced in the Holy of Holies and was directed from it and thus is seen from its perspective. Just outside the Holy of Holies (to the east) was the Holy Place which represented the Garden of Eden. Therefore, when the scriptural account states that the garden was planted "eastward" it means that it was planted eastward from the Holy of Holies where God was located.

In like manner, then, when Genesis 3:8 states that Adam and Eve heard God's voice from the west it has reference to the fact that the Holy of Holies was west of the Holy Place and was the place from which God's voice would be heard since it was his abode. Understanding that the stories of the creation of the earth and the fall of mankind are set in the temple is crucial to understanding these accounts.

Exodus: Gods and Kings

A trailer for the upcoming film on the exodus has been released. The costumes and sets look impressive, now if they would only stop casting actors of European descent in these films - there must be some good North African and Eastern Mediterranean actors out there.

Laman and Lemuel

Laman and Lemuel

In 1 Nephi 2:12-13 Nephi mentions that both Laman and Lemuel did not believe the teachings of their father Lehi regarding the impending fate of the city of Jerusalem. That attitudes seems strange based on the fact that cities were destroyed on a routine basis anciently and that Jerusalem was not unusually large or well fortified. What, then, was the source of their misplaced confidence?

The answer may lie in the recent history of Jerusalem and in the prevailing attitudes of its people at the time. Approximately one hundred years before the time of Laman and Lemuel, Hezekiah, king of Judah, defied the Assyrian king, Sennacherib and stopped paying tribute. In retribution, Sennacherib invaded Judah and nearly wiped out the entire kingdom. When he laid siege to Jerusalem the city was saved by either (depending on which source you accept) a plague of some kind that swept through the Assyrian camp (2 Kings 19:35) or by a large payment made to Sennacherib when Hezekiah stripped the temple of all its precious metals (2 Kings 18:13-16) or a combination of the two. (A few years ago I put together a short video depicting this event. You can watch it here.)

Margaret Barker in The Gate of Heaven: The History and Symbolism of the Temple in Jerusalem explained what the result of the city's preservation was on its inhabitants: "The people of Jerusalem were content to believe that the presence of the temple had saved them and would continue to do so" (6, emphasis added). In all probability Lehi's progenitors were refugees from the northern kingdom of Israel who had fled to Jerusalem when Assyria decimated it (the northern kingdom) only twenty years before. They had probably witnessed first hand the immense power of the Assyrian war machine as their homeland was destroyed. It must have seemed all the more miraculous, therefore, when their lives were preserved in Jerusalem and this may have contributed to their confidence that Jerusalem could not be destroyed. This attitude was inherited by Laman and Lemuel and their contemporaries. It turned out, however, that their confidence was tragically misplaced.

In 586 BC, fourteen years, or thereabouts, after Lehi's departure from Jerusalem the Babylonian empire laid siege to the city, slaughtered its inhabitants and razed the temple to the vindication of Lehi and Jeremiah. It would not be until several decades later that the Jews would be allowed to rebuild their sacred edifice following the decree of Cyrus, the Persian king. Unfortunately, the Israelites of that era learned the hard lesson that the Lord would not protect his people unconditionally. His promises could only be secured by obedience to his laws and commandments.

Adam and Eve

I came across this quote from Hugh Nibley in Jeff Bradshaw's commentary on the book of Moses and thought it was very insightful:

"The perfect union of Adam and Eve excited the envy and jealousy of the Evil One, who made it his prime objective to break it up... His first step (or wedge) [was] to get one of them to make an important decision without consulting the other. He approached Adam in the absence of Eve with a proposition to make him wise, and being turned down he sought out the woman to find her alone and thus undermine her resistance more easily. It is important that he was able to fine them both alone."
(In God's Image and Likeness: Ancient and Modern Perspectives on the Book of Moses 1:249-50).

The Martyrdom

Today marks 170 years since the death of the prophet of the restoration, Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum.



He lived great, and he died great in the eyes of God and his people; and like most of the Lord’s anointed in ancient times, has sealed his mission and his works with his own blood; and so has his brother Hyrum. In life they were not divided, and in death they were not separated! (D&C 135:3)

The Law of Consecration ≠ The United Order

Ephraim United Order Cooperative Building

One of the least understood doctrines of the Church is the law of consecration. Most members equate the law of consecration with the United Order and use the terms interchangeably.  They assume that since we no longer live in communities governed by the United Order we therefore do not practice the law of consecration, however this is not the case. The law of consecration is currently binding on the Church and has been since its inception. Indeed, President Hinckley taught that "the law of sacrifice and the law of consecration were not done away with and are still in effect" (Gordon B. Hinckley, Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley, 639.) Many, perhaps most, active members of the Church practice the law today without even realizing it. To understand the distinction it's important to clearly define the terms so that difference between the two can be understood.

Elder Bruce R. McConkie, who served as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles from 1972 until his death in 1985 gave a very clear and concise definition of the law of consecration in an address given during the April 1975 annual general conference. The title of his talk was Obedience, Consecration and Sacrifice, and this is what he had to say:

"The law of consecration is that we consecrate our time, our talents, and our money and property to the cause of the Church: such are to be available to the extent they are needed to further the Lord’s interests on earth."

The United Order on the other hand operated under the principles of the law of consecration but was not synonymous with it. The United Order only existed for a short time in the early to mid 1830's. In March 1832 Joseph Smith and some of the other leaders of the Church had gathered in Kirtland for the purpose of discussing church business. During their meeting Joseph Smith received a revelation that became Doctrine and Covenants 78. In this revelation the Lord called for the creation of an organization that would oversee the Church's printing and business endeavors both in Kirtland and in Missouri. This organization became known as the United Order.

The revenue generated by the United Order would be utilized in operating the Church and caring for the poor. The principles by which the United Order would operate were established in another revelation the next month which became Doctrine and Covenants 82. In section 78 this organization is called the United Firm but it would later be referred to as the United Order. Ultimately, because of discord within the Church the Lord dissolved the United Order in April 1834. This was done through the revelation found in Doctrine and Covenants 104 wherein the Lord stated:

Therefore, you are dissolved as a united order with your brethren, that you are not bound only up to this hour unto them, only on this wise, as I said, by loan as shall be agreed by this order in council, as your circumstances will admit and the voice of the council direct.

To summarize, the United Order was an organization, established by the Lord, which was guided by the principles of the law of consecration. It existed for a short time from April 1832 until April 1834.

Later, in the second half of the nineteenth century, the Church established numerous cooperative community organizations which those involved referred to as united orders, but they were not the same thing as the original United Order established in 1832.These united orders were operated in numerous different ways. Some were communal type organizations where property was held in common while others were more cooperative in nature and didn't require the consecration of property. These united orders pretty well died out by the end of the nineteenth century and there have not been any more official attempts to establish these types of communities since that time.  (cf)

Currently when members of the Church talk about the law of consecration they are typically referring to the system these communities operated under but when the terminology is utilized in this way it is not accurate. The reason for this, to reiterate, is that the law of consecration is a requirement that members of the Church be willing to sacrifice of their time, talents, possessions etc. to the building up the Church as is requested by the Lord or his agents and is not the system of united orders that operated in the intermountain west over a century ago.

Another common misperception is that when these united orders failed the Lord replaced them with tithing. It is seen by some as a lower law subordinate to the law of consecration/united orders as they understand them. This is simply untrue. The principle of tithing was first introduced in this dispensation in 1838 when the revelation found in Doctrine and Covenants 119 was given to Joseph Smith in Far West, Missouri. Contained in the revelation is a declaration by the Lord which makes it clear that the principle of tithing is not a substitution which will be done away with at some unspecified future time. In verse four the Lord states regarding the law of tithing: "and this (the law of tithing) shall be a standing law unto them forever." Clearly, if it was a lower law it would not be destined to be practiced forever.

Another common idea in the Church is that at some future period the Church will again establish a united order to govern the economic affairs of its members. It is conceivable that there is some truth to this idea but I am not aware of any authoritative source that confirms this to be the case and I suspect it is merely a folktale. 

In summary, the original United Order operated for a very brief time during the infancy of the Church and subsequent united orders which operated during the latter half of the nineteenth century were attempts to implement the principles contained in the law of consecration but were not synonymous with it. Also, the law of consecration is currently binding on members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and simply states that we will sacrifice whatever may be required to the building up of the Church. Finally, the law of tithing is not a substitution for the law of consecration and is to be practiced by the Church forever.

Evidences of the Book of Mormon

In my last couple of posts I have briefly mentioned some fairly minor bits of evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon and the work of Joseph Smith. In the spirit of those posts I thought I would post a video featuring a presentation by Daniel C. Peterson examining some of the more impressive pieces of evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon:

 

"Though argument does not create conviction, the lack of it destroys belief. What seems to be proved may not be embraced; but what no one shows the ability to defend is quickly abandoned. Rational argument does not create belief, but it maintains a climate in which belief may flourish."

-Austin Farrer

Messengers

Peter, James and John in a statue by Avard Fairbanks on Temple Square in Salt Lake City, UT.

Currently I'm slowly making my way through volume one of Jeff Bradshaw's commentary on the book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price. One page 181 of that volume he points out a fascinating piece of information found in extra-biblical literature. He is commenting on Moses 3:21-22 which reads:

21 And I, the Lord God, caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam; and he slept, and I took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh in the stead thereof;

22 And the rib which I, the Lord God, had taken from man, made I a woman, and brought her unto the man.

Regarding these verses Bradshaw says the deep sleep which came upon Adam was a sleep of forgetfulness in which he became ignorant of his past. He then goes on to say the following:

"The awakening of Adam represents the beginning of his recovery from his state of ignorance and mortality. In the Hypostasis (of the Archons), it is Eve, 'the spirit-endowed woman.' who says to the sleeping Adam, 'Arise,' however, in the Apocalypse of Adam this same role is played instead by 'three men' of surpassing 'glory.' Although in Adam's new state of ignorance he was at first 'unable to recognize' them, they proceeded to reveal knowledge to him about his Creator."

To summarize, Adam, in his forgetful state is visited by three messengers who are not recognized by Adam at first. They then proceed to teach him. 

It's no secret that in the liturgy (or ordinances) of the LDS temple there is a dramatic portrayal of the creation of the Earth and the fall of mankind. What's most striking about this passage is that the details regarding the three messengers from the Apocalypse of Adam parallel the temple account. A critic might be tempted to believe that somehow Joseph Smith had access to these extra-biblical sources but that seems highly unlikely since both the Hypostasis of the Archons and the Apocalypse of Adam were completely lost until they were found as part of the Nag Hammadi library in 1945, more than 100 years after the death of Joseph Smith! It seems far more reasonable to suppose that the modern temple ceremony was divinely inspired just as Joseph Smith claimed it to be.

The Sinai Covenant

This afternoon I was reading through Avraham Gileadi's Isaiah commentary and came across a fascinating insight in verse two of chapter one. The verse reads as follows (Gileadi's translation):

Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth:
      for the Lord hath spoken,
I have nourished and brought up children,
      and they have rebelled against me.

Gileadi then provides the following commentary:

"Isaiah begins his prophecy by calling on the heavens and the earth, which are witnesses of the Sinai Covenant (Deuteronomy 4:26; 30:19). That is the covenant Jehovah makes with Israel as a nation, through which the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob become the people of God (Exodus 6:7). However, the "heavens" and the "earth" don't refer simply to the physical heavens and earth but to those who reside in them. Such heavenly witnesses to the covenant no doubt include Israel's ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who would have the utmost interest in their descendants.
     
"Additionally, when Jehovah makes the covenant with his people Israel, it includes both those present and those who aren't present (Deuteronomy 29:14–15). That alludes to the idea that there exist others yet unborn who are parties to the covenant as much as the people who stand with Moses at Mount Sinai. In fact, even though God's people Israel may at different times break the Sinai Covenant, that never causes the covenant itself to be annulled. According to Isaiah, even the new covenant Jehovah makes at the dawning of the millennial age is a compound of all former covenants he has made." (underline added)

I don't really have anything additional to add - it made an impression upon me and I wanted to share. Fascinating stuff.

"Great are the Word of Isaiah"

Isaiah, by Michelangelo, (c. 1508–1512, Sistine Chapel ceiling, Vatican City)

During his appearance to the Nephites, Jesus Christ quoted chapter 54 of the book of Isaiah and then commended the prophet's writings to the Nephites and by extension to readers of the Book of Mormon, by stating the following:

"And now, behold, I say unto you, that ye ought to search these things. Yea, a commandment I give unto you that ye search these things diligently; for great are the words of Isaiah." (3 Nephi 23:1)

Clearly Jesus Christ holds the writings of Isaiah in high esteem regardless of whether they were composed by the original prophet or by one of his disciples (Isaiah 54 is generally considered by scholars to be part of Deutero-Isaiah, a post-exilic work, although there is not a consensus). What's more, Isaiah is the only prophet he specifically endorses in this way.

The idea that Jesus was particularly influenced by and placed great value on Isaiah finds convergence in the work of non-LDS scholar Margaret Barker. In Frederick M. Huchel's review of Barker's book Temple Themes in Christian Worship the following point is made:

"In her commentary on Isaiah, Barker 'argued that Isaiah was the crucial influence on Jesus . . . and that the Isaiah tradition continued to be dominant in the early church . . . [by representing] the world view of the first temple, an Enochic . . . faith . . . known to the Christians who consciously looked back to the first, the true, temple.'” (underline added)

As I read Huchel's article this afternoon it occured to me that this was one more detail in the Book of Mormon that Joseph Smith is unlikely to have merely guessed correctly regarding. It stands as a small albeit significant piece of evidence of the Book of Mormon's authenticity.

The Seventh Day

Here is a fascinating insight from John H. Walton's book entitled The Lost World of Genesis One:

"In the traditional view that Genesis 1 is an account of material origins, day seven is mystifying. It appears to be nothing more than an afterthought with theological concerns about Israelites observing the sabbath - an appendix, a postscript, a tack on.

"In contrast, a reader from the ancient world would know immediately what was going on and recognize the role of day seven. Without hesitation the ancient reader would conclude that this is a temple text and that day seven is the most important of the seven days. In a material account day seven would have little role, but in a functional account, as we will see, it is the true climax without which nothing else would make any sense or have any meaning.

"How could reactions be so different? The difference is the piece of information that everyone knew in the ancient world and to which most modern readers are totally oblivious: Deity rests in a temple, and only in a temple. This is what temples were built for. We might even say that this is what a temple is - a place for divine rest. Perhaps even more significant, in some texts the construction of a temple is associated with cosmic creation.

"What does divine rest entail? Most of us think of rest as disengagement from the cares, worries and tasks of life. What comes to mind is sleeping in or taking an afternoon nap. But in the ancient world rest is what results when a crisis has been resolved or when stability has been acieved, when things have 'settled down.' Consequently normal routines can be established and enjoyed. For deity this means that the normal operations of the cosmos can be undertaken, This is more a matter of engagement without obstacles rather than disengagement without responsibilities."

In light of what Walton outlines in his book it is interesting to examine Jesus' statement in Matthew 8:20:

"And Jesus saith unto him, The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head."

Jesus' intent may have been to condemn the second temple and to declare his divine identity. In any event Walton's statement regarding the seventh day of creation is super interesting. I have not read the book in its entirety yet but it is certainly on my "to-read" list.

The Menorah

In a couple of my previous posts I have made the assertion that the Menorah in the Jerusalem temple probably represented Moses' burning bush from Exodus 3. This afternoon I have come across a source that agrees that was probably the case. For my own benefit I am posting it here so that I can look it up quickly if the need ever arises.

The source is Jeffrey M. Bradshaw's commentary on the book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price entitled: In God's Image and Likeness: Ancient and Modern Perspectives on the Book of Moses and is found in volume 1 page 163. It reads:

"It should be emphasized that the Tree of Life does not represent eternal life merely in an abstract sense, but rather as a symbol of embodied deity. Thomas explains that 'most often in scripture... the tree is an anthropomorphic symbol. A tree serves well as such a symbol because it has, after all, limbs, a circulatory system, the bearing of fruit, and so forth. Specifically, scriptural trees stand for Christ and his attributes.' Wyatt concurs, noting that: 'The trees are... messianic symbols. The Menorah is probably what Moses is understood to have seen as the burning bush in Exodus 3.' Thus, Jehovah, the pre mortal Jesus Christ, was represented to Moses as one who dwells in the midst of the burning glory of the Tree of Life."

Here are the references Bradshaw cites in the excerpt:

M. Catherine Thomas: Jacob's Allegory: The Mystery of Christ
Nicolas Wyatt: Space and Time in the Religious Life of the Near East

Restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood

Today marks 185 years since the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood - one of the most significant and important events of modern times.



Read more here.

The Creation

"The creation scene from the movie "Noah" was released on YouTube Saturday by Protozoa Pictures, the production company owned by writer and director Darren Aronofsky.

 "The scene consists of Russell Crowe as Noah telling his children the story of the creation. While the narration follows the biblical account, Aronofsky's animation depicts a process that incorporates aspects of evolution and creationism, beginning with The Big Bang and making its way to Adam and Eve."

From Deseret News (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865602990/Creation-scene-from-Noah-released-on-YouTube.html)

Jerusalem: Link to the past

For those of you who missed it here is the video on Jerusalem KSL showed between sessions during this past conference:

Jesus Christ on the Tree of Life

Burne-Jones' mosaic of the Crucifixion was unveiled in November 1894. It shows Christ on the Tree between Adam and Eve, for by his death on the Cross he undid their death from the Tree of Eden.

Acts 5

29 ¶Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to ^aobey God rather than men.

30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and ^ahanged on a tree.

31 Him hath God exalted ^awith his right hand to be a ^bPrince and a ^cSaviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and ^dforgiveness of sins.

32 And we are his ^awitnesses of these things; and so is also the ^bHoly Ghost, whom God hath ^cgiven to them that obey him.

The apostle Peter in this passage refers to the cross upon which Jesus Christ was crucified as a tree. Perhaps Peter's purpose in doing this was to equate the cross with the tree of life. When Nephi was shown his father's vision of the fruit bearing tree of life he asked to know the meaning of the tree. In response Nephi was shown a vision of Mary, the mother of Jesus, bearing the Christ-child in her arms. Ancient Judea had a tradition of an ancient mother goddess who was known as Asherah, Astarte and Wisdom among other names and who was the mother of the son of God. Her symbol was a tree. Nephi, who was a product of this culture, instantly recognized the symbolism and saw that the tree in his dream was a symbol of Mary (who was the earthly embodiment of the archetypical heavenly mother) and the fruit of the tree was a symbol of the son of God. Jesus, being depicted as hanging on a tree during his crucifixion draws upon this mother-goddess symbolism. He is the fruit of the tree of life. (For more on this I highly recommend a fascinating article by Daniel C. Peterson entitled "Nephi and His Asherah" published in the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies.)

In Proverbs 8 this divine mother (Wisdom) speaks in the first person as the tree of life and teaches about her fruit:

19 My fruit is better than gold, yea, than fine gold; and my revenue than choice silver.

The name Asherah is the feminine Hebrew form of the word asher which means "happy" and Lehi in the account of his dream may have been engaging in word play when he said the following (1 Nephi 8:10):

10 And it came to pass that I beheld a ^atree, whose ^bfruit was desirable to make one ^chappy. (emphasis added)

Just as the fruit was partaken by Nephi and his faithful followers in his dream we as Latter-Day Saints also partake of emblems of Jesus Christ every week in our sacrament service. When we eat food we assimilate it and it becomes part of us (you are what you eat). Metaphorically the Lord intends for us to partake of the Savior's divine nature and take upon ourselves his identity.

Judean terracotta figurine

Additionally, it is interesting to note that anciently the mother-goddess was also associated with bread. Archaeologist in the Holy Land have found hundreds of terracotta figurines depicting females which scholars have identified with Asherah. They all date roughly to the time of Nephi and before and some have been found clasping a round object to their breast. This object is sometimes interpreted as a tambourine but William Dever has interpreted the objects as loaves of bread (see here for his statement regarding this. The discussion begins at about 17:45). Jeremiah 44 mentions that the people of his day were baking cakes to the queen of heaven and that they attributed their good fortune to this practice.

During the Savior's mortal ministry he associated himself with bread and identified himself as the "bread of life" in John 6 and associated the sacramental bread with his body during the Last Supper (Matthew 26:26). Likewise, its easy to see an analogy between bread baking in an oven and an infant in his mother's womb and this may have been part of the divine mother/son iconography.

Tree of Life = the Mother = the Cross

Plan of Salvation

Every missionary of my generation was at least aware of and probably used the familiar diagram which laid out in visual form the Church's teachings regarding our premortal, mortal and post mortal existence. The diagram is an attempt to simplify the Church's teachings and help investigators understand these new ideas.

While the diagram is very useful, especially in missionary work and when teaching children, and not inaccurate per se I do believe there is another way the diagram could be presented that is more consistent with the plan as it is presented in the temple. I have put together a diagram illustrating this alternative but I really want to emphasize that this is all very tentative and subject to revision. I do believe, however, that this diagram is consistent with the teachings of the Church and the teachings found in ancient and modern temples, so here is the diagram, let me know what you think:

You'll notice that the diagram is chiastic which I believe is significant and that it is consistent with this diagram which is fairly well known:

The Divine Mother

I came across the photograph to the left recently of a really intriguing mosaic located at the Collegio San Lorenzo da Brindisi in Rome. Created by Friar Marko Ivan Rupnik it depicts the very well known event found in Exodus 3 of when Yahweh (aka Jehovah) appeared to Moses in the burning bush.

The mosaic depicts Moses with a veil over his face conversing with Jesus Christ (Yahweh) who is in the embrace of his mother Mary. Jesus and his mother are both seated within the burning bush. The presence of the veil on Moses evidently refers to the veil he wore when he returned to the camp of Israel after speaking with God as recorded in Exodus 34:29-35.

The presence of Mary or a divine mother figure in this depiction may be puzzling as Exodus fails to mention any other persons in Moses's encounter with the burning bush. However, one of the more curious qualities of the burning bush is that it is an unambiguously feminine symbol. The golden lampstand (aka menorah) in the temple was almost certainly a stylized representation of the burning bush. It was adorned with golden almond blossoms and contained bowls at the end of each arm containing olive oil into which the wicks were placed (see Exodus 25:31-35). Trees in general and the almond tree in particular were closely associated with the divine mother known as Asherah who was considered in early Israelite religion to be the mother of Yahweh and consort to the father god El. In the Hebrew Bible (aka Old Testament) this divine mother figure was sometimes referred to as "Wisdom" and was associated with Mary the mother of Jesus by the early Christians.

Additionally, Margaret Barker in her book "The Mother of the Lord" asserts that the voice from the burning bush was originally the divine mother and states "'She that dwelt in the bush' is still remembered in the titles and ikons of Mary. Sometimes she is depicted as the bush itself and sometimes she is seated in the burning bush and holding her son." (185) It is important to point out that the early Christians probably did not believe Asherah/Wisdom and Mary were identical persons but that they both filled the role of divine mother. In an LDS context we might look at it in this way: Asherah is the mother of the Lord's spirit and Mary is the mother of his body - both can rightfully be viewed as his mother.

Whether this divine mother figure was in fact the primary agent in the burning bush theophany or played some other supportive role to her divine son Yahweh is unknown but for Latter-Day Saints who possess a doctrine of divinization this is an intriguing idea. It seems probable that both members of an exalted couple would play an active role in the lives of their mortal children. If this is the case it does not seem unreasonable to suppose that the divine mother has in fact participated in at least some, if not all, of the great theophanies which are recorded in the scriptures.

Biblical scholars have successfully demonstrated (via the documentary hypothesis) that the Hebrew Bible has gone through a long process of redaction by various groups promoting their own particular agendas and that many "plain and precious truths" have been removed (see 1 Nephi 13:24-28). Beginning with Joseph Smith the Lord has restored some of these lost truths "line upon line; here a little and there a little" (Isaiah 28:10)  and we believe that God "will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God" (Articles of Faith 1:9).

It appears that one of the truths which Satan has been very eager to vanquish from the earth pertains to the existence of our divine mother. This may be part of his larger effort to denigrate women generally in order to cause them to forget their inherent divinity and nobility. The apostle John evidently witnessed the war that has been waged against her in his great apocalyptic vision in Revelation 12:1-6:

The Virgin Mary as the Woman of the Apocalypse by Rubens.

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

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

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

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

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

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

There has been some debate regarding the identity of the woman in John's vision with some arguing that she represents the Church. This seems unlikely when the identity of the child is established. Revelation 19:15-16 states that the Lord, like the man child, is to rule the nations with a rod of iron, therefore, it seems reasonable to suppose that they are identical persons. If we assume that to be the case it is unclear how the Church would have given birth to the Lord when he is the one who brought it into existence. It seems more likely that the woman in John's revelation was intended to represent this divine mother figure. It's possible that when John describes the woman fleeing into the wilderness he is describing the world at large losing its knowledge of her.

The divine mother shows up in many, many other places in the scriptures in addition to the two examples that have been cited already. It's beyond the scope of this blog post to list many more but if you do want to read more about it here's a good place to start:

Nephi and His Asherah

Free M.A. in Biblical Studies

I came across a blog this morning where the author has put together a mock M.A. program in Biblical Studies using open courses offered on iTunes U and some other sites. Very cool. While it won't earn you a degree, reviewing the courses certainly would enrich your understanding of the Biblical world. Click on the link here to see the blog post.

Marriage - Gallup Historical Trends

Marriage | Gallup Historical Trends

The results of the poll brought this scripture to mind:

Helaman 5:2

For as their laws and their governments were established by the voice of the people, and they who chose evil were more numerous than they who chose good, therefore they were ripening for destruction, for the laws had become corrupted.

Most Excellent Theophilus

10th century Byzantine illustration of Luke the Evangelist.

In his gospel and in the book of Acts, Luke addresses his words to a unknown figure by the name of Theophilus. The identity of Theophilus has been debated over the centuries but the BYU New Testament Commentary website has an interesting post by Kent Brown, a portion of which deals with the identity of this figure.

Here are his comments regarding the identity of Theophilus (it can be viewed at its original source here):

"Within five years or so of Jesus’ death, a Jew named Theophilus was appointed High Priest by Vitellius, who was Prefect of Judaea from AD 35 to 39 (Emil Schürer, A History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, rev. ed., 2:230). Nevertheless, in light of the thoroughly Greek cast of Luke’s Gospel and book of Acts, it is safe to see the Theophilus whom Luke addresses as an educated Roman official (Luke 1:3; Acts 1:1). This observation is made more secure by the fact that the term translated “most excellent” in Luke 1:3 is applied to ranking Roman officials in more or less august situations in Acts 23:26, 24:3, and 26:25. In a different vein, in my opinion, it will not do to argue that the name Theophilus simply bears the meaning “friend of God” or the like, thus shedding it of any tie to the world of living Roman officials. An addition in the Joseph Smith Translation seemingly stands against this sort of reading of the name, making the name very personal in an interesting add-on to the text (see JST Luke 3:19)."

Here is the JST translation of Luke 3:19-20 that he refers to:

19 For it is well known unto you, Theophilus, that after the manner of the Jews, and according to the custom of their law in receiving money into the treasury, that out of the abundance which was received, was appointed unto the poor, every man his portion;

20 And after this manner did the publicans also, wherefore John said unto them, Exact no more than that which is appointed you.