Mirror, Mirror?

Mirror, Mirror on the wall,
Who’s the next in line to fall?

Nephi^[1], Jacob^[2], AND Jesus^[3], all recommend that we read Old Testament prophets (particularly Isaiah), noting their déjà vus and likening the words unto ourselves. In the spirit of that advice, let us (Americans) read a portion of Avraham Gileadi’s translation of Isaiah 19 with “American” substitutions. (If you are of another nationality, make your own appropriate substitutions to liken these words unto yourself and your own nation.)

Also, a caution to Republican AND Democrat ideologues (et al.): There isn’t much personal awareness and healing in forever likening all “evil” unto your adversaries. Nor is this “likening” focused on the current administration. This Oracle for America (et al.) has been in the making for decades (perhaps even from the beginning).

19 An Oracle concerning [America]
   When the Lord enters [America] riding on swift clouds,
      the idols of [America] will rock at his presence
      and the [Americans’] hearts melt within them.
  ² I will stir up the [Americans] against the [Americans];
    they will fight brother against brother
  and neighbor against neighbor,
    city against city and state against state.
  ³ [America’s] spirit shall be drained from within;
    I will frustrate their plans,
  and they will resort to the idols and to spiritists,
    to mediums and witchcraft.
  ⁴ Then will I deliver the [Americans]
    into the hand of a cruel master;
  a harsh ruler will subject them,
    says my Lord, the Lord of hosts.
  ⁵ The waters of the lakes shall ebb away
    as streambeds become desolate and dry.
  ⁶ The rivers shall turn foul,
    and [America’s] waterways recede and dry up. …
    ⁷ vegetation adjoining canals and estuaries,
  and all things sown along irrigation channels,
    shall shrivel and blow away and be no more.
  ⁸ Fishermen will deplore their lot
    and anglers in canals bemoan themselves;
  those who cast nets on water
    will be in misery.
  ⁹ Manufacturers of combed linen
    and weavers of fine fabrics will be dismayed.
  ¹⁰ The textile workers will know despair,
    and all who work for wages suffer distress.
  ¹¹ The ministers of [capital] are utter fools;
    the wisest of [Presidential, congressional, and senate] advisers give absurd counsel. …
  ¹³ The ministers of [capital] have been foolish,
    the officials of [America] deluded;
    the heads of state have led [America] astray.
  ¹⁴ The Lord has permeated them
    with a spirit of confusion;
    they have misled [America] in all that she does,
  causing her to stagger like a drunkard into his vomit.
   ¹⁵ And there shall be nothing the [Americans]
    can do about it,
  neither head nor tail, palm top or reed.

BUT there is hope—at least for a remnant^[4] (of every nation, kindred, tongue, and people) that finally repents and accepts what this life has always been about: Maturing in faith, hope, charity, knowledge, understanding, wisdom, truth, justice, humility, courage, etc., etc., etc.^[5] . Here is Isaiah’s optimism:

²² The Lord will smite [America], and by smiting heal: they [the repentant] will turn back to the Lord, and he will respond to their pleas and heal them.

Then, if we read the rest of Isaiah 19, we will see that diverse (repentant) peoples and nations who thought (and acted like) they were enemies forever will be reconciled and called by God, “my people,” “the work of my hands,” “my inheritance.”

-----------------/
[1] … I did liken all scriptures unto us, that it might be for our profit and learning. (Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 19:23); And now I write some of the words of Isaiah, …. Now these are the words, and ye may liken them unto you and unto all men. (Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 11:8)
[2] … there are many things which have been spoken by Isaiah which may be likened unto you, because ye are of the house of Israel. (Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 6:5)
[3] 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. For surely he spake as touching all things concerning my people which are of the house of Israel; therefore it must needs be that he must speak also to the Gentiles. And all things that he spake have been and shall be, even according to the words which he spake. (Book of Mormon 3 Nephi 23:1-3)
[4] see Zechariah 13:8-9, and the sum and substance of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, etc.
[5] The very opposite of our present hypocrisies, uncivil discourse, and innumerable, idolatries (another déjà vu!).

In the house of my friends[1]

~
IF, in reading Old Testament Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Zechariah, Malachi, etc., etc., you get the distinct déjà vu that the Twelve Tribes were serial offenders, might it not be wise to “take heed” and “liken them unto” our latter-day selves? Do we ever ask ourselves how much of our lives and ideologies reflect the Sermon on the Mount and how much reflects the Babylonian screeds of competition; accumulation; wealth/power/fame; freedom from market rules, regulations, boundaries; ends justify means; riches/excess = God’s blessing; etc., etc..

Do we believe in AND countenance the separation of church and markets? Of religion and business? Of equity and bottom-line? Of charity and merit?^[2]

Why did the Savior quote (His own) Old Testament prophets in His visit to the Americas as recorded in the Book of Mormon, 3rd Nephi? Why did Moroni quote Old Testament prophets in his appearances to Joseph Smith? Are we offended by Spencer W. Kimball’s accusation in 1976 that “… we are, on the whole, an idolatrous people—a condition most repugnant to the Lord” (see “The False Gods We Worship,” http://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/06/the-false-gods-we-worship?lang=eng ).

Does not God say that latter-day judgments will begin in His own house?^[3] Does that give us any pause for reflection?

Are we serial offenders and seriously offended at the accusation?

Is 33 A.D. a prescient warning for the latter-days?

--------------------------/
[1] Old Testament Zechariah 13:6: “And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. (Latter-day Christians of all stripes?) See also: D&C 45:52

[2] Book of Mormon Mosiah 4:17-19: “Perhaps thou shalt say: The man has brought upon himself his misery; therefore I will stay my hand, and will not give unto him of my food, nor impart unto him of my substance that he may not suffer, for his punishments are just— But I say unto you, O man, whosoever doeth this the same hath great cause to repent; and except he repenteth of that which he hath done he perisheth forever, and hath no interest in the kingdom of God. For behold, are we not all beggars? Do we not all depend upon the same Being, even God, for all the substance which we have, for both food and raiment, and for gold, and for silver, and for all the riches which we have of every kind?”

[3] Doctrine and Covenants Section 112:24–26: “Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord. And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord; First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord.” (emphasis added).

Occupy Wall Street*

(* i.e., the “street” that hides behind a massive WALL of false ideology, propaganda, idolatry, and fraud)

Finally—at last! global protests against the perennial hoaxes of Big-Business and the so-called “free markets of invisible, intelligent design”! Here is a page or two worth pondering by my fellow Mormons (and others) from the book, Approaching Zion.

What kind of justice is it when the nobleman, the banker (goldsmith), the money lender, in short, those who do nothing productive, glory in riches while day laborers, teamsters, blacksmiths, carpenters and field workers, whose work can not be dispensed with for a year can sweat out a miserable existence at a level below that of beasts of burden? Our animals do not work so long, are better fed and have better security than they do, for our workers are pressed down by the hopelessness of the situation and the expectation of beggary in old age. What they are paid does not cover their daily needs, and to save anything for old age is out of the question. So we find shocking waste, luxury, triviality and vanity [the lives of the rich and famous] on the one side and utter abject misery on the other.⁴⁶

So as things are, we get the worst of both worlds.

… when I consider this, then every modern society seems to me to be nothing but a conspiracy of the rich, who while protesting their interest in the common good pursue their own interests and stop at no trick and deception to secure their ill-gotten possessions, to pay as little as possible for the labor that produces their wealth and so force its makers to accept the nearest thing to nothing. They contrive rules for securing and assuring these tidy profits for the rich in the name of the common good, including of course the poor, and call them laws!⁴⁷

"But after they have divided among themselves in their insatiable greed all that should go to the society as a whole, they still are not happy."!⁴⁸
The law can avenge but never hinder the deceptions, thievery, riots, panics, murders, assassinations, poisonings, and so on, all of which spring from one source—money. That is Thomas More writing—and it cost him his life.
It has been the same story all along, only suddenly we have reached a new level. For the first time selfishness goes by its own name: "The virtue of selfishness" is the testament of Ayn Rand, the guru of Milton Friedman, Alan Greenspan, and James Watt, long the favorite reading of BYU students. "No other civilization has permitted the calculus of self-interest so to dominate its culture," writes R. L. Heilbroner; "it has transmogrified greed and philistinism into social virtues, and subordinated all values to commercial values."⁴⁹ This is exactly what Thomas More said: "What has heretofore passed as unjust, … they have turned upside down, and in fact proclaimed it publicly and by law to be nothing less than justice itself."⁵⁰ Mr. Ivan Boesky, in college convocation, commended "healthy greed" as a virtue to be cultivated by the young.⁵¹ That's a virtue! A frenzy of privatization now insists that the only public institution with a reason for existence is the military, to defend us against societies more committed to sharing, and to root out those among us who doubt the sacredness of property. [End of quote.]

Surely, the “sacredness of property” must be reviewed in light of how much has been acquired through oppression, deceit, coercion, corruption, collusion, injustice, and unpunished criminal acts.

Let us, in light of current events and omnipresent déjà vu, take up the task of rethinking the economic theories (of Babylon) and finally admit that men and women have far more to offer the world than self-interested, profit-driven excuse. Why in rejecting the tyrannies of socialism/communism do we so readily accept the inevitable tyrannies of (corporate-driven) capitalism—as if those were the only two choices?

----------------/
Footnotes from pp. 486 of Approaching Zion
46. [Thomas More, Utopia, tr. Robert M. Adams, 2 vols. (London: Yale University Press, 1964)], 2:88-89.
47. Ibid., 2:89.
48. Ibid.
49. See Leonard Silk, "The End of the Road?" New York Times Book Review, a review of Robert L. Heilbroner, Business Civilization in Decline (New York: Nolton, 1976).
50. More, Utopia, 1:25.
51. Mariann Caprino, "Healthy Greed Was Boesky's Undoing," Salt Lake Tribune, 20 November 1986, D9.
(Hugh Nibley, [**] Approaching Zion, edited by Don E. Norton [Salt Lake City and Provo: Deseret Book Co., Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1989], 466-7.)

----------------------/
** For those who wish to disparage the life, scholarship, and POV of Hugh Nibley because of the accusations of Martha Beck, I refer you to:
https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/136-62-68.pdf
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=17&num=1&id=570
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=17&num=2&id=587
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?reviewed_author&vol=17&num=1&id=569
http://en.fairmormon.org/Hugh_Nibley/Footnotes

So Soon Removed … (?)

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: (New Testament Galatians 1:6)

Have we become advocates of another gospel of:

▪ following the profits?
▪ win at all costs?
▪ self-sufficiency?
▪ self-interest?
▪ appearances?
▪ pride?
▪ excess?
▪ glory-seeking?
▪ being a law unto self?
▪ meritorious entitlements?
▪ scorning the poor and needy?
▪ forgetfulness and ingratitude?
▪ compartmentalized morals and politics?

I listen to self-proclaimed “Christians,” to defenders of capitalist “democracy,” to “free-market” devotees, and much of what I hear is the song of Babylon. The pursuit of gain. Déjà vu Cain & company—millennium one.

In Defense of Peter



Saint Peter
6th-century encaustic icon
from Saint Catherine's Monastery
Mount Sinai
Public Domain Wikimedia Commons

Every so often the topic of the Apostle Peter’s denials surfaces for discussion, and each time, I have felt we were missing something vital in the accepted interpretation of those accounts. Then in the early 1990s, I read a talk^[1] by Pres. Spencer W. Kimball that opened the door, just a crack, for re-analysis. I decided to put my thoughts into a one-act play, “Witness for Peter” and did so in 1995. (It has remained, with minor tweaks, in various incarnations of electronic storage since that time.) Several years after writing it, I discovered a talk^[2] by Bruce C. Hafen, then president of Ricks College, wherein the crack for re-analysis widened. Then in 2005, I encountered a discussion^[3] at TimesandSeasons.org wherein a Greek word was presented as a trump against such re-analysis. In defense of Peter, I left a comment as follows:

11/4/2005 at 8:04 pm
Belated caution re post #17
  Proposition: As no original manuscripts remain to prove the compositional language(s) of the Gospels; as there is no consensus amongst scholars or historians about the use of Greek in those originals; as most of the relied-upon, copied texts for the KJV are distant from the original authors by several hundred years; as interpretive choices in translation work, even by well-meaning translators, can, and often do, change meaning and intent (not to mention, “corrective” or “correlative” interpolations made by copyists and translators); therefore, it is questionable whether we know the precise words spoken by the Lord and whether the words have been accurately transmitted (e.g., compare the synoptic gospels with John’s). And more to the point, we cannot know with certainty how the Lord meant His words—probably spoken in Aramaic—to be understood.
  Perhaps, in fairness to Peter, the safest course is not to take a dogmatic position either way, but to ask, as Spencer W. Kimball, “Are we sure of his motive in that recorded denial?” And then, to not be afraid of uncertainty about the matter (see, Bruce C. Hafen, “On Dealing with Uncertainty,” BYU Devotional, 9 January 1979, Ensign, Aug. 1979, 63-4 where he also addresses the Peter question).

Two days ago, (Nov. 29, 2011) I discovered a thoughtful, scholarly analysis^[4] by Andrew Skinner, that is worth the consideration of every soul who wonders about Peter—an analysis that seems to ably answer the “Greek trump.”

Not only does the command interpretation appear possible, but does it not fit within the pattern of “Abrahamic” tests that God seems to require of all who follow in the footsteps of His Son? A pattern that requires a complete submission of will^[5], of nature, of passion, and sometimes, of possessions (Mark 10:17-22)? If Christ had to suffer great contradiction^[6], and Abraham, Job, Mary & Joseph, Joseph & Emma, and nigh every scriptural prophet, and many saints and sages in the triumph over self, why not Peter?

For some this is an intensely emotional issue. For them it deeply offends the scriptural account. Yet, is it not strange that the Apostle John, who was present at the trials and witness to the events first-hand, does not include any remark about Peter's sudden recollection of his Lord's words when the cock crew?

Also, in this analysis, the inconsistencies in Peter's character do not arise. As well, Peter seems to have had no reservation about rushing to the empty tomb or of meeting his risen Master three days after his awful denial; nor did the Church seem to hold Simon Peter in less esteem for what would surely have been seen as a monumental failing. So shouldn't we be willing to hear all the evidence before making as reasoned a  judgment as possible in the circumstances?

Of course, we cannot know the full truth of that night, but does it not seem credible that this was a night of supreme testing for Peter, which, as we see with Abraham and others, came as a nigh unbearable contradiction (and denial) of his bold character and convictions—to submit his will, against every inclination, to God’s will?

Even if it turns out that Simon Peter failed this test^[7], the account still testifies to the great cleansing power of repentance and to the efficacy of the realized atonement.

----------------------/
[1] Given in 1971 and now found at http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/GenlAuthorities/PeterMyBrother.pdf
[2] Given in 1979 and now found at http://lds.org/ensign/1979/08/on-dealing-with-uncertainty?lang=eng
[3] http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2005/02/peter/
[4] http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/211FOLDER/Peters%20Denial.pdf
[5] http://dejavu-timestwo.blogspot.com/search/label/WILL
[6] http://dejavu-timestwo.blogspot.com/2009/09/agony-of-contradictions.html
[7] I am aware of Pres. Hinckley’s talk on Peter, but find other thoughts and analyses far more persuasive.

See also: http://troygparker.wordpress.com/2011/07/29/peters-denial-prediction-or-command/

I hope in the near future to publish my one-act, one-person play, Witness for Peter, at Scribd.com.

A Plague of False Witness

(or How Technology Can Be Misused)

In 1971, Richard L. Evans said:

Among the many human faults and failings there is one that seems peculiarly persistent, and that is, gossiping—whispering; spreading rumors that travel like a windswept fire from ear to ear and sometimes destroy, without conscience, the good name of a man, the reputation of an institution, or even the pride and confidence of a country. To speak abusive words in public, to put libelous statements in print, and to bear false witness in court are offenses that can be traced to their source. But to let words loose on a whisper that sweeps from ear to ear and from lip to lip, and that suggests more than it says, is in some ways among the worst forms of bearing false witness. And because of our receptiveness to gossip and our eagerness to be the first to tell something, we perhaps involve ourselves in the spread of what is false and unfounded oftener than we would wish to admit. (emphasis added, "The Spoken Word," Ensign, Sept. 1971, 43)

Now, forty years later, technology has presented us with the means to spread falsehood to a thousand itching "eyes" via emails, forwards, blogs, and tweets, and from thence to a thousand itching ears.

How ready we seem to pass on information that has been passed to us, without the least effort at seeking to verify its truth or real application. And whether the news is "good" or bad does it make any difference, if it is false?

Perhaps we do not offend in the weightier matter of deliberately lying, but when we pass on a falsehood that has its origin in deliberate untruth, do we not become an accomplice to the act?

In this world of competitive markets and politics, why do we so often act as though we can implicitly trust what we see and hear from one side without fact-checking? Without running the claims of profit-seekers (of every stripe) through the prisms of skepticism and thoughtful questioning until the truth can be established?

We are all susceptible to varying degrees of false witness because of preconceptions, allegiances and biases, but with 21st Century ready access to verifiable data, why do we remain so vulnerable to propaganda? So ready to believe it? To pass it on? So ready to discount or ignore the disconnect between words and evidence? How relevant the words of Elder Evans for our technological age!

No Mistake?



From Wikimedia Commons
*Fotograf: Walter J. Pilsak, Waldsassen
 *Copyright Status:
 GNU Freie Dokumentationslizenz

On occasion I have had Christian visitors who sought to question my belief in the Bible. Sometimes I have tried to defend myself and sometimes I have listened. Let me give a virtual composite of what some Mormons experience.

"Now how can you say I am damned?" I asked my zealous visitor.

"Because, right here in Mark," she said, leafing through her well-used copy of the Bible, "it says that the unbeliever is damned. Right here, Mark 16:16, ... `he that believeth not shall be damned.'"

"Could I see that?" I asked and she showed me.

"But you didn't ask me that," I said. "I believe the Christian gospel—I truly do."

"The gospel is the Bible and you're damned for you don't believe it. You said you didn't."

"No, I didn't say that. I said, I didn't believe it was infallible."

"That is blasphemy," she said. She sounded deeply shocked.

"Do you mean to tell me that there is not one error in translation? That every word is gospel truth? That there are no inconsistencies?"

Her companion took up the answer. "This is God's book. He does not make mistakes. He does not allow mistakes."

"Pardon me," I said, "could we talk about the allow part. I thought He let us choose. From my point I see quite a few mistakes."

"You know what I mean," the companion said and her voice was cajoling. "This book does not have one untruth. And if you would let God soften your heart you could be saved."

"Then maybe you are the very people I need," I said, "for there is a lot I don't understand. Like could I ask you some questions?"

"We only have a few minutes," the zealous one said.

"You think my heart is hard?" I asked.

"Satan deceives many," she said and her voice was firm.

"But I am a truth seeker," I said. "Honest, I am."

"You must give yourself over to God," she said more gently, seeing a glimmer of hope. "Before it is too late. You must cast out of your life the one who hardens men's hearts."

"I do read the Bible," I said. "And I think my Bible is OK. It's the King James translation, so I think it should be all right?"

"Yes, that is a good Bible," they both said and nodded in unison.

"Well, from what you said—about hardened hearts?—I have to ask—it's this Pharaoh business that confuses me."

"This Pharaoh business?" the companion said and they glanced sideways at one another.

"Why would the LORD harden the heart of Pharaoh? That's what I wonder."

"Pharaoh was a wicked man. He is responsible for himself," the zealous one said. Her voice was even firmer and I watched her fingers tighten on the dark worn wood of her cane.

"So why does it say that the LORD hardened the heart of Pharaoh?" I asked.

"It doesn't say that," she said in a voice to end the discussion and she taped the knotted cane on the thick sole of her shoe.

I showed her the place. She mouthed the words of Exodus 9:12* and then she said in the same voice as before. "It means just what I said."

"Oh!" I said, as she tapped on the thick sole of her shoe. I was going to show her the other "hard" places, but decided to let the Pharaoh pass.

"There's also another question," I said and began turning to find Paul's accounts of his famous encounter on the road to Damascus.

"You see what you want to see," she said, "and we are not interested in your traps." She turned to her companion. "I'm ready," she said, rising upon the thick and thin soles of her adjusted stride. And then to me in a studied, pleasant voice, she said, "I'm sorry, but we have to go. And I hope that one day before it is too late that you will choose to hear the voice of God."

"But that's what I wanted to ask," I said. "Did they or didn't they? I just want to know."

"Who?" the companion said.

"We're going," the zealous one said.

"Paul's companions," I said. "Did they or didn't they?"

"Did they or didn't they what?" the companion said.

"We can't stay," the other said.

"Hear the voice," I said. "Did they or didn't they hear it?"

"Do you know?" the companion asked hesitantly turning to her colleague.

"Paul heard and that's what's important," the zealous one said and shut the screen door upon their departure and I heard the companion say again as they turned down the walk, "Do you know?"

And her colleague said, "My, I dislike this cold weather. Spring will be so nice."

I closed the heavy door against the brisk air and went to stand before the sofa which my two visitors had just vacated.

"You see," I said, holding my KJV Bible up before their absent faces. "One place it says they did (Acts 9:7) and another it says they didn't (Acts 22:9). Which is right?** Or does it make any difference? I just wanted to say that I think some things are allowed."

I heard again the tapping of the cane on the thick sole.

"Human things have happened to this book, too," I said. "It does not have to be perfect to be useful and good. That is all I wanted to say."

-------------------/
"Article of Faith 8: We believe the Bible to be the word of God, as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God. (Joseph Smith, "The Wentworth Letter," March 1, 1842; see History of the Church, Vol. 4, pp. 535-541)

* Joseph Smith Translation (JST) of Exodus 9:12: "And Pharaoh hardened his heart, and he hearkened not unto them; as the LORD has spoken unto Moses." Other JST corrections at Exodus 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:4, 8, 17.

** JST of Acts 9:7: "And they who were journeying with him saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him who spake to him."