Earth & Sky

Additional, enlightening Cantos by Alfred, Lord Tennyson to supplement the second post of today (14 March 2014) being Natural or Unnatural ? (Did he see by the Law of Nature or some Higher Law?)

from http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/In_Memoriam_A._H._H.
(in the Public Domain)

from office.microsoft.com

In Memoriam A. H. H.
by Alfred Tennyson

I envy not the beast that takes
His license in the field of time,
Unfetter'd by the sense of crime,
To whom a conscience never wakes; (from Canto 27)

But as [man] grows he gathers much,
And learns the use of ‘I' and ‘me,'
And finds ‘I am not what I see,
And other than the things I touch.' (from Canto 45)

And we shall sit at endless feast,
Enjoying each the other's good:
What vaster dream can hit the mood
Of Love on earth? He seeks at least

Upon the last and sharpest height,
Before the spirits fade away,
Some landing-place, to clasp and say,
'Farewell! We lose ourselves in light.' (from Canto 47)

Oh yet we trust that somehow good
Will be the final goal of ill,
To pangs of nature, sins of will,
Defects of doubt, and taints of blood;

That nothing walks with aimless feet;
That not one life shall be destroy'd,
Or cast as rubbish to the void,
When God hath made the pile complete;

That not a worm is cloven in vain;
That not a moth with vain desire
Is shrivell'd in a fruitless fire,
Or but subserves another's gain.

Behold, we know not anything;
I can but trust that good shall fall
At last--far off--at last, to all,
And every winter change to spring. (from Canto 54)

Are God and Nature then at strife,
That Nature lends such evil dreams?
So careful of the type she seems,
So careless of the single life;

That I, considering everywhere
Her secret meaning in her deeds,
And finding that of fifty seeds
She often brings but one to bear, (from Canto 55)

Ring out a slowly dying cause,
And ancient forms of party strife;
Ring in the nobler modes of life,
With sweeter manners, purer laws. (from Canto 106)

In tracts of fluent heat began,
And grew to seeming-random forms,
The seeming prey of cyclic storms,
Till at the last arose the man;

Who throve and branch'd from clime to clime,
The herald of a higher race,
And of himself in higher place,
If so he type this work of time

Within himself, from more to more;
Or, crown'd with attributes of woe
Like glories, move his course, and show
That life is not as idle ore,

But iron dug from central gloom,
And heated hot with burning fears,
And dipt in baths of hissing tears,
And batter'd with the shocks of doom

To shape and use. Arise and fly
The reeling Faun, the sensual feast;
Move upward, working out the beast,
And let the ape and tiger die. (from Canto 118)

Let him, the wiser man who springs
Hereafter, up from childhood shape
His action like the greater ape,
But I was born to other things. (from Canto 120)

No longer half-akin to brute,
For all we thought and loved and did,
And hoped, and suffer'd, is but seed
Of what in them is flower and fruit;

Whereof the man, that with me trod
This planet, was a noble type
Appearing ere the times were ripe,
That friend of mine who lives in God,

That God, which ever lives and loves,
One God, one law, one element,
And one far-off divine event,
To which the whole creation moves. (from the Epilogue)

Here and There ?

(Words & Imagery)

One problem with communication, especially concerning divine things, seems to be that, down here, we’re missing at least half the conversation—the most important half?—the image half, being the pictures and meanings in the mind of the Speaker.

Some who tell of other-world or near-death experiences have said:¹

1. [Communication] was completely through thought…. There was no mistaking what either of us was saying— there was no possibility of misunderstanding.”

2. [I]t was communication of thought. When he spoke, words were used, but I can't tell you what they were. It was more a conveyance of knowledge.

3. “Telepathy is the purest form of communication,” [my guide] said. “There could not possibly be any misunderstanding this way. If I were to send you a message telepathically, you'd see it exactly as I saw it, as I sent it. For instance, if I told you that I wanted to meet you in the park, you'd want to know what park, where in the park, an exact location. I would use words to describe everything the way I understood them. You might not have the same definition for the words I chose. Therefore, a misunderstanding. But, if I sent a message telepathically to you of the same park, you'd see the exact spot as well as the park I had chosen. Therefore, you wouldn't misunderstand because of the different definitions for the words we use.”

4. “That's why it's the purest form of communication,” [my guide] said. “You not only see what I see, you also experience the emotions I feel at the time. Therefore, it's as if you're actually experiencing the message yourself.”

So, the plaguing question is: How can we be sure of the full meaning of anything God or His (inspired) spokespeople say when all we have are the words, unless we have some further encounter with the mind of God? An example is the recurring tussle over the word “one,” as in “one God.”

What was the “one” imagery, when Abinadi said:

I would that ye should understand that God himself shall come down among the children of men, and shall redeem his people. And because he dwelleth in flesh he shall be called the Son of God, and having subjected the flesh to the will of the Father, being the Father and the Son— The Father, because he was conceived by the power of God; and the Son, because of the flesh; thus becoming the Father and Son— And they are one God, yea, the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth. And thus the flesh becoming subject to the Spirit, or the Son to the Father, being one God, suffereth temptation, and yieldeth not to the temptation, but suffereth himself to be mocked, and scourged, and cast out, and disowned by his people. (Book of Mormon Mosiah 15:1-5)?

Or when Nephi wrote:

And they must come according to the words which shall be established by the mouth of the Lamb; and the words of the Lamb shall be made known in the records of thy seed, as well as in the records of the twelve apostles of the Lamb; wherefore they both shall be established in one; for there is one God and one Shepherd over all the earth. (Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 13:41)

And now, behold, my beloved brethren, this is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God. And now, behold, this is the doctrine of Christ, and the only and true doctrine of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, which is one God, without end. Amen. (Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 31:21)?

Or with Mormon:

And he hath brought to pass the redemption of the world, whereby he that is found guiltless before him at the judgment day hath it given unto him to dwell in the presence of God in his kingdom, to sing ceaseless praises with the choirs above, unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end. (Book of Mormon Mormon 7:7)?

Or Joseph Smith:

As well as those who should come after, who should believe in the gifts and callings of God by the Holy Ghost, which beareth record of the Father and of the Son; Which Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one God, infinite and eternal, without end. Amen. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 20:27-28)?

Can the following quotes concerning “one” give us some clue as to how “one” can be both one and many at the same time?²—an attempt to convey imagery in words?

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Old Testament Genesis 2:24; see also New Testament Matthew 19:5; Mark 10:8; Ephesians 5:31; Doctrine and Covenants 49:16; Pearl of Great Price Moses 3:24; Abraham 5:18)

And thou shalt make fifty taches of brass, and put the taches into the loops, and couple the tent together, that it may be one. (Old Testament Exodus 26:11)

Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand. (Old Testament Ezekiel 37:19)

And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one. (Old Testament Zechariah 14:9)

And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. ... That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: (New Testament John 17:11, 21-22)

And he gathereth his children from the four quarters of the earth; and he numbereth his sheep, and they know him; and there shall be one fold and one shepherd; and he shall feed his sheep, and in him they shall find pasture. (Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 22:25)

Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; (Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 2:11)

And the branches of the natural tree will I graft into the natural branches of the tree; and thus will I bring them together again, that they shall bring forth the natural fruit, and they shall be one. (Book of Mormon Jacob 5:68)

Father, I pray not for the world, but for those whom thou hast given me out of the world, because of their faith, that they may be purified in me, that I may be in them as thou, Father, art in me, that we may be one, that I may be glorified in them. (Book of Mormon 3 Nephi 19:29)

For a trump shall sound both long and loud, even as upon Mount Sinai, and all the earth shall quake, and they shall come forth—yea, even the dead which died in me, to receive a crown of righteousness, and to be clothed upon, even as I am, to be with me, that we may be one. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 29:13)

Behold, you have had many afflictions because of your family; nevertheless, I will bless you and your family, yea, your little ones; and the day cometh that they will believe and know the truth and be one with you in my church. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 31:2)

I am Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who was crucified for the sins of the world, even as many as will believe on my name, that they may become the sons of God, even one in me as I am one in the Father, as the Father is one in me, that we may be one. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 35:2)

Behold, this I have given unto you as a parable, and it is even as I am. I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 38:27)

And let every man deal honestly, and be alike among this people, and receive alike, that ye may be one, even as I have commanded you. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 51:9)

These type of questions kept cropping up for me as I read Daymon Smith’s A Cultural History of the Book of Mormon, Vol. 1: Setting, a foundation, of stones to stumble over. As I’m re-reading it, I keep wondering if our beliefs, biases, preferences, and theories are as much about mezza-communing as meta-texting? In other words, we start with half-communion³ (the words without the defining imagery) and proceed to elaborations and conclusions (meta-texting).

That seems to be one of the great gaps between here and there, especially in comprehending prophecy. When God (through an inspired prophet) says: “Zion,” which one of the several is He picturing? What about other words like Israel? Jerusalem? Egypt? Assyria? Babylon? Even, “Restore all things”?⁴ and so forth. Can these “words” stand as shifting archetypes—with layer upon layer of historical imagery and déjà vu attached—and thus be brilliantly applied in a different time, to a different entity by virtue of the imagery in the mind of the Speaker?

What if the “Joseph” pictured in the mind of God and referred to in Doctrine and Covenants 113:4 is an entirely different “Joseph” from the one God pictures in verse 6? such that the “rod” descends of one Joseph and the “root” descends of a subsequent Joseph?

What if imagery in the mind of God is the master key to distinguishing and understanding all the “words”? What if, without the revealed imagery, it’s all meta-texting about words, words, words?

A relevant observation from Joseph Smith (added here October 5, 2014):

“Oh Lord God deliver us in thy due time from the little narrow prison almost as it were totel darkness of paper pen and ink and a crooked broken scattered and imperfect language” (source⁵).

--------------/
Note: In a future post, I intend to explore some questions I have about Daymon Smith's apparent view (if I am reading him right) that the Bible has become so corrupted by the loss of plain and precious things (Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 13 & 14) that it should not be used. Might such a rejection also constitute meta-texting?

1. See Crowther, Duane S., Life Everlasting, Cedar Fort, Inc.. Kindle Edition (2006-01-01). Chapter 6: “The Amazing Capabilities of Spirit World Beings”, section titled “Telepathic Mind Communication” (Kindle Locations for quotes (Q) are at: Q-1: Locations 5396-5397; Q-2: Locations 5403-5404; Q-3: Locations 5431-5435; Q-4: Locations 5440-5441.
2. See also: New Testament Romans 12:4-5 ~ For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.
New Testament 1 Corinthians 10:1 ~ For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.
New Testament 1 Corinthians 12:11-14, 18-20 ~ But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. ... But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but one body.
Book of Mormon Jacob 5:74 ~ ... and they became like unto one body; and the fruits were equal; and the Lord of the vineyard had preserved unto himself the natural fruit, which was most precious unto him from the beginning.
3. The greater accuracy is probably half of that half (or less) since we humans have a tendency to favor those scriptures (as well as other things) that confirm our already established preferences; and miss or discount what doesn’t confirm our biases.
4. New Testament Matthew 17:11 ~ And Jesus answered and said unto them, Elias truly shall first come, and restore all things.
Doctrine and Covenants Section 77:9 ~ And, if you will receive it, this is Elias which was to come to gather together the tribes of Israel and restore all things.
Doctrine and Covenants Section 77:14 ~ Q. What are we to understand by the little book which was eaten by John, as mentioned in the 10th chapter of Revelation? A. We are to understand that it was a mission, and an ordinance, for him to gather the tribes of Israel; behold, this is Elias, who, as it is written, must come and restore all things.
Doctrine and Covenants Section 132:40 ~ I am the Lord thy God, and I gave unto thee, my servant Joseph, an appointment, and restore all things. Ask what ye will, and it shall be given unto you according to my word.
Doctrine and Covenants Section 132:45 ~ For I have conferred upon you the keys and power of the priesthood, wherein I restore all things, and make known unto you all things in due time.
5. http://josephsmithpapers.org/intro/joseph-smith-and-his-papers-an-introduction?p=8

Facsimile 3: Book of Abraham ??

A Facsimile from The Pearl of Great Price
Book of Abraham, No. 3 
Author/Artist unknown; brought forth
via Abraham & Joseph Smith ?

IF “There is no institution so pure and excellent which the corruption and folly of man will not, in time, alter for the worse”¹;

IF the same observation applies to written text²;

IF the source of Facsimile 3 is of unknown, ancient origin;

IF the copy Joseph Smith had was a corrupted version of some older text;

IF Joseph had access to revelation, visions, and divine technology, as he claimed;

THEN, WHAT IF this facsimile, as sketched by the Prophet Joseph, reverts back to an older, truer rendition and reading, making all the scholarly-scorn, hand-wringing, and head-clutching for naught?

Again, just asking.

------------------
1. This quote from Mosheim, Ecclesiastical History, Century II, Part II, chapter 4 was first observed at http://barerecord.blogspot.ca/2014/02/238-temple-rites-and-movies.html
2. For déjà vu! see: Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 13:28-29; 34-35, 40; Pearl of Great Price Articles of Faith 1:8 ~ "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; ..."; and Joseph's amendments to Biblical text.

First, Last, In-between, Or ... ?

(A Mormon Faux-Conundrum??)

Q: How many times have individuals or teams been working in “splendid isolation” only to discover that  their great scientific breakthrough has been preempted by another individual or team working also in “splendid isolation”?

A: Often enough that it has a Wikipedia entry!

“The concept of multiple discovery is the hypothesis that most scientific discoveries and inventions are made independently and more or less simultaneously by multiple scientists and inventors.”¹ (Bold emphasis added.)

The hypothesis is strongly supported. Here is an extracted sample:²

▪ Calculus – Isaac Newton, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Pierre de Fermat and others;
▪ Sunspots – Thomas Harriot (England, 1610), Johannes and David Fabricius (Frisia, 1611), Galileo Galilei (Italy, 1612), Christoph Scheiner (Germany, 1612);
▪ Leyden Jar – Ewald Georg von Kleist (1745) and Pieter van Musschenbroek (1745-46);
▪ Oxygen – Carl Wilhelm Scheele (Uppsala, 1773), Joseph Priestley (Wiltshire, 1774). Antoine Lavoisier (1777) and others;
▪ Theory of the evolution of species, independently advanced by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace (19th century);
▪ Cadmium – Friedrich Strohmeyer, K.S.L Hermann (both in 1817);
▪ Electrical telegraph – Charles Wheatstone (England), 1837, Samuel F.B. Morse (United States), 1837;
▪ Helium – Pierre Jansen, Norman Lockyer (both in 1868);
▪ Two proofs of the prime number theorem by Jacques Hadamard and Charles de la Vallée-Poussin in the same year (1896);
▪ Sound film – Joseph Tykociński-Tykociner (1922), Lee De Forest (1923);
▪ Jet engine by Hans von Ohain (1939), Secondo Campini (1940) and Frank Whittle(1941);
▪ Higgs boson into a full relativistic model in 1964 independently and almost simultaneously by three groups of physicists: by Englert / Brout; Higgs; and Guralnik / Hagen / Kibble;
▪ Endorphins ~ in Scotland and the US in 1975.

SO, if multiple, independent discovery is frequently true for science, WHY do we seem so adverse to the possibility of multiple, independent inspiration / revelation in religion? I ask because of the contest about who first discovered /developed / received the “restored gospel” sequence³ in the 1820s-early 1830s. Was it Walter Scott, Barton Stone, Alexander Campbell, Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, Sydney Rigdon, or some unknown other persons, lost to history? ⁴

Why the attempts to order or reorder dates so one’s verifiable or preferred creator comes first? Why the anxiety to cover up seeming plagiarism of ideas and concepts; or the enthusiasm to levy such charges? Why the need to disparage other “contestants” for prime position? Why “revise and expand” suppositions in order to defend tradition and orthodoxy? Why insist on a precise, documented order that may misrepresent a revealed order?

Despite our dispositions and predispositions, is it  possible to accept the documented historical “proofs” AND the confusions / contradictions / inexplicables? Is it possible to concede that God is often inscrutable and unconcerned about presenting linear, pristine provenance for momentous events? Is it possible to admit that God isn't constrained by our expectations of precision, proofs, or exclusivity?

Surely, God’s spirit can brood upon the flowing waters of desire and sincerity and pour down knowledge into diverse, imperfect vessels, wherever they may be, even in near neighborhoods! Can’t He follow the trails of agency and stewardship; and apply the principle of added-upon or not, as each case may prove?

So, why all the allegations of plagiarism? If an angel repeats “the very same things” on at least four occasions⁵ might other heavenly manifestations / inspirations contain elements of repetition? Does the economy of Heaven favor déjà vu?

What if Oliver Cowdery’s “Articles of the Church of Christ”⁶ is an inspired reception of truths—truths also revealed to others? Is God not permitted to repeat Himself? to speak to more than one at a time? to give testimony into the mouths of two or three witnesses?

What did God say?

To Oliver, April 1829: Behold thou hast a gift, and blessed art thou because of thy gift. Remember it is sacred and cometh from above— And if thou wilt inquire, thou shalt know mysteries which are great and marvelous; therefore thou shalt exercise thy gift, that thou mayest find out mysteries, that thou mayest bring many to the knowledge of the truth, yea, convince them of the error of their ways. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 6:10-11)

To Alma: For behold, the Lord doth grant unto all nations, of their own nation and tongue, to teach his word, yea, in wisdom, all that he seeth fit that they should have; therefore we see that the Lord doth counsel in wisdom, according to that which is just and true. (Book of Mormon Alma 29:8; circa 76 B.C.)

To Joel: And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit. (Old Testament Joel 2:28-29; see also Numbers 11:29; New Testament Acts 2:17; Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 14:25-6; Doctrine & Covenants 1:20, 34)

So, can we mortals drop exclusivity? Can we stop cobbling together sparse facts to create “true” scenarios that favor our view of how something really happened (or should have happened)? How  can we ever think to discover the invisible workings of God by pure study of and reliance on (or manipulation of)  the visible?

Can we let God be non-exclusive?!⁷ Can we exercise a modicum of trust in one of the most important scriptures ever pronounced for the enlightenment of every saint, sinner, scribe, and scholar?

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. (Old Testament Isaiah 55:8-9)

Can we remember that faith is, in part, "the evidence of things not seen"?

 --------------/
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_discovery
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multiple_discoveries
3. As in the Article of Faith # 4 sequence: Faith, Repentance, Baptism, Holy Ghost.
4. See Daymon M Smith, A Cultural History of the Book of Mormon: Vol. 1, setting, a foundation of stones to stumble over, where he discusses the distortions from entwining tradition and history; where he critiques several scholars, including: Bushman, Givens, Faulring, Welch, et al.; and where he, too, sometimes seems to take a position, that may itself distort.
5. Pearl of Great Price, “Joseph Smith History;” and “Testimony of the Prophet Joseph Smith,” frontispiece of the Book of Mormon
6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_of_the_Church_of_Christ
7. “Wherefore, I the Lord, knowing the calamity which should come upon the inhabitants of the earth, called upon my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and spake unto him from heaven, and gave him commandments; And also gave commandments to others, that they should proclaim these things unto the world; and all this that it might be fulfilled, which was written by the prophets— ... But that every man might speak in the name of God the Lord, even the Savior of the world; ... And again, verily I say unto you, O inhabitants of the earth: I the Lord am willing to make these things known unto all flesh;” (Doctrine and Covenants Section 1:17-18, 20, 34; bold emphasis added.)

God’s Lament

(Bold emphasis added in scripture quotes)

Here is a small compilation from the olden days (circa 700 BCE to 1800s CE):

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. ... Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards: they judge not the fatherless, neither doth the cause of the widow come unto them. (Old Testament Isaiah 1:2, 23)

All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. (Old Testament Isaiah 53:6)

Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter. (Old Testament Isaiah 56:11)

I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts; (Old Testament Isaiah 65:2)

They are not humbled even unto this day, neither have they feared, nor walked in my law, nor in my statutes, that I set before you and before your fathers. (Old Testament Jeremiah 44:10)

... they have despised the law of the LORD, and have not kept his commandments, and their lies caused them to err, after the which their fathers have walked: (Old Testament Amos 2:4)

... ye have turned judgment into gall, and the fruit of righteousness into hemlock: (Old Testament Amos 6:12)

For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. (New Testament Romans 10:2-3)

For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's. (New Testament Philippians 2:21)

[Y]ea, the more part of them had turned out of the way of righteousness, and did trample under their feet the commandments of God, and did turn unto their own ways, and did build up unto themselves idols of their gold and their silver. (Book of Mormon Helaman 6:31)

They seek not the Lord to establish his righteousness, but every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol, which waxeth old and shall perish in Babylon, even Babylon the great, which shall fall. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 1:16)

And my vineyard has become corrupted every whit; and there is none which doeth good save it be a few; and they err in many instances because of priestcrafts, all having corrupt minds. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 33:4)

Behold, thus saith the Lord unto my people—you have many things to do and to repent of; for behold, your sins have come up unto me, and are not pardoned, because you seek to counsel in your own ways. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 56:14)

And the anger of God kindleth against the inhabitants of the earth; and none doeth good, for all have gone out of the way. (Doctrine and Covenants Section 82:6)

Does any of this sound déjà vu, even from Moses’ day?

And the LORD said unto Moses, Behold, thou shalt sleep with thy fathers; and this people will rise up, and go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land, whither they go to be among them, and will forsake me, and break my covenant which I have made with them. (Old Testament Deuteronomy 31:16)

Does God lament anymore? or have we got it all under control? or are our gods too subtle for recognition? or too necessary to the “good” life? or so entwined in our culture, we can’t see for not looking?

And if we're not hearing God's Lament from our bishop's, pastors, elders, preachers,  et al. could it be because we won't? Could Isaiah's words apply today?

Now go, write it before them in a table, and note it in a book, that it may be for the time to come for ever and ever: That this is a rebellious people, lying children, children that will not hear the law of the LORD: Which say to the seers, See not; and to the prophets, Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits: Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us. (Old Testament Isaiah 30:8-11)

Is it time for a review of Spencer W. Kimball's, "The False God's We Worship"?

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/06/the-false-gods-we-worship?lang=eng

Is it time to listen to latter-day witnesses, as in Chris Hedges, former foreign correspondent, and hundreds of others?

Curtis White in The Middle Mind argues that most Americans are aware of the brutality and injustice used to maintain the excesses of their consumer society and empire. He suspects they do not care. They don't want to see what is done in their name. ["The rows of flag-draped coffins," "the horribly maimed bodies and faces of veterans," "the hundreds of thousands who have been killed in Iraq," and elsewhere over 230 years of history.¹] It is too upsetting. They don't want to read about the nation's growing legions of underemployed and poor, or the child laborers in sweat shops who make our clothing and our shoes. Government and media censorship ... are appreciated. Most prefer to be entertained. (Chris Hedges, I Don't Believe in Atheists, p. 85-86, © 2008)

---------------------/
Note to all believers in God, everywhere: If we think these laments apply only to our wayward neighbors, perhaps we should find one of those ubiquitous mirrors from the prior post. And that includes this writer. I write these things out of self-reflection and to witness of what I, too often, experience and see in myself and others of all faiths and persuasions.

1. http://www.dejavu-times.blogspot.ca/2008/06/memo-to-cindy-mccain-et-al.html

Glass-lookers: One and All ?

Mirror, Mirror
on the wall

In 1826, Joseph Smith was purportedly brought to trial¹ for glass-looking. The flurry of derision seems unending, so it is rather fortunate that glass-looking is no longer a misdemeanor. Fortunate because most of us spend large portions of our day, glass-looking as in: iphone, smartphone, ipad, Nexus, desktop, laptop, Kindle, Kobo, TV, DVD-player, or a thousand other branded devices that crowd our real estate—not to mention those ubiquitous mirrors. Glass-looking indeed!

Twenty year-old Joseph Smith was accused of looking for treasure with his “magical” stone. What are we modern glass-lookers, seeking with our electronic “magic”?² Some personal treasure?—like knowledge, information, connection, communication, riches, fame, fantasy, popularity, market flux, gambling, gaming, titillation, best price, a relationship, another like, a viral backdoor, a sucker, a stolen identity, a Second Life, a third wife, ... ? (The list of “treasures” is endless.)

As many researchers have noted, magic and folklore permeated Joseph’s environment, as did skeptics who feared misuse—to deceive and defraud. Hhmm! Glass-looking to deceive and defraud? What a novel idea! Or just déjà vu?

But who can judge the intent of a glass-looker with certainty? And who cannot use selective information to support presuppositions?³

In 100 years, (nay, even today with our ever-watching / -listening NSA), what “accusations” might be dug up about any one of us from the archaeology of data-mining?

Why did X google “child sacrifice”? To research her (never-published) book about the ancient god Moloch or for some Friday-the-13th forest ritual?

Why did Y Ask “explosive”? To build an IED or to find synonyms to use when pitching his new and sensational play about Mitch McConnell?

Why did Z bing “Bill O'Reilly deceased”? To find a missing great-uncle in the family tree or with criminal intent?

Yes, data-mining has more data to expose truth than old newspapers and affidavits, but consider the selective, deceptive, distorted, fabricated, misinterpreted, “honest-to-gosh-true” accounts that litter our beloved WWW. Could there have been any similar “honest-to-gosh-true” accounts that littered 19th-century America? For many, their first thoughts are that everything condemning Joseph Smith is really true. Historical witness is: probably not. Too much of what we decide seems to depend on “hard priors,”³ independent of truth.

So, let us remember: No one is immune to the “false witness” of circumstantial, mistaken, or malicious evidence. All one has to do is listen to the varying accounts of an upsetting local event to know that much of what comes pouring forth as “true facts” is flat-out wrong.

So, as we continue our glass-looking ventures, remember the long and the short:

▪ bias and misinformation in history are ubiquitous;
▪ much of what we think we know, we don’t;
▪ much of what we think we see, we don’t;
▪ much of what there is to see, we miss;
▪ reconstruction of history is often misconstruction;
▪ no one but God knows the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

So, Help Us God!

Please.

-----------------/
1. The compromised “evidence” seems more likely to document a pretrial procedure, but whether trial or pretrial, most who speak out with such assurance of “facts” speak from hearsay and would be much distressed to find their own lives judged by antagonists on such sparse and ambivalent evidence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_of_Joseph_Smith
http://byulaw.blogspot.ca/2005/09/joseph-smiths-arrest-records-found.html
http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Legal_issues/Trials/1826_glasslooking_trial
http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1g64rh/was_joseph_smith_a_convicted_conman/
2. Only a small minority understands how these devises work—through the mystery of 0s & 1s, not to mention (yes, again) the physics of the electricity that powers / sustains it all. Considering God has created the Cosmos, is it not conceivable that He might have a technology superior, more natural, and more self-sustaining than the “magic” created by man? And that such technology would have the potential for use and misuse by mankind, even as man’s technology? And that God alone will be the judge of misuse!
3. “If you have a strongly held belief with an emotional component, the brain defends information that reinforces those ‘priors’ and is skeptical of information that challenges them. … People who hold these hard priors filter information to support their perceptions.” (Bold emphasis added.) From the work of political scientist Hank Jenkins-Smith of the University of Oklahoma as quoted, in Newsweek, October 13, 2010, pp. 29-30 by science writer Sharon Begley about voter tendencies—observations that seem applicable to almost everything that requires choice or discernment.

Tampering: A Small (Déjà Vu) Case Study ?

In Hugh Nibley’s, Teachings of the Book of Mormon, Vol. 4, he laments the “exacting editor” who, in some perceived wisdom, removed an “insignificant” word from Book of Mormon, Ether 2:20—a word that proves not so insignificant to a proper understanding.¹

So, how do we stop these (chronic) “exacting editors” who give no notice of their edits from edition to edition of sacred scripture? And WHY have we not learned about the dangers of tampering with “plain and precious” words from the example in Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 13:28-34 and from Article of Faith #8?²

This question of tampering arose one day while I was reading:

And the Lord said: I will prepare unto my servant Gazelem,^[3] a stone, which shall shine forth in darkness unto light, that I may discover unto my people who serve me, that I may discover unto them the works of their brethren, yea, their secret works, their works of darkness, and their wickedness and abominations. (Book of Mormon Alma 37:23)

Gazelem?! Why did I suddenly attach that word to Joseph Smith? and how many times had I read that verse and never connected it—till that day—to the olden days (pre-1981) Doctrine and Covenants? There, in sections 78 and 104 (if one can find an old D&C), the similar word Gazelam is used (but now removed). Thus, how many new (and old) members don't have a clue about code names because they have been totally excised? How many don't have a clue that one of the Prophet’s code names was Gazelam?

Are these code names of no import? Can we safely assume they have no meaning, considering how mysterious and subtle God can be? Were they just snatched out of thin air or were they inspired⁴—with some meaning yet to be understood? Why couldn't the original code names remain—just in case they had greater purpose—while inserting the real names in square brackets?

And who is to say that the excised Shinehah (code name for Kirtland) has no historical or prophetic meaning, considering its uses elsewhere?⁵

In recent years, there has been considerable discussion over the use of a so-called “peep-stone” in preference to the Urim and Thummin, during the Prophet Joseph’s translation of the Book of Mormon. Considering Alma 37:23 and its reference to “a stone”—not stones or Urim and Thummin—maybe the code name Gazelam is a clue to something we don’t yet understand about the translation process.

So, the question is: Have we had an important prophetic fulfillment regarding Joseph Smith stripped from our awareness by “exacting editors” who decided that Doctrine and Covenants’ code words were nothing more than subterfuge, fluff, or paranoia?

Why can’t we admit what was and is; confess that we don’t always understand or like what surfaces; and be open to the possibility that our best interpretation of past records and events might be flawed?

But please, whatever the case or reason, can we stop editing scripture? If we are trying to squeeze it into some latter-day expectation or norm, that's not a good sign.

Note: Yes, this critique is based on faith that Joseph Smith was a prophet; that the Book of Mormon is his genuine translation of an ancient record; and that prophetic words are best left alone by subsequent generations. If subsequent generations wish to make amendments to revelations, please let them do it by recording separate, independent revelation,⁶ not by quietly editing old ones. In this writer’s view: to quietly edit another's revelation—no matter how innocuous the edit may seem—is to compromise the integrity of the original revelation as well as the integrity of the (presumptuous?) editor. (In the near words of Groucho Marx, “These are my [views]; if you don’t like them, I have others.”)

--------------------/
1. Hugh W. Nibley, Teachings of the Book of Mormon--Semester 4 [p. 270]: Transcripts of Lectures Presented to an Honors Book of Mormon Class at Brigham Young University, 1988--1990 [Provo: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies.) Ether 2:20: "And the Lord said unto the brother of Jared: Behold, thou shalt make a hole in the top [thereof], and also in the bottom [thereof]; and when thou shalt suffer for air thou shalt unstop the hole [it doesn't say open the window] and receive air." That's a very different thing from opening windows. It talks about opening windows, and this is something else. There's a hole in the top. What is this, an air compressor? "Thou shalt unstop the hole and receive air. And if it be so that the water come in upon thee, behold, ye shall stop the hole, that ye may not perish in the flood."
Notice "the hole thereof"; there's the hole of the air and the hole of the water, "that ye may not perish in the flood." An exacting editor, by removing the very significant thereofs [has changed the meaning]. When you suffer for air, you unstop the hole thereof and receive air. That means air hole, you see. But he removed the [word] thereof, and he said, "When thou shalt suffer for air thou shalt unstop the hole and receive air." He doesn't mention thereof, meaning air hole. He made it to appear that when Jared wanted air, he had to open the top window of the boat to admit fresh air. That's the very time he had to keep it closed. When they didn't have air inside, they had to keep it closed because the waves are dashing outside. That was not what the original of the Book of Mormon said. For one thing, the ships had no windows communicating with the outside. "Ye cannot have windows," it said. Each ship had an air-tight door, we're told, and that was all. Air was received not by opening and closing doors and windows. Only when they were quiet and riding on the surface could they open the window and replenish the air. But he says by unplugging air holes "thou shalt unstop the hole [thereof] and receive air," this being done only when the ship was not on the surface. "When thou shalt suffer for air"-that is, when the ships were not able to open the hatches and replenish their air. Well, this can only refer to a reserve supply of air, and indeed the brother of Jared recognizes that the people cannot possibly survive on the air contained within the ship at normal pressure. Ether 2:19 : "We shall perish, for in them we cannot breathe, save it is the air which is in them; therefore we shall perish."
So the Lord recommended a device for compressing air with a hole in the top thereof and also in the bottom thereof-not referring to the ship but to the air chamber with the peculiar language "unstop an air hole." When the crew found it impossible to remain on the surface, [verse 20], "And if it be so that the water come in upon thee," they were to plug up the air chamber. "Ye shall stop the hole [thereof], that ye may not perish in the flood"-to keep the air after you've replenished it. (Bold emphasis added. Square brackets are in the original transcripted book.)
2. Book of Mormon 1 Nephi 13:24-29 ~ And the angel of the Lord said unto me: Thou hast beheld that the book proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew; and when it proceeded forth from the mouth of a Jew it contained the fulness of the gospel of the Lord, of whom the twelve apostles bear record; and they bear record according to the truth which is in the Lamb of God. Wherefore, these things go forth from the Jews in purity unto the Gentiles, according to the truth which is in God. And after they go forth by the hand of the twelve apostles of the Lamb, from the Jews unto the Gentiles, thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away. And all this have they done that they might pervert the right ways of the Lord, that they might blind the eyes and harden the hearts of the children of men. Wherefore, thou seest that after the book hath gone forth through the hands of the great and abominable church, that there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God. And after these plain and precious things were taken away it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles; and after it goeth forth unto all the nations of the Gentiles, yea, even across the many waters which thou hast seen with the Gentiles which have gone forth out of captivity, thou seest—because of the many plain and precious things which have been taken out of the book, which were plain unto the understanding of the children of men, according to the plainness which is in the Lamb of God—because of these things which are taken away out of the gospel of the Lamb, an exceedingly great many do stumble, yea, insomuch that Satan hath great power over them.
Pearl of Great Price Articles of Faith 1:8 ~ 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.
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gazelem  ~ Although wiki suggests Gazelem might mean the name of the stone, a cursory review of scripture shows “my servant X” used hundreds of times in reference to a person and never in reference to an object.
4. Orson Hyde’s comments about the "inspired" code names published in The Seer, 2 no. 3 (March 1854):228 found at http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/NCMP1820-1846/id/18143 . Thanks to Karl Ricks Anderson, I came across this reference in his book, The Savior in Kirtland: Personal Accounts of Divine Manifestations at p. 3, fn. 3, (© 2012) on January 23, 2014 and added this footnote here the following day.
5. Doctrine and Covenants Section 117:8 ~ Is there not room enough on the mountains of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and on the plains of Olaha Shinehah, or the land where Adam dwelt, that you should covet that which is but the drop, and neglect the more weighty matters?
Pearl of Great Price Abraham 3:13 ~ And he said unto me: This is Shinehah, which is the sun. And he said unto me: Kokob, which is star. And he said unto me: Olea, which is the moon. And he said unto me: Kokaubeam, which signifies stars, or all the great lights, which were in the firmament of heaven.
6. (as the Prophet Joseph did with his inspired translation of the Bible).