Archive for the 'Thought Provoking' Category
Posted on 2/7/2010 at 5:42:26 PM
“Human law, … is not binding upon any honest man”
All men should be entitled to two kinds of rights: – natural and artificial. Natural rights are embraced in life, liberty and the pursuits of happiness. Artificial rights consist of powers granted by legislative enactment; hence the machinery of government. …
Men do not enjoy all their rights in any government now existing. They waive the right by appointing men to make laws for the safety and convenience of the whole, allowing the majority to govern. But this is no criterion, or standard to suit the wants and capacities of the people. Every man is above the law, and can act as he pleases if he does not interfere with his neighbor’s right.
This is clearly taught in the great foundation of all law, the ten commandments. Human law, the artificial contrivance of the intellect, is not binding upon any honest man; nor should it be any more than the creeds and dogmas of bigots. Laws are for transgressors. …
Men have a right to petition and protest, and if either is unheeded by those entrusted with powers, they, the people, (oppressed) have what is denominated the reserved right of protecting themselves from insult.
Nor is it less legal for an insulted individual or community to resist oppression. For this reason, until the blood of Joseph and Hyrum Smith has been atoned for, by hanging, shooting, or staying in some manner, every person engaged in that cowardly, mean assassination, no Latter-day Saint should give himself up to the law: for the presumption is, that they will murder him in the same manner. The government has not redeemed the broken faith of the State; but upon the contrary, allowed an indicted murderer to sit in the legislative halls, whereby the whole state becomes accessory to the crime! The partaker is as bad as the thief.
Neither should civil process come in to Nauvoo, till the United States, by a rigorous effort, causes the state of Missouri and the state of Illinois to redress every man that has suffered the loss of lands, goods, or any thing else, by expulsion and the robbery from the one state and martyrdom and state plunder in the other. Commissioners can be appointed to regulate, where the clandestine forms of law might require the strange work of God to rebut it.
Let it be proclaimed to the ends of the earth that the lives of the Saints are their own property, and that they are bound to protect them, and that they will in the name of Israel’s God.
If any man is bound to maintain the law, it is for the benefit he may derive from it. No man can be compelled in a free country, to support a law that deprives him of his natural rights, when, enjoying them is no disadvantage to his neighbor. “Thus,” says Blackstone, “the statute of King Edward IV, which forbade the fine gentlemen of those times (under the degree of Lord) to wear pikes upon their boots and shoes of more than two inches in length, was a law that savored of oppression.”
Well, our charter is repealed; the murderers of the Smiths are running at large, and if the Mormons should wish to imitate their fore-fathers, and fulfil the scriptures making it “hard to kick against the pricks,” by wearing cast steel pikes about four or five inches long on their boots and shoes, to kick with, that’s the harm?
John Taylor, The Nauvoo Neighbor, 23rd April 1845.
Posted on 2/7/2010 at 5:39:35 PM
When filling in forms, such as those you are given when staying in an American Hospital, one question, amongst the myriad that ask for such information as your Ethnic origin, preferred title and diet requirements, is that of Religious ‘preference.’ A friend found herself filling in one of these forms recently, and it caused her to pause and think, “Is my religion just a preference. Do I prefer to be LDS today, maybe Baptist tomorrow? Or do I have Religious convictions?”
The United States Supreme Court classifies all religious beliefs as either preferences or convictions. According to the court, only convictions are given the full protection of the First Amendment.
When is a Belief a Preference?
A belief is a preference when, under certain circumstances, that belief can be changed. A belief may be strong and intense and may still be a preference. The five circumstances noted by the court that most often cause one to change his beliefs are: peer pressure, family pressure, litigation pressure, jail pressure, and death pressure.
Peer Pressure – When the disapproval of others causes one to bend their beliefs, their beliefs are simply preferences.
Family Pressure – It is often pressure from within a family – from a spouse, parent, or child – that will cause one to lessen their beliefs. The court held that if family pressure causes one to change ones beliefs, then those beliefs are merely a preference.
Litigation Pressure – When one faces an intimidating legal battle, he often re-evaluates his beliefs. If a lawsuit changes your beliefs, they are preferences.
Jail Pressure – Would you be willing to suffer a jail sentence for your belief? If not, your belief is just a preference.
Death Pressure – The ultimate test of a belief is whether you would be willing to die for it – like many Christian martyrs have done throughout history. Would you be willing to die for your belief? If not, your belief is not a conviction.
When is a Belief a Conviction?
Convictions are self-determined – The court held that if you need other people to stand with you, your belief is not a conviction. A conviction must be self-determined, not influenced by what others do or by what others ask of you.
Convictions are nonnegotiable – If you are willing to even discuss the option of dishonouring your belief, your belief is not a conviction but only a preference.
Convictions are victorious – Victory is standing for what you believe is right, regardless of the cost. The court held that if you need earthly victory to remain true to what you believe, you do not have a conviction.
Convictions are lifestyles – The court held that if a man holds true to his beliefs, those beliefs will evidence themselves in a life which is consistent with those beliefs.
Convictions must control a person’s life.
If religious liberty is to be passed on to the next generation, it is critical that we study the Gospel so that we can understand what it teaches, live consistent lives according to those teachings, and stand firmly for Gospel principles. Only then will the world recognise God’s people to be people of conviction and only then will we find our faith is sufficient to pass the test of conviction versus preference.
This story was previously printed in
the British edition of Messenger magazine (2:1).
It was written by a previous editor.
Posted on 2/7/2010 at 10:01:31 AM
The Setting for Lehi’s Vision
Lehi’s dream of the Tree of Life is one of the most memorable visions in all of Mormonism. Beginning in chapter eight of the first book of Nephi, the vision sets the stage for everything that follows in the Book of Mormon. It is a testament to us that God’s plan for His children is for us to withstand the test of mortality, to be able to once again return to His presence; this is the Plan of Salvation.
The literal interpretation of the vision is that if we hold to the rod we will be given the opportunity to partake of the love of God. Through Nephi’s prophetic interpretation of the vision, we are able to gain an in-depth understanding of its meaning, as well as a glimpse at the grace of God. However, the vision and its meaning are so significant that if we dig a little deeper, we can find greater meaning and clues that shed light on some of the steps we must take in order to be worthy of the promises God has made to us.
Lehi’s dream isn’t just about the Nephites or any other particular group of people. It is about each and every one of us.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted on 10/13/2009 at 8:02:39 AM
The Latter-day Saints have often been ridiculed on account of their belief in the pre-existence of spirits, and for marrying for time and all eternity, both being Bible doctrines. We have often been requested to give our views in relation to these principles, but considered the things of the kingdom belonged to the children of the kingdom, therefore not meet to give them to those without. But being very politely requested by a lady a few days since (a member of the Church) to answer the following questions, we could not consistently refuse, viz.:
“Where did I come from? What am I doing here? Whither am I going? And what is my destiny after having obeyed the truth, if faithful to the end?”
For her benefit and all others concerned, we will endeavor to answer the questions in brief, as we understand them. The reason will be apparent for our belief in the pre-existence of spirits, and in marrying for time and all eternity.
Lady, whence comest thou? Thine origin? What art thou doing here? Whither art thou going, and what is thy destiny? Declare unto me if thou hast understanding. Knowest thou not that thou art a spark of Deity, struck from the fire of His eternal blaze, and brought forth in the midst of eternal burning? Read the rest of this entry »
Posted on 10/7/2009 at 10:26:02 AM
In the ancient Apocrypha it tells the story of the young man named Tobias, and how he was guided by an angel to the “fair and wise” Sara, whom he was destined to marry.
However, Tobias was more than a little scared at this prospect as previously “this maid hath been given to seven men, who all died in the marriage chamber” at the hands of an evil spirit. Yet the angel told him not to be afraid, and assured him “this same night shall she be given thee in marriage.”
After being given some instruction on how to ward of the demon that would oppose their union, he was further reassured that following he and his wife’s prayers, “God which is merciful, … will have pity on you, and save you: Fear not, for she is appointed unto thee from the beginning; and thou shalt preserve her, and she shall go with thee.”
Yet, we might wonder, why should the angel favor Tobias amongst all the other men? The answer seems to be in his statement that Sara was “appointed unto thee from the beginning.” Having heard this he softened, and we are told that from that moment “he loved her, and his heart was effectually joined to her.”
It seems that Sara, being appointed to Tobias from the beginning, suggests that their relationship was fore-ordained (or planned) in the pre-mortal world, and I began to wonder whether it was possible that many other couples were similarly ‘meant for each other’, or if this incident was just an exception.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted on 11/28/2007 at 8:58:43 AM
Jessica: “I shall be saved by my husband; he hath made me a Christian.”
Shylock’s servant: “This making of Christians will raise the price of hogs: if we all become pork-eaters, in no time we’ll not be able to afford to cook bacon.” (The Merchant of Venice, William Shakespeare)
From the days of Noah there was a distinction between clean and unclean animals. It was only the unclean animals that went in two by two.(1) It does not say, however, exactly which animals were deemed unclean. Read the rest of this entry »
Posted on 10/7/2007 at 12:32:55 PM
Some see the law of Moses as entirely irrelevant in our era. Some believe it to be an ancient and mystic set of rites, understood only by aged Rabbis. Others are convinced it is as relevant today in our every day life as it was in ancient Israel.
Most of the world finds its information on Mosaic law solely from the Old Testament, but we Latter-day Saints have another source of God’s dealings with his people before Christ. Unlike the Bible which is only being acceptable only “as far as it is translated correctly” with “many plain and precious things” missing, the Book of Mormon is a volume of scripture translated into our language “by the gift and power of God.”
According to President John Taylor, in his book Mediation and Atonement: “it appears indubitable from the two records, that Bible and the Book of Mormon, that the intent and true meaning of the law of Moses, of its sacrifices, etc., were far better understood and comprehended by the Nephites than by the Jews.”
This means we should expect to find more insights in the Book of Mormon on the origins, purpose, and extent of the law of Moses in that divine record than from any Jewish experts or Rabbinical commentaries, and that its word should carry the greatest authority.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted on 10/7/2007 at 12:09:47 PM
“A recent study proved if you watch the movie just seven times … your brain would be transformed. Just seven times and The Secret is part of your life forever.” (Rhonda Byrne)
The Secret is a phenomenon. It is a video, a book, and a movement. In it’s DVD and hardback forms it has sold millions. It has been promoted on television by Oprah Winfrey and Larry King, and has made its way into business meetings, church services, support groups, and homes belonging to every ethnic, social and religious group.
It’s author calls it the “most powerful law in the universe,” and claims that it was hidden for 3,500 years by leaders who wanted “to keep the power” to themselves. It promises to “give you anything you want: happiness, health, and wealth.”
It claims to accomplish this through a formula of “ask, believe, and receive” that by “deciding what you want to be, do, and have,” and that by “thinking the thoughts of it,” and “emitting the frequency, … your vision will become your life.” Simply put, the universe is at your beck and call and is only awaiting its orders to furnish you with whatever you want.
The author, Rhonda Byrne, an Australian television producer, was introduced to the Secret herself through a book her daughter gave her during a troubled time in her life. That book was “The Science of Getting Rich” written in 1910, and influenced by the beliefs of Phineas Quimby, whose “New Thought” philosophy formed the basis of the Christian Science and Unity churches, with their hundreds of thousands of members.
Although the video and book tend not to speak about God directly, many Christians have embraced its teachings in the belief that they are just an embodiment of the principles of faith and prayer. But God tells us that whatever we see, hear, or learn we should compare it to His words, and test its truthfulness, and hold fast to what we find to be true. So, with that in mind, let us look at the Secret in greater depth and see how it stands up to the scriptures.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted on 10/7/2007 at 11:33:54 AM
When, in 1843, Joseph Smith received the revelation on Celestial Marriage we now call section 132, it not only introduced the controversial principle of plural marriage, but for the first time clearly revealed the concept of exaltation:
“Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.”
That revelation, however, was only known to a few at the time, and was not made public until 1852. However, the idea that our God was but one of many had already been hinted at four years earlier in the Prophet’s epistle from Liberty Jail in which he spoke of “a time to come in the which nothing shall be withheld, whether there be one God or many gods, they shall be manifest.” In saying this he was perhaps paraphrasing the Apostle Paul who said in his first Corinthian epistle that “there be gods many, and lords many” He also hinted that there was more to the subject that was yet to be revealed. Yet It was not until April 1844, in the now famous King Follet sermon that Joseph publicly explained this doctrine to the Saints. Said he:
“God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible, – I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form – like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with another. …
Here, then, is eternal life – to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power.”
The Prophet Joseph also later revealed why God chose us to have this privilege:
“God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. … [Therefore] he [used his] power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits.”
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted on 9/8/2007 at 7:31:29 AM
When John the Baptist came to Oliver Cowdery and the Prophet Joseph Smith, and ordained them he promised them that the Aaronic Priesthood “shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness.”
Many Latter-day Saints have never considered the implications of this statement. Who are the sons of Levi? What kind of offering would the sons of Levi need to make? How did this relate to the Priesthood conferred in 1829?
Levi was the son of Jacob and Leah, whose children became known as the tribe of Levi. In a revelation to Moses, God gave Aaron (his brother and descendant of Levi) and his sons a special priestly responsibility, and designating his cousins functions to perform within the temple.
Although their principle duties were primarily temporal, such as dealing with the furnishings in the temple and musical accompaniment, they were also involved in purification rituals, prayers of thanksgiving, and assisting the Priests with burnt offerings.
John the Baptist seems to be quoting an earlier prophesy by Malachi that “God shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.”
Malachi lived in a time when much of Israel had fallen into apostasy, when the temple had been desecrated, and most of the tribes were in Babylonian exile. He was looking forward to a time when the Messiah would come in power (through the second coming of Jesus) to the New Jerusalem, and when the Levites would again be able to fulfill their temple responsibilities.
That Malachi is speaking of the second coming of Jesus as the time period in which his prophesy will take place is verified by a latter-day revelation given to Joseph Smith in 1842, in which the Saints are told to offer the Lord a record of their genealogy, to be acceptable before Him before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord.
Read the rest of this entry »
Messenger