Episode 10: The Allegory of the Olive Tree (Jacob 5)

Olive trees

This is the mother of all chapters in the Book of Mormon.  A lot of people have a hard time reading through Jacob 5, but a speedy, cursory pass-through will miss a lot of the beautiful symbolism.  I'm going to do something different with this post, though.  I'm going to post other people's stuff more than my own.  I think with something like the Allegory of the Olive Tree, it helps to have visual aids, and there are a decent number of them already out there, so...why reinvent the wheel?

Here's a video that CES produced for seminary students back in the early '90s.  If you get past the hair and the clothes, you'll be able to get a fantastic understanding of the allegory:

http://www.lds.org/media-library/video/book-of-mormon?lang=eng&id=2012-08-1680-the-olive-tree#2012-08-1680-the-olive-tree


Here's a drawing of the process of grafting in a new branch:

This picture makes more sense after you've watched the video linked above.

Here is a diagram I found of the symbols and their historical counterparts:

And here's another diagram.  This one is from the Book of Mormon Student Manual:

These pictures are probably still not big enough to be read on this blog; I would apologize for that except, maybe it's good that the reader be forced to search out these things on his/her own.  Like I mentioned a couple posts ago, I've learned a lot from making my own visual aids.

That being said, here are just a few thoughts of my own:

The question that the lord of the vineyard asks throughout the allegory is, "What more could I have done for my vineyard?"  Obviously the prophet Jacob took this [rhetorical] question to heart, for he says of himself and his brother Joseph:

"And we did magnify our office unto the Lord, taking upon us the responsibility, answering the sins of the people upon our own heads if we did not teach them the word of God with all diligence; wherefore, by laboring with our might their blood might not come upon our garments, and we would not be found spotless at the last day" (Jac. 1:19)

Jacob mentions that he "labored diligently" several other times in his account.  When he asked himself, "What more could I have done?", he didn't want the answer to be: "A lot."

This reminds me of one of my favorite talks given in General Conference.  Henry B. Eyring gave a talk in the Priesthood Session of the April 2010 General Conference entitled, Act In All Diligence.  Near the opening of his talk, he quotes Brigham Young, who said of the priesthood:

"An individual who holds a share in the Priesthood, and continues faithful to his calling, who delights himself continually in doing the things God requires at his hands, and continues through life in the performance of every duty will secure to himself not only the privilege of receiving, but the knowledge [of] how to receive the things of God, that he may know the mind of God continually" (emphasis added).

One of the examples that Pres. Eyring gave to illustrate this sort of diligence was of an older man who had served in his ward as a bishop--twice.  This brother's "increasing physical limitations made any priesthood service very difficult."  But then Pres. Eyring points out something very important about this man's service:

"Yet he had a plan to act in diligence.  He sat every Sunday he could get to church near the row nearest the door where most of the people would enter for the sacrament meeting.  He got there early to be sure a seat was vacant.  Each person arriving could see his look of love and welcome, just as they did when he sat on the stand as their bishop.  His influence warmed and lifted us because we knew something of the price he paid to serve.  His task as a bishop was finished; his priesthood service did not end."

This quote immediately brought someone to mind in my own ward who is very similar.  This brother in my ward is also in his "golden years," has served as bishop in the past (along with countless other time-consuming callings), and still sits near the entrance to our chapel every Sunday in order to greet everyone as they enter.  He always has a smile on his face; he always has kind words to share.  He is also always ready to step in and serve, even when not asked.  An example of this has to do with the little number-cards at the front of the chapel for the hymns that will be sung during the service.  One of my callings is that of Ward Music Director, which means I pick the music for sacrament meeting, and it's also technically my job to slide those little cards into the slots at the front of the chapel each week.  However, I'm also the Ward Choir Director and Choir Pianist (I lead like a Jazz director, throwing ambiguous hand signals from where I sit at the piano; our choir still somehow understands me--they rock).  We have choir rehearsal in the morning before church starts, which means I'm usually rushing into the chapel just in time for choir practice, kids in tow, with nothing but choir stuff on my mind; when first called, I tended to forget about posting the hymn numbers for sacrament meeting.  But this good brother noticed my unspoken need for help and, on his own, began posting the hymn numbers for sacrament meeting each week.  He still does it to this day: he gets a hold of the program, checks out the hymn numbers, and posts them up front.  It's not a big thing--sliding little number-cards into slots at the front of the chapel--but it's been a great help to me every week.  More than that, it's taught me something about being aware of the needs around oneself.  This brother knew of my "plethora" of callings, recognized that it's not always easy to get to church early when you have small children, and he lent a hand.  What a huge lesson learned from such a small thing!

When you add to this the fact that just about every other time I attend the temple I also see him serving there in one capacity or another, you have for yourself a living lesson of diligence--of someone who is constantly asking himself: "What more [can] I do for [the Lord's] vineyard?"

I've tried asking myself that question with more frequency; I can do better, though.  We can always do better.  I'm just thankful that the Lord has blessed me with examples in my life of what that sort of diligence looks and acts like.  This is no abstract idea for me: it's a real, sought-after way of life.

Episode 9: Race, Religion, and Light

The many faces of Brazil: these pictures illustrate the great deal of ethnic
diversity to which the Americas have been no stranger throughout the ages.

In chapter one, verse fourteen of his book, Jacob made it clear that from this point on he would refer to anyone who wanted to destroy the people loyal to Nephi as "Lamanites"; on the other hand, those who had been loyal to Nephi were placed under the heading of "Nephites." He mentions other "-ites" (such as Ishmaelites, Josephites, Zoramites, Lemuelites, etc.), but proceeds to tell his readers that his narrative is going to simply stick with that broad pair of somewhat loosely defined monikers.  These umbrella titles leave a lot of wiggle room for interpretation: a lot of people could fall under their broad designations, which may or may not have included cultures/cities/people who were already living in the Americas before the Lehite colony arrived.  After all, the book of 2 Nephi already starts speaking of "wars" between the two main divisions of the Lehite colony.  Even with the most generous numbers we could give their group, the family of Lehi would still hardly warrant the use of such terminology.  I mean, I've seen family disputes and sibling rivalry, but I would hardly call it "war."  Using that word implies far larger numbers.

Of course, discussion of any peoples outside the Book of Mormon text is all speculation; and there are countless articles and papers written by scholars of the Book of Mormon who debate the possibilities of early interactions Lehi's family might have had with indigenous peoples.  In the end: who knows?  What's important is that the record admittedly addresses the issues between cultures and peoples in the Nephite world using a broad duality (of which the groundwork is laid in Lehi's dream with the duality between the Tree of Life and the Great and Spacious Building: the whole Book of Mormon is really an account of this larger--and often unseen--war being waged for the souls of men).

I only bring up the speculation on cultural interaction, however, because in the book of Jacob you immediately see the introduction of what appear to be issues relating to "race" between the two factions that were formed after Lehi's death.  Because there are still so many questions relating to the verses that I want to talk about, I'm going to tread carefully and I'm going to stick to the lessons and doctrine that are intended in these verses.

And what is intended?  We are told numerous times by the various contributors to the Book of Mormon that their intent for the record is to bring people to Christ, to aid in the gathering of Israel and the restoration of their descendants to the truth--to help them remember their covenants with God.  In fact, in this very chapter, our candid author tells us: "Nephi gave me, Jacob, a commandment concerning the small plates, upon which these things are engraven ... that I should write...a few of the things which I considered to be most precious; that I should not touch, save it were lightly, concerning the history of this people which are called the people of Nephi."  And then a couple verses later, Jacob tells us just what he means when he says, "precious": "preaching which was sacred, or revelation which was great, or prophesying."  Politics, literature, art, music, fashion trends, lottery numbers--none of that was included in the aforementioned definition.

Thus, we really don't know anything about the Nephite culture.  We think we do, but it's a teaspoon from the Mediterranean.

An analogy might serve to illustrate what I mean here:

Imagine the United States was completely wiped off the face of the map.  Then, imagine a thousand
years from now that the only record available to future generations about the U.S. was the Doctrine & Covenants.  The Doctrine & Covenants is an excellent book of scripture, and there are flashes and glimpses of the political and social structure of the United States: one could even glean a general sense of so-called "American culture" in the nineteenth century from its study.  But there's no way that person would have the slightest clue about the Revolutionary War, issues of prejudice in places like New York with Italian and Irish immigrants, racial tensions between the U.S. and Native Americans, the war with Mexico, or a whole host of other things I could list.  Even such a behemoth topic in American history like slavery would not be fully understood: the issue of slavery in America is touched on a little bit in the Doctrine & Covenants, and perhaps even our fictitious future archaeologists would be able to find evidence of the American Civil War with which they could corroborate Joseph Smith's prophecy in D&C 87, but it still would not lend them any great understanding of the complex tangle of issues that, even to this day, surround slavery.

If your only view of New York City was from a tunnel in
Central Park (which is where the picture was taken)...

However, it doesn't matter that none of that information is in that book: the purpose of the Doctrine & Covenants is not that of a historical record.  In fact, Section 1 (which acts as a preface to the book) highlights among the book's purposes its intent to: "break down the mighty and strong ones"; "that every man might speak in the name of God"; "that faith also might increase in the earth"; "That [God's] everlasting covenant might be established"; "That the fulness of [Christ's] gospel might be proclaimed by the weak and simple (i.e. people like Doug McCulloch) unto the ends of the world" (D&C 1:19-23).  

The Book of Mormon and the Doctrine & Covenants have their individual  roles to play in God's plan, of course, but one could argue that their purposes are similar.  More than that, it's plain that, whatever may be said of what they are, there's no doubting what they aren't: exhaustive records of the secular history of the inhabitants of the American continents, be they ancient or modern.

...then you would never really know just how big New York
City really is.

Consider even the Old Testament: when you read it, you would think the Israelites were the only people on earth that anyone cared about or talked about (I know I'm exaggerating, but I hope you know what I mean).  How funny it is that the first time the word "Israel" pops up in a source outside the Bible (I'm referring to the Merneptah Stele), it's on a "laundry list" of an expansionist king's many other subjected peoples, with no special emphasis given; in fact, the Israelites are mentioned almost as an aside ("Um, let's see, today I walked the dog, paid the electric bill, and, uh...oh yeah!  Conquered Israel...").  Thus, if one can get
such a distorted sense of the role that the Israelites had in the wider world during Biblical times by an exclusive study of the Old Testament, is it not just as likely we are prone to create an equally distorted view of the Nephite nation within the broader context of the nations and cultures around them?  The Bible contains crucial information to be sure, but there was still a lot of stuff that happened outside of what we read in its pages.  Empires and civilizations like the Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians and Persians only cared about Palestine because it happened to be the only gas station along that stretch

The Merneptah Stele: "The text is
largely an account of Merneptah's
victory over the Libyans and their
allies, but the last few lines deal with
a separate campaign in Canaan...and
include the first probable instance
of the name 'Israel' in the historical
record."  It says: "Israel is laid waste."
(from Wikipedia, "Merneptah Stele)

of Route 66 (and again, I'm exaggerating by oversimplifying, but you get the point).  Otherwise, I'm not sure they would have even noticed that tiny little nation.  And I believe this carries over to the Book of Mormon: it's a beautiful scriptural record with crucial information, but as Jacob himself points out: "a hundredth part of the proceedings of this people, which began to be numerous, cannot be written upon these plates."  In other words: a lot of stuff happened that is not written in the Book of Mormon.

My point with all of this is that we do not really know if the divisions between Nephite and Lamanite were really as simple as two opposing world views, or if their ethnic diversity really was contained to a convenient binary of "dark" and "light."  And I acknowledge that throughout the Book of Mormon, prophets were quick to point out cases in which it was the Nephites who were "wicked" and the Lamanites who were "righteous": there's a constant drumbeat for the message that salvation comes down to an individual issue, not race, culture, membership, or anything else.  So, even with this simple duality, we find greater complexity behind it in the text.  That being said, I believe it's important to maintain an open mind when reading the Book of Mormon.  The purpose of the book was never to paint a complete picture, but rather to act as a "voice from the dust."  We cannot use the limited scope of its historical narrative to be our absolute boundaries for the conditions of its people.  It's all about the message--always about the message.


Now that I've set the stage using my typically long-winded approach...

In chapter 3, Jacob uses Nephite pride as a means to call them to repentance.  In this sermon (which is actually contained across chapters 2 & 3), we see that he has to broach a somewhat unpleasant subject: that of chastity, fidelity, and even monogamy.  Apparently the Nephites were applying some fairly liberal interpretations to references in their scriptures concerning plural marriage (one man, many wives).  And it should be noted that, again, this too contributes to the possibility of there being more people involved in their story at this point than simply those who came across the ocean on Nephi's ship: something like "many wives and concubines" can only come about when there is, for lack of a better term, a "surplus" of women (the opposite of that term would be, I suppose, the song entitled, "It's Raining Men").  A smaller group--like those who came across on Nephi's boat--would be more given to straight-up "pairing off."

Anyway!  There were a number of ways Jacob could have approached the issue.  One of these would have been to simply tell the people that they had to stop what they were doing and repent.  It's not the most original approach but what it lacks in style it makes up for in directness.  But such an approach would not have been good enough.  Jacob instead used what was perhaps the most effective tool at his disposal: the Nephite pride I mentioned earlier.

This approach chosen by Jacob implies that the Nephites thought they were better than the Lamanites.  I assume that this mindset was partially because of their view that they were the ones continuing the Abrahamic Covenant through their branch of Lehi's family tree (like the Pharisees and Sadducees during Christ's mortal ministry); it was probably also due in part to their difference in lifestyle (i.e. Nephite "civilization" and architecture as opposed to the Lamanites' more "hunter-gatherer" culture); and Jacob makes some references that would appear as if the Nephites' dim view of their Lamanite cousins also had a racial basis.  These "racial" references, if taken at face value, are a little problematic, however.  I'll explain why (and I will try to do it in a manner that retains the intent for why Jacob included them--which is the same intent for anything in the Book of Mormon: to bring others to Christ).

Now, I don't know exactly (nor does anyone, in my opinion) what physical implications are meant by the verses in 2 Nephi 5 where Nephi mentions a "skin of blackness" coming upon the Lamanites.  Whatever they may be, Jacob uses this issue to really get under the Nephites' skin (pun intended) when he points out to them that "the Lamanites, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which has come upon their skins, are more righteous than you." Jacob expounds on this argument by pointing out that the Lamanites had kept God's commandments concerning marriage and fidelity; that whatever they had lost in rejecting the prophetic callings of their forefathers, Lehi and Nephi, they had at least held onto some core family values: "Behold, their husbands love their wives, and their wives love their husbands; and their husbands and their wives love their children."  Then, in the coup de grace that would really demonstrate the hypocrisy of Nephite "racial superiority" (that's a harsh label for their mindset, I know, but I'm not sure what else to call it), which they had apparently tied in with their continuation of the Law of Moses and other traditions, Jacob says, "O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours."  In other words, race has got nothing to do with it because God doesn't look on the outward appearance anyway, but rather the inward; it was like Christ said to his disciples, that "whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man (or, from the outside in), it cannot defile him ... That which cometh out of the man (or, from the inside out), that defileth the man.  For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man." A man can do everything possible to create an appearance of righteousness, but the stuff on the outside doesn't mean anything: it's the stuff on the inside that matters, because that's where a man's true intentions are--whether they be righteous or wicked.

Before we pursue that train of thought further, however, I want to pause and take a closer look at this issue of the Lamanites' skin color.  Hugh Nibley has a few compelling thoughts on this, in which I hope you'll indulge me as I quote them in their near-entirety.  Something I should add, however, is that much of Nibley's profile that he created of Lehi and his family (and thus of the roots of Nephite culture) comes from studies relating to Arabic peoples.  He has his reasons for this, which I also find compelling, but ultimately many of his somewhat broad conclusions drawn from that mixed and varied people can and do spill over into Jewish cultural paradigms of the time (of which we know would of course have had an impact on the Lehite colony).

Okay, without further ado, Hugh's words:

"With the Arabs, to be white of countenance is to be blessed and to be black of countenance is to be cursed; there are parallel expressions in Hebrew and Egyptian.  And what of Lehi's peoples?  It is most significant that the curse against the Lamanites is the very same as that commonly held in the East to blight the sons of Ishmael, who appear to the light-skinned people of the towns as 'a dark and loathsome, and a filthy people' ... The Book of Mormon always mentions the curse of the dark skin in connection with and as part of a larger picture: 'After they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people,' etc. ...The statement that 'God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them' (2 Nephi 5:21) describes the result, not the method, which is described elsewhere."

Then Nibley ties this in with the story of another anti-Nephite people called the Amlicites, who were a splinter group from the Nephite nation and differentiated themselves from their former brethren by placing a mark of red on their foreheads:

"Here God places his mark on people as a curse, yet it is an artificial mark which they actually placed upon themselves.  The mark was not a racial thing but was acquired by 'whosoever suffered himself to be led away by the Lamanites' (Alma 3:10); Alma moreover defines a Nephite as anyone observing 'the tradition of their fathers' (Alma 3:11).  Which makes the difference between Nephite and Lamanite a cultural, not a racial, one."

And then Nibley asks what I think is a very important question:

"Does this also apply to the dark skin?  Note that the dark skin is never mentioned alone but always as attending a generally depraved way of life, which also is described as the direct result of the curse.  When the Lamanites become 'white' again, it is by living among the Nephites as Nephites, i.e., adopting the Nephite way of life (3 Nephi 2:15-16).  The cultural picture may not be the whole story of the dark skin of the Lamanites, but it is an important part of that story and is given great emphasis by the Book of Mormon itself."

He then closes his argument by once again asserting that the terms "black (or dark) and white" were "used as the Arabs use them" (Lehi in the Desert, pg. 73-74).

Another explanation could simply be that the Lamanites began intermarrying with other peoples outside the Lehi/Ishamel family group (such as, any of the indigenous inhabitants already living at or near the place where they arrived at the Promise Land).  This could have resulted in racial diversity amongst the subsequent generations and, if the negative perception that the Jews had of the Samaritans because of their intermarrying with non-Israelite peoples can be taken as an indicator, it is very likely the Nephites would have frowned upon such a practice among their former brethren as well.

Whether cultural or racial, if it seems to us that the use of these terms--"black skin" and "white skin"--in this manner is a less-than-ideal way to describe the issues between differing cultures in the Book of Mormon, then I think that's okay to feel that way.  It is important to remember that the prophet Mormon addresses this in the Introduction: "And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ." In other words, don't knock the message just because the messenger doesn't present it in the best way.

Maybe this is all easy for me to say since I'm Caucasian; perhaps my whole argument seems disingenuous. If it does, I apologize, and I ask the reader to remember that much of this has been speculation mingled with doctrine (which is something I really try to avoid in public discussion).  My speculation is informed by my own personal, cultural experiences, of which my opinion is also a result.  So, please take it for what it's worth and nothing more.

However, in order to reinforce what I believe is the message inherent in all of this, I would like to add just a couple more notes in speculation and [perhaps flawed] exegesis:

I was recently referred to a website (yashanet.com) by a friend of mine which has an article entitled, "Skins of Flesh and Light".  In there, the author points out a similarity in Hebrew between the words for "skin" and "light."  According to the article, these two words are pronounced the same in Hebrew and have only one letter difference in their spellings (like the words "to," "too," and "two"). Apparently, there is a strong association in Judaism between skin and light.  The author of the article illustrates this by pointing out that Rabbi Meir (of the Mishnah) had Genesis 3:21 in his copy of the Torah translated as "garments of light" rather than "garments of skin."  When you poke around in the scriptures for other occurrences of this association between skin and light, you don't have to look far: the most famous candidate that pops up is Moses' face, "which shone" after he came down out of the mount where he spoke with God face-to-face.

Furthermore, this idea of a duality between "civilized" and "barbaric" as captured in the symbolism of "dark" and "light" as it was used by Jews in the Old World can be seen in an instance where the apostle Paul describes the Ishmaelites (who were "cousins" to the Jews, being also descended from Abraham) using terminology very similar to how the Nephites described the Lamanites (Gal. 4:21-25).  The differences between Jews and Ishamaelites were always more "cultural" than "racial." Hugh Nibley is correct to point out, though, that those who lived in cities were of a fairer complexion and tended to look down their noses at those who did not live in cities and who were of a "darker" complexion.  One of the cultural differences between Nephites and Lamanites that is hinted at quite frequently throughout the Book of Mormon is that the Nephites were more "urban," while it appears the Lamanites were less so.  This perhaps imbalanced view that the "city folk" had of "country folk"undoubtedly followed the Lehite

This mural from Bonampak, with the diversity of skin color
shown on it, illustrates a great deal of ethnic diversity
amongst ancient cultures of South America.

colony across the ocean to the Promised Land where it eventually came into full sway during the ministry of the prophet Jacob.  Thus, instead of seeing their brethren as God's children who had yet to be taught the gospel, a number of Nephites were beginning to allow their beliefs to become a means for creating hierarchy between themselves and the Lamanites, which then extended beyond a difference in beliefs all the way to other cultural (and possibly racial) differences as well.

What I feel is most important, like I've said throughout, is the message in all of this.  What I got from the article, "Skins of Flesh and Light," was that when it says in 2 Nephi 5 that the Lamanites' curse brought upon them a "skin of blackness," it actually means they had lost their light--the light of Christ.  I believe this is reinforced by the language that Nephi uses in those verses: he says that the Lamanites had been "cut off from the presence of the Lord," which is exactly how Adam and Eve were described after they were banished from the Garden of Eden: "cut off from the presence of God." And yet, to aid Adam and Eve in their fallen state, the Lord made for them "coats of skin" (or, "coats of light"?), which fact becomes even more intriguing when you read about the parallel account of Cain's fall in which it is said that he, too, received a "mark" as a result of his turning away from the truth (Moses 5:40).

"Garments", "skin", "dark", "light"--are they all connected?

Seen in this light, I feel it adds greater weight to Alma's poignant words:

"I say unto you, can ye look up to God at that day with a pure heart and clean hands?  I say unto you, can you look up, having the image of God engraven upon your countenances?  ...[F]or there can no man be saved except his garments are washed white;... And now I ask of you, my brethren, how will any of you feel, if ye shall stand before the bar of God, having your garments stained with blood and all manner of filthiness? (i.e. "blackness" or "dark") ... Behold, my brethren, do you suppose that such an one can have a place to sit down in the kingdom of God, with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob, and also all the holy prophets, whose garments are cleansed and are spotless, pure and white?"

Let it be noted that, due to their nomadic ("non-urban") lifestyle, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were all probably of a much darker countenance than most Nephites.


In the end, men seem to find any excuse to hate other men--with or without differences in skin color.  I don't know whether to call it "silly" or "sad."  It seems human nature to search for any means that can lend itself to inflated ideas of superiority.  Isn't that the purpose of talk shows like "The Jerry Springer Show," or reality TV shows like "Big Brother," or tabloids, or any other number of voyeuristic windows to the lives of people who are set up as that object to which others can look and say, "It could be worse: I could be that person"?  The media makes a lot of money off of shows that celebrate depravity and sensationalize the weaknesses of others so that the viewer at home can look at someone other than himself and pass judgment on them.  Such is how we have used our knowledge gained from partaking of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  Maybe our modern society is not so enlightened as we would like to believe.

Whether the "skin of blackness" spoken of in the Book of Mormon is to be taken literally or figuratively, the point is this: many of the Nephites thought they were better than the Lamanites.  As members of the Church, we must always see our own story in that of the Nephites--we, too, are in danger of falling into the trap of thinking we're better than others not of our faith; and even within Church membership, the various "cliques" and groups that can often arise within a ward are, I believe, grievous to the Lord.  Christ spent his time amongst lepers and fishermen--people that I don't imagine smelled very pleasant, let alone appeared charismatic or even appealing: people that others were not so prone to hang out with.  Surely our circles of friends can extend a little further than their current boundaries.

What is perhaps funny about this post, though, is that all of this was merely a discussion of why Jacob framed his sermon the way he did--which was: the Nephites were breaking some very strict laws on marriage that God had given: the Lamanites had not broken these laws; the Nephites thought they were more pious than the Lamanites because they kept the Law of Moses: Jacob pointed out that in many ways, the Lamanites had been keeping the more important laws.  But I never actually got around to talking about the topic of Jacob's sermon (chastity)--just its framework.

Oh well.  Maybe that's enough for now.





   

Episode 8: Fast Forward to Jacob

My posts have been falling farther and farther behind the schedule on the S.T.O.M.P. calendar.  It took five posts just to talk about the vision of the Tree of Life!  For that reason, I've decided to "skip ahead" in my posts and move on to the book of Jacob.  

This brings up a point I would like to make, however, about different methods for reading the Book of Mormon.  Participating in STOMP last year changed me: it really did.  I've read the Book of Mormon countless times in my life, but something about last year's reading really stuck with me.  I believe I know why this particular experience was so different than previous experiences:

Before I began STOMP, I had taken seriously the challenge extended near the beginning of 2012 by our Stake Presidency to read through the Book of Mormon that year--both individually and as families.

What had been a failed "New Year's Resolution" for so many years now became a desperate mission.  I say "desperate" because, for one thing, as I've mentioned in past posts that I have spent time wandering in the "dark and dreary wilderness" and swimming in the "river of filthy water," I am very familiar with what it feels like to be heading in that direction.  My scripture reading had become so lackadaisical that I could hardly claim I was holding onto the Iron Rod anymore--I was really just walking alongside it, brushing my fingers across it every once in a while.

Also, we had some events in our life as a family that had really compelled me to turn to God.  As a result of these trials, I had several deeply impactful spiritual experiences: experiences that are too sacred and too precious to toss out onto a "public" forum like this (I use the term "public" loosely because I honestly think no one out there is reading any of these--and that's fine: I'm doing this for myself as much as anything else).

Thus, I had been prepared through: external events beyond my control; experiences that I had as a result of how I reacted to those events; and through my own inner resolutions that I made after taking an honest accounting of where I really stood in relation to the Tree of Life.

With the ground now fertile and tilled, Heavenly Father could begin to plant in my heart the messages and faith that I would need that would once again lend my life a course-correction that I desperately needed.

I had been using the same set of scriptures since my Freshman year of high school: my seminary scriptures.  These scriptures are what I used on my mission, in college, and throughout my life up until a little over a year ago.  What's great about them is that they're a sort of journal: I can see the notes and highlighted passages from different phases in my life like a stratified archeological dig site--my own

Archaeologists can use stratified dig sites to
determine how old something is, or what era
it belonged to: older junk is at the bottom;
newer junk is at the top.  It's all in layers
(like lasagna!)

life's story is told back to me by the little impressions or thoughts I'd jotted down in the page margins, or by the particular scriptures that have stood out to me (the red colored-pencil highlights are from my time in seminary; the orange crayon highlights are when I was coming back to church and getting ready to go on my mission; the yellow marker highlights and passages underlined by a black ballpoint pen are from when I was on my mission; etc.).

Because I felt like my participation in STOMP last year was going to be a fresh start for me, however, I decided to use a fresh set of scriptures.  So, for the first time in almost 20 years (ugh, that makes me feel old!) I was reading a "blank" Book of Mormon.  No notes, no highlights: nothing.  With that, I tried to come to the Lord with no preconceptions, with none of my own wisdom, with none of my own "mists of darkness" that I had cloaked myself in because of pride--pride I had obtained through an arrogant belief that I actually understood what was on those pages; pride that had led me to read them only casually, sporadically, and sometimes even indifferently; pride that had sculpted my participation in Gospel Doctrine class into making comments aimed at affirming my righteousness in front of others rather than sincerely "knocking" and "asking."  In essence, without realizing it, I had been saying beforehand that I already had "enough"; and because of that, Heavenly Father "[took] away even that which [I had]" (2 Ne. 28:30).  I found myself once again back in that stupid Great and Spacious Building--they were even holding my mail for me there!

"Welcome back Mr. McCulloch.  We knew you would return
soon...muahahahahaha!"

I'm so glad I took the time to listen--to listen to the quiet sound of someone outside that building calling out to me: "Get out of there you blockhead!"  I'm so glad I recognized the emptiness that comes with standing in that lobby; the phony smiles of all those false securities with which I had surrounded myself in order to believe that "all is well in Zion": or rather, "all is well in [Doug]; yea, [Doug] prospereth, all is well--and thus the devil cheateth [my soul], and leadeth [me] away carefully down to hell."  

King Benjamin admonished us "to be as little children."  How ironic it is that the trait most of us find so irritating in kids (you parents know what I'm talking about: the endless questions--"Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?"  AAAAAAAH!!!) is just the trait that we should be emulating ourselves.  And maybe that's why so many adults find children's curiosity annoying: because deep down they know it's something they have lost.  Or maybe it's because we've become too lazy or too prideful to ask anymore, and we don't like to have this lethargy or this hubris pointed out to us.

Probably all-of-the-above...

Whatever the case, I gained fresh insight into the Book of Mormon that I'd never had before.  It was also helpful to read the Book of Mormon cover-to-cover in such a short timespan.  I was able to see greater continuity and connect certain events that I hadn't seen before.  However, what was really helpful, was that after reading through the book at Mach 12, I then went back and re-read it again at a slower, more deliberate pace.  When I did so, I once again used a "fresh" Book of Mormon.  This time, new insight came in a flood and my pen couldn't move fast enough.

And I've decided to illustrate this by scanning in a few pages from these two copies of the Book of Mormon, as well as some of the notes I took on bits of scratch paper and in my personal journal.

This picture is from the Book of Mormon I had used during STOMP last year.  As you can see, even though I've read the book of 1 Nephi a million times, and even though I was going through at a pretty fast pace, I still got quite a few little nuggets of new insight:

      

But when I went back through as soon as STOMP was done and did a more careful reading, you can see a BIG difference:

Yet, even this was not enough!  As I read, I often found myself snatching up whatever scratch paper may be around as a sort of "overflow" contingency:

You can see that these scratch-paper-notes are very ad hoc and scattered (which pretty much describes my personality, too).  So, I decided to record more detailed notes in my personal journal:

Something I'm sure you've noticed with all of these, however, are all the little arrows and doodles.  I'm a very visual person.  In fact, long before I ever had any interest in music, I had thought I would grow up to be an artist of some sort.  So, for me, it helps if I make my own visual aids as another means to understand the messages of the scriptures: not only so that I can see the messages with my finished product, but to also go through the process of creating my visual aids, which is instructive in and of itself:

I'm sure you can see from this picture why I decided to pursue music instead of art...
(And yes: those are rocket boosters I drew on the bottom of the Great and Spacious Building)

Anyway, I started talking about all of this because, even though I've jumped ahead in my posts so that they can "catch up" to where we're at in the STOMP schedule, I still plan on going back to post about the remaining chapters in 1 Nephi, as well as all of 2 Nephi.  I wanted to make it abundantly clear that STOMP is a great way to get a survey of the Book of Mormon--but by no means has anyone "finished" anything when they've read those last words of Moroni chapter 10.  It's a revolving door: once I've read Moroni's final admonition, I can jump back to Nephi's autobiography and scan the terrain once more--picking up little trinkets and treasures along the way that I had missed the last time.

Episode 7: The Tree of Life, Part 4: Book of Mormon Buzz Words (1 Ne. 12)

With our modern technology, searching the scriptures and creating our own cross-references has never been easier.  Nevertheless, I think it has been God's intent all along that his children should be making connections between ideas, symbols and doctrine, via the means of key words and phrases.

I'll illustrate this by going through a few of the key words/phrases found in 1 Nephi chapter 12:

A couple of the more well known key phrases that pop up in these chapters are, "A marvelous work and a wonder"--which means the Restoration of the Gospel (i.e. the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, restoration of priesthood authority, etc.); and the one about those who "publish peace" and "tidings of great joy, how beautiful upon the mountains shall they be"--which refers to the preaching of the Gospel, specifically the message of Christ's birth, mortal ministry, atonement and resurrection.


The purpose of key words and phrases is that every time you see them, you know automatically what is being referenced without the writer having to add a ton of extra explanation.  So, whenever you see "a marvelous work and a wonder," the whole package of the Restoration comes with it.  Likewise, whenever you read about "publishing peace," "how beautiful upon the mountains," or "glad tidings," you know that this is talking about the preaching of the Gospel.

However, we'll look at those two phrases in more detail later on.  Right now, I want to dive into "the depths of hell."  I mean, not literally--I don't actually want to dive into the depths of hell, I just meant...

You know what I mean!

Anyway, the key phrase "the depths of hell" is first referenced in 1 Ne. 12:16.  In this verse, it is defined as being the depths of the "river of filthiness" that ran alongside the Strait and Narrow Path (waiting for travelers to let go of the Iron Rod and fall in).

Something that I do when I'm studying key words/phrases in the scriptures is go to lds.org (or just pull up my scriptures on my iPhone) and I click on the link, "Scriptures."  Then I enter the word or phrase into the "Search" window.  The Topical Guide (located at the back of the LDS edition of the Bible) is useful in much the same way; however, performing a word search on lds.org allows you to search all occurrences of the word or phrase that you're studying, which may or may not be included in the Topical Guide.

Researching the scriptures' key words and phrases online using lds.org is a great
way to perform a much more exhaustive search than you'd be able to do using
only the Topical Guide.  And, if you have an lds.org login, you can also highlight
scriptures and add notes to highlighted passages; there is also a journal
where you can keep track of your thoughts and impressions.  The entries
 in your journal can either be categorized by date or by topic.

Since I'm currently researching the Book of Mormon, I clicked on the link for "Book of Mormon" after performing my search. This narrowed my results.

When I typed in "depths of hell," the result that came up was that same scripture--1Ne. 12:16--where I had seen it in the first place.  So, I shortened my search to simply read "depths."

Now we were cookin'!

As I started perusing my search results, I was able to begin categorizing them.  This is what I came up with:

Four of the search results were about cities being "swallowed up" in either the "depths of the sea" or the "depths of the earth."  These were all cases in which the cities' inhabitants were so wicked (i.e. they were divided into classes, not caring for the poor, worshipped idols, all that stuff) that their respective cities were completely destroyed through natural disasters.

As underwater archeology continues to develop, it will be
interesting if we ever find the remains of these Nephite
cities that were "swallowed up in the depths of the sea."

Two search results were about the dead bodies of fallen soldiers being buried in the "depths of the river Sidon," or digging a large pit where they buried them in the "depths of the earth," because there were too many bodies for the survivors to dig individual graves.  Both cases are referring to wars that resulted from men's lust for power.


One result (2 Ne. 26:5) was about "they that kill the prophets, and the saints," saying that "the depths of the earth shall swallow them up."   (This was a prophecy of the cities mentioned above, so it technically could be categorized with them).

Do you see how all of these instances help to further illustrate "the depths of hell"?

But there's more...

There were also six search results that were about cases in which travelers were swallowed up in the depths of the sea, who then called upon God for rescue:

• Three of these references were from the account of Nephi: remember that while journeying to the "promised land," Nephi's brothers became angry with him and tied him to the ship's mast.  A storm came in and they were about to be "swallowed up in the depths of the sea"...that is, until they repented of their sins and no longer restrained (or rather, bound) the voice of the Lord (i.e. their brother, Nephi).  It was then that Nephi took hold of the Liahona and the waves calmed and they were shown the way once again. 
   
• Two references were about the Jaredites: they knew that in crossing the sea to come to the "promised land," the journey would necessarily include time spent "in the depths of the sea," because of how their ships were constructed and because of the conditions of the ocean at that time.  However, they were given light--at the request of and by the faith of the brother of Jared--so that even when they were in the depths of the sea, they were not in darkness (see Pres. Uchtdorf's talk from this last General Conference: http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/04/the-hope-of-gods-light?lang=eng).  

• The last reference ties all of these others together rather nicely: in 2 Ne. 8:10, Nephi is quoting Isaiah.  This particular prophecy by Isaiah is speaking of when "the Lord shall comfort Zion and gather Israel." In verse 10, Isaiah asks the Lord rhetorically, "Art thou not he who hath dried the sea, the waters of the great deep; that hath made the depths of the sea a way for the ransomed to pass over?"
  

Think about that: Christ "made the depths of the sea a way for the ransomed to pass over".

The "promised land" represents Eternal Life, returning home to live with our Heavenly Father.  The journey to there is this life.  Through trials and sin, we all find ourselves "swallowed up in the depths of the sea" at one point or another.  But we are never left without light (the "light of Christ"), and it is never too late to repent: a way is provided, just like it was for the children of Israel when they went through the Red Sea and the River Jordan; just like it was for Nephi and his family; just like it was for the Jaredites.

We may find ourselves, like the apostle Peter, drowning when we've lost some of our faith, or when we've become afraid: but don't forget that the Lord was there to snatch Peter from sinking into the sea and to pull him up.




This brings me to the last group of search results that I found when searching the word "depths" in the Book of Mormon.  These last six references are to the "depths of humility" and "depths of sorrow":

• Lehi was brought down to the "depths of sorrow" when he had to likewise repent of complaining against God when Nephi's bow broke and they couldn't find food. 
• In Helaman 6:5 it talks about the spread of missionary work amongst the Nephites just prior to the Lord's visit and that many received the gospel ("glad tidings") from prophets and missionaries (those who were "publishing peace") and came "into the depths of humility, to be the humble followers of God and the Lamb".  
• Mosiah 21:14 tells us about the people of King Limhi who, after being defeated, humiliated, and forced into servitude by the Lamanites, "did humble themselves even in the depths of humility; and they did cry mightily to God; yea, even all the day long did they cry unto their God that he would deliver them out of their afflictions."  
• Christ told his disciples in the Americas that anyone who believed in their words, and who would come "down into the depths of humility and be baptized," would be "visited with fire and with the Holy Ghost, and shall receive a remission of their sins."  
• The prophet Jacob warns us, in 2 Ne. 9:42, that unless men "consider themselves fools before God, and come down into the depths of humility, he will not open unto them."  
• And King Benjamin echoed this in his famous address when he said that once we have "come to the knowledge of the glory of God, or if ye have known of his goodness and have tasted of his love (notice the little reference to the fruit of the Tree of Life here), and have received a remission of your sins, ... even so I would that ye should remember, and always retain in remembrance, the greatness of God, ... and humble yourselves even in the depths of humility."  He follows this by telling us how to humble ourselves: by "calling on the name of the Lord daily, and standing steadfastly in the faith" (which ties in to the Youth Theme for 2013: "Stand in Holy Places").     

All of these are examples of someone who passed through certain "depths" (either through trial, through sin, or through the giving up of an old way of life) and allowed their experiences to point their gaze to God--to learn from their experiences.

The prophet Alma said that it is better to be humble without being compelled into humility.  This is something he knew from personal experience since his own humility came as a result of three days in a

Alma the Younger was an opponent of Christ's Church,
actively going about and trying to dissuade its adherents.
After seeing an angel, he fell into a coma for 3 days.  His
dad, Alma the Elder, knew that this was the Lord's answer
to his prayers and rejoiced when he saw his comatose son
(which I'm sure confused certain onlookers who didn't know
about the countless prayers of this father over his wayward
son).  Parents can never underestimate the power that their
faith can have.  I can testify to the faith that my own parents
had, with their countless prayers on my behalf, which sent
numerous "angels" and events into my life to bring me back
and set me on the path to the Tree of Life once again. 

coma where he was shown in perfect clarity all of his sins; it was three days in which he was "wracked" with the torment that comes with guilt, and he was "encircled about by the everlasting chains of death" (i.e. the depths of hell).  But it was during this time--being "wracked" and "encircled"--that he learned to call upon God: "I cried within my heart: O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me, who am in the gall of bitterness."

This is what Adam and Eve learned they must do when they were first cast out of the Garden of Eden--to call on God.  Transgression should have that effect: guilt is meant to impel us toward calling upon God.  Satan would have us believe otherwise--that guilt means we're "not worth it"; that we're "too far gone"; that we must hate ourselves in order to feel forgiven.  This is why he told Adam and Eve, after they had partaken of the Forbidden Fruit, "You're naked!  (Or, in other words, "God will see all your sins!")  You need to hide!  Father is coming!  He will see your nakedness and you need to hide!"  Satan also told Adam and Eve that they needed to cover their nakedness by their own means, making for themselves aprons out of fig leaves.  But Heavenly Father warned against those who would "undertake to cover [their] sins" (D&C 121:36).   Adam and Eve learned from a loving Heavenly Father that it is especially during these times of guilt that we must turn to God--to call on Him.  In a beautiful gesture of love, Heavenly Father made "coats of skins" for Adam and Eve.  This is symbolic: only Christ can "cover" (or "blot out") our sins.  But we must never be ashamed to approach Heavenly Father--we must never "hide" from him, never think we are "not worth it," and never think we are "too far gone." The moment Alma called upon God, he said, "I could remember my pains no more; yea, I was harrowed up by the memory of my sins no more."

Another nice illustration of this comes from yet another part of the Exodus story.  There was a time when the children of Israel came to a river to drink.  The water, however, was nasty (actually, the word they used in Ex. 15:23 was "bitter" ["Marrah" means "Bitterness"]).  Their first reaction was their usual reaction: they complained against poor Moses.  Moses in turn prayed to God, "and the Lord showed him a tree which when he had cast into the waters, the waters were made sweet: there he made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved them" (Ex. 15:25).  Alma described his conversion experience saying, "there could be nothing so...bitter as were my pains ... [and] on the other hand, there can be nothing so...sweet as was my joy" (Al. 36:21).  The Tree of Life represents the love of God.  The love of God can make even the most bitter waters become sweet.

It's important to note how this experience changed Alma: "Yea, and from that time even until now, I have labored without ceasing, that I might bring souls unto repentance; that I might bring them to taste (note once again the reference to the fruit of the Tree of Life) of the exceeding joy of which I did taste; that they might also be born of God, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."

Being the stubborn blockhead that I am, I too had to be "compelled" to be humble.  I didn't see an angel, and I didn't go into a coma for three days, but I had nevertheless spent time "swallowed up in the depths of the sea" (or "river of filthy water") because of my own decisions and actions; I've experienced that horrible feeling of being "wracked" with guilt; I've felt as though I was "encircled about by the everlasting chains of death."  I would never wish these feelings upon anyone.  And they are certainly nothing to sensationalize.  Those who have not been through depths as "deep" as I have--or even as deep as Alma--are by no means "sheltered" or "naive."  There's this great quote by C.S. Lewis, written around the time of WWII: 

"No man knows how bad he is till he has tried very hard to be good.  A silly idea is current that good people do not know what temptation means.  This is an obvious lie.  Only those who try to resist temptation know how strong it is.  After all, you find out the strength of the German army by fighting against it, not by giving in.  You find out the strength of a wind by trying to walk against it, not by lying down.  A man who gives in to temptation after five minutes simply does not know what it would have been like an hour later.  That is why bad people, in one sense, know very little about badness -- they have lived a sheltered life by always giving in.  We never find out the strength of the evil impulse inside us until we try to fight it: and Christ, because He was the only man who never yielded to temptation, is also the only man who knows to the full what temptation means -- the only complete realist." (from his book, Mere Christianity)

That being said, it was because of those feelings and experiences that I, like Alma, have learned to call upon God.  I can't speculate on who I would be or where I would be without my past mistakes.  What I do know is that because I have spent time in that "river of filthy water," I have lived my life since that time to do everything I can to never be there again.  It's because of this that I'm perhaps a little more zealous in some church stuff than other people, but this isn't a case of "more righteousness": it's more like being on "Defcon 1" all the time.  I guess an analogy would be the Incredible Hulk.  If someone like Captain America loses his temper, it's no big deal.  But if Bruce Banner loses his temper...his skin starts to turn green...bad things happen.  Thus, if Bruce Banner seems a little more "buttoned-up" than his fellow Avengers, it's not necessarily because he's calmer; it just means he has more to lose if he ever loses control.  He walks the "razor's edge."

But look at all of this material we've been able to find just from typing in the word "depths"!  Do you see how key words work?  Now, whenever I read about the "depths of hell" or the depths of the "river of filthy water," I have a broader context for it.  In fact, I no longer think of it only in negative terms, but have now attached hope to what has typically been a gloomy topic for me in the scriptures.  The vision of the Tree of Life feels more applicable to me because I see where I have been and where I now am within the vision; the stories of those people who were in the "depths of the sea," or the "depths of humility," or, like Alma, in "the gall of bitterness," are all events and people to which I can relate.   This is the beauty of context in the scriptures.  In fact, you might have noticed how we were able to expand the context of another key word--"taste"--during our research of the word "depths."  It's beautiful that the message of tasting the love of God as we partake of His gift of eternal life--or partaking of the fruit of the Tree of Life--comes up throughout a search on the "depths of hell."  That's important to remember.

And these types of connections are all over the place!  Like when Lehi describes people along the path of the Iron Rod as "pressing forward": then, near the end of his record, Nephi echoes this in a very powerful way when he tells us to "press forward with a steadfastness in Christ."  Or, when Lehi says that as he partook of the fruit of the Tree of Life, "it filled [his] soul with exceedingly great joy": that word, "filled", is given so much more power and meaning when we recall 3 Ne. 18 where it gives the account of Christ administering the sacrament to the Nephite and Lamanite survivors: "And when they had eaten and were filled ... [A]nd they did drink, and they were filled."  This is why I tell the deacons in our Ward that whenever they think of Lehi standing by the Tree of Life beckoning others to partake of the fruit as well, they can put themselves in his place, offering eternal life as they offer the sacrament.  And even when Lehi described the people in his vision who were coming forward to grab hold of the Iron Rod, he said that they were all in a vast field: every week in Young Men's we recite D&C 4, which says, "Behold, the field is white, already to harvest..."  Our deacons understand that it is their priesthood duty to lead God's children who are gathered in this field, to the path that leads to Eternal Life...to the Iron Rod...to Christ.  Theirs is a duty that goes beyond passing sacrament trays on Sunday, and the power of the symbolism behind the contents of those trays is empowered to have greater effect in their hearts.

Episode 6: The Tree of Life, Part 3: "The Noisy Neighbors" (1 Ne. 11-12)

Now for the "great and spacious building":
In his vision of the Tree of Life, Nephi next saw the crucifixion of Christ, as well as the rejection of His apostles during their respective ministries (the event).  Then he was shown the same "great and spacious building" that Lehi had seen in his vision (the symbol).  The Spirit explained to Nephi: "Behold the world and wisdom thereof; yea, behold the house of Israel hath gathered together to fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (the meaning behind the symbol).

There's something very important for us to understand here: when Nephi saw those people in that building, they weren't the "non-members" he was looking at.  The Spirit didn't say, "Behold the gentiles hath gathered to fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb," or "the heathen," or anyone else.  No, he said "the house of Israel."

Then, in the very next chapter, Nephi saw in vision the "land of promise" that would someday be inhabited by his descendants: their rise as a powerful nation; the visit of the resurrected Lord to them; their own rejection of Christ; and their subsequent descent into total disbelief.

So who is it that is in the Great and Spacious Building?  If it's the House of Israel, and it's also the Nephites (notice how, in the vision, their fall as a nation is tied in with the fall of the building), and if we as members of the church are "of the house of Israel," and the story of the Nephites in the Book of Mormon was written for us in our day...

That's us in the Great and Spacious Building; that's our pride; that's our downfall--or, at least, it will be if we don't repent.  In Doctrine and Covenants 84:54-57, it says:

"And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received.  Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.  And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.  And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written" (emphasis added).

We can never look around in an airport, or the mall, or read about the latest Kardashian scandal while

I found this while looking for pictures of the Great and
Spacious Building.  I'm not sure we're served by the
message of the vision through the pointing of fingers.

standing in the check-out line at the grocery store, and point our fingers and say, "Look at all these people--they are all tenants of the Great and Spacious Building!"  No; I can tell you how frightening it is to stop and take a moment to really discern your position in life, only to realize that you're the one in the Great and Spacious Building.

In fact, sometimes I look at those not of our faith, who do not have all the scriptures that we have, or a living prophet at the head of their religion, or the priesthood, and yet still accomplish so much good in the world; I look at them and I think, "How is it that they are able to do so much with so little, while we in the Church do so little with so much?"

To my knowledge, the condemnation laid upon the Church in that revelation in D&C 84 (given in 1832) has never been lifted.  That means no one gets to clock-out yet.  And trust me when I say that I do not intend for this post to come across as "preachy," or as if I'm pointing fingers.  Don't you realize that I know so much about the Great and Spacious Building because I, myself, have spent so much time in there?  Honestly, sometimes I feel like I'm the building's superintendent.

I think I'd rather spend more time across the river under the shade of that tree with the glowing fruit...

Episode 5: The Tree of Life, Part 2 (1Ne. 11)

When Nephi had a question, he did exactly what Joseph Smith had learned to do from James 1:5: "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God." Whenever Nephi heard his dad prophesy or, in this case, relate a vision he'd had in a dream, Nephi went and prayed to know for himself.  This doesn't demonstrate a lack of faith.  In fact, quite the contrary: it shows a great deal of faith that Nephi, too, could receive guidance and inspiration from our Heavenly Father.  Rather than leaning on Lehi's testimony, Nephi was constantly, actively going out and solidifying his own.

Prayer is the best way to go to God
for answers.  This is why, Mormon
warned, "the evil spirit teacheth not
a man to pray."

Many of the things Nephi saw that are not mentioned in Lehi's account, Lehi must have seen as well, because immediately after sharing his vision with his family, Lehi began to prophesy of many of the things that Nephi saw in his own experience with the vision (1 Ne. 10).

However, another distinction to make is the difference in how Nephi's vision was received from how Lehi got his.  Lehi tended to get his information from the Lord when he was sleeping (if only that was how it worked for me too): a lot of Lehi's visions, prophecies and inspiration came to him in his dreams.

Nephi, on the other hand, was not so lucky: he had to go to the Lord to receive most of his revelations (that we know of).  And not only did he have to go to the Lord, but half the time he was having to

Mt. Eliat, in the Negev, south of
Jerusalem (roughly the area that
Nephi's family was camped).

climb a mountain in order to receive that revelation!  It's not as convenient as the "house calls" that Lehi enjoyed, but the advantage is that Nephi was totally awake, totally aware, and thus his account is much clearer and more detailed.  (He even points out certain places where he noticed something that his dad didn't notice when viewing the same vision).

That being said, I would like to add something interesting from a few General Conferences ago about dreams.  In the Saturday Afternoon Session of the April 2012 General Conference, Elder Richard G. Scott gave, in my opinion, one of the greatest talks ever given in General Conference.  His talk was entitled, "How to Obtain Revelation and Inspiration for Your Personal Life"   (http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/04/how-to-obtain-revelation-and-inspiration-for-your-personal-life?lang=eng ).  It was one of the most practical talks I have ever heard on receiving revelation.  It didn't have the usual bullet-points of doctrine that you hear abstractly listed in detachment from practical application.  No, this was a complete "Idiot's Guide to Revelation"--it had both compelling doctrine and real, hands-on counsel.  The connection between scripture and daily life was laid out in perfect harmony.

Elder Richard G. Scott
(He's the man!)

But let me end my gushing and get to the point.  I want to include here a couple paragraphs from Elder Scott's talk that apply to what Lehi understood about dreams and what we, in time, can learn for ourselves:

"Revelation can also be given in a dream when there is an almost imperceptible transition from sleep to wakefulness.  If you strive to capture the content immediately, you can record great detail, but otherwise it fades rapidly.  Inspired communication in the night is generally accompanied by a sacred feeling for the entire experience.  The Lord uses individuals for whom we have great respect to teach us truths in a dream because we trust them and will listen to their counsel.  It is the Lord doing the teaching through the Holy Ghost.  However, He may in a dream make it both easier to understand and more likely to touch our hearts by teaching us through someone we love and respect.

"When it is for the Lord's purposes, He can bring anything to our remembrance.  That should not weaken our determination to record impressions of the Spirit.  Inspiration carefully recorded shows God that His communications are sacred to us.  Recording will also enhance our ability to recall revelation.  Such recording of direction of the Spirit should be protected from loss or intrusion by others."

Whenever I have gone back through my old journals and looked at passages in which I included some impression from the Lord, the feelings that came with those impressions return to me and it's reaffirmed in my heart that that was an example of Father speaking to son.  As for dreams, I have tried keeping my journal by my bed at night, just in case.  I can't say that I've woken up, yet, with any notable impressions or inspiration (not that I'm giving up, mind you).  However, I do have one experience in my life that's always been precious to me.  Once, when I was far from the presence of the Lord in my life and in my heart, I remember feeling sharply that separation from God.  And when the distance between you and God gets that far, the journey back can seem overwhelming.  But I remember  during that time having a dream in which I met the Savior, and He didn't say anything to me, but just gave me a hug.  And that was all that He needed to say; it was all I needed to hear.  I had hope where before none existed.  I'll never forget that experience.


Back to Nephi's vision...

Chapter 10 ends with Nephi pondering over the words of his father (it's interesting how often prophets receive great inspiration while reflecting on the teachings of their fathers--a dad can never take for granted the impact his words and actions will have on his children).  Chapter 11 then begins with Nephi being led into the mountain by the Spirit of the Lord.  This is where he sees Lehi's vision, but the Spirit also sticks around in order to give Nephi the "director's commentary."

There are three parts to every portion of Nephi's vision -

• the symbol 
• the actual events that are directly related to the symbols' symbolization 
• and then Nephi is asked by the Spirit to state what that symbol symbolizes symbolically (I think I need to invest in a thesaurus).

The Tree:
The Spirit tells Nephi that after he sees the Tree "which bore the fruit which thy father tasted, thou shalt also behold a man descending out of heaven, and him shall ye witness; and after ye have witnessed him ye shall bear record that it is the Son of God."

I guess in legal terms this would be called "prepping your witness."  But here's where this 3-step process comes into play.  Nephi sees the Tree (the symbol), and then the Spirit asks, "What desiredst thou?" Nephi tells him: "To know the interpretation thereof." Then the Spirit says, "Look!"  This is when Nephi sees in vision the Virgin Mary (the event related to the symbol).  The Spirit then asks Nephi, "Knowest thou the condescension of God?"  Nephi, in his classic, unadorned honesty, says, "Nope" (I'm paraphrasing here).  However, he does point out that, even though he doesn't have all the answers, he knows that God loves His children (see Elder Holland's talk from this past General Conference: http://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/04/lord-i-believe?lang=eng).  Then Nephi sees Christ as a baby, in the arms of His mother, and the Spirit asks him, "Knowest thou the meaning of the tree which thy father saw?"
Now Nephi can give a clear answer concerning the "condescension of God." He says: "Yea, [the Tree] is the love of God, which sheddeth itself abroad in the hearts of the children of men; wherefore, it is the most desirable above all things".


I love the use of the word "sheddeth" there in referring to the shade of the Tree and the reach of its shelter.  Every week we hear in the sacrament prayer, "...to bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them...".  What greater symbol of God's love and shelter than in the blood shed by His Son for us?  There's this beautiful passage in Doctrine & Covenants 76:50-53, concerning those "who received the testimony of Jesus, and believed on his name and were baptized."  It says that we can be "sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, which the Father sheds forth upon all those who are just and true."  This sealing is made possible by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.  The beginnings of this experience happen when we receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost at baptism (and notice how that is the first commandment given to any newly baptized member of the church: "I say unto you, receive the Holy Ghost").  This is why we're also promised in the sacrament prayer that those who partake of the sacrament in remembrance of Christ, will "always have His spirit to be with them." As we remember Christ throughout the week, we are enabling His spirit to have place in our hearts, which in turn changes us from our "fallen" state to our...well...not-so-fallen state.  Thus, the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts, and the shade of this Tree extends over our lives throughout the week and not just

on Sunday; and eventually we are changed into new creatures so that our wills are completely aligned with his and he can envelope us, "sealing" us to Him.  We just need to stop fighting and receive His Spirit.


Okay, symbol number two: the Iron Rod:

The Spirit said again, "Look!"  Nephi looked, and he writes: "I be-

As we follow the Iron Rod, we are follow-
ing the example of our Savior. Think of
how He lived his life: always in the serv-
ice of others.  Grasping the Iron Rod does
not mean only reading your scriptures--it
means living their teachings.

held the Son of God going forth among the children of men; and I saw many fall down at his feet and worship him" (the event).  Then, immediately after, Nephi's account says, "And it came to pass that I beheld that the rod of iron, which my father had seen, was the word of God" (the symbol and the meaning).  It's important here to see that the Savior's earthly ministry is associated with the Iron Rod.  Nephi says that he "beheld that the rod of iron...was the word of God" after he had seen the Savior "going forth among the children of men."  Most often we think of the Iron Rod as representing the scriptures, but let us not forget that the Apostle John begins his account saying, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us..." (John 1:1, 14).

Isn't it nice to think that whenever we're
reaching for the Iron Rod, maybe it's
reaching back for us?

How differently does one hold onto the Iron Rod when they understand the greater depth to its symbolism: of not only what the "word of God" is, but also who the "Word of God" is?



And there's so much more to the Iron Rod, which also gives greater insight to Christ's ministry and how we can hold onto it.  Consider the many ways in which rods are used symbolically throughout the scriptures:

There's the shepherd's rod, which was used to beat wolves away from the herd,

or to guide the sheep (see Ps. 2:9: "Thou shalt break [the heathen] with a rod of iron"), or upon which the shepherd can rest and use for support as he walks (see 2Ne. 4:20: "My God hath been my support").

There's the rod as a symbol of priesthood authority, as in the case of Moses in Exodus 4:17 (see also Rev. 2:27: "And he [Christ] shall rule them with a rod of iron", or even Isa. 11:1: "And there shall

come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse" [speaking of the coming of Christ]).  Priesthood authority is how gospel ordinances are administered, which in turn solidify our grasp on the Iron Rod and allow us to "press forward."

There's also the symbolism--albeit an uncomfortable one--of the rod as a means of punishing a wayward child (see Isa. 11:4: "...and he shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth," or also check out D&C 19:15: "Repent lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth").  The Iron Rod guides its followers along a "strait and narrow path," just as God's gentle instruction guides us.  Man often uses punishment as a means for revenge or as a release valve for anger (which is the cause of so much domestic abuse in too many households).  Yet for God, punishment is used strictly as a tool for instruction.  I often react emotionally to things that my kids do that are "wrong," and instead of instructing them, I yell at them; when I do that, what is my primary concern: teaching them, or releasing my frustration on them?  And on one last note: this symbolism of a rod can also be seen another way when applied to the words of the familiar hymn, God Loved Us, So He Sent His Son: "He came as man, though Son of God, And bowed himself beneath the rod.  He died in holy innocence, A broken law to recompense."  Though completely without sin, Christ nevertheless allowed Himself to be punished by sinful men.  Think about that...

How do you measure up?  Paul told the Ephesians that
the reason God calls all of us to serve in the church
is for the perfecting of the saints, "Till we all come in the
unity of the faith,  and of the knowledge of the Son of
God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of
the fulness of Christ."  Our spiritual growth isn't
a solitary thing--we're in this together.  And most
importantly, through Christ, we can all "measure up"--
our Savior makes up the difference where we fall short.

And finally, there's the use of a rod as a measuring stick, which was used to gauge distances (which brings us back to 1Ne. 11:25: "...the rod of iron...was the word of God").  Christ's life and ministry are the standard by which we gauge ourselves (our spiritual growth) and the distance between us and God (see Hymn #127, Does the Journey Seem Long?).



Now for the next symbol: Nephi mixes metaphors here--which is usually something that will result in the loss of points in English class--but it's for good reason.  As Nephi followed his gaze along the Iron Rod, he saw that it "led to the fountain of living waters, or to the tree of life; which waters are a representation of the love of God; and I also beheld that the tree of life was a representation of the love of God" (vs. 25).

You might ask yourself, "Didn't we already talk about the Tree of Life representing God's love?"
The answer of course is yes: but remember that the event tied with the earlier presentation of the symbol was the birth of the Savior (the "condescension of God"), and it only mentioned the Tree of Life by itself--no mention was made of the "fountain of livings waters." This time, however, notice that after the Spirit repeats his earlier instruction--"Look and behold the condescension of God" (vs. 26)--Nephi looks and sees Christ's baptism.  This time, the condescension of God is broadened to

Christ was baptized in the Jordan
River.  Centuries earlier, Joshua
led the Children of Israel through
the Jordan, which parted for them
just like the Red Sea.  These two
occasions of the Israelites passing
through bodies of water on dry
ground represent their baptisms
as the covenant people of the Lord.
Christ didn't pick this river at random.

include not only Christ's birth into a physical, mortal body, but also to show obedience to His Father in all things, even including those things that, technically, He didn't have to do.

Baptism represents the washing away of all our sins: Christ was sinless.  Even John the Baptist acknowledged this and said to Christ, "I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?" The Savior replied, "Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness." Pure obedience: that is what the Savior was demonstrating.

More than that, however, baptism also ties in to the condescension of God because it is the first of the saving ordinances that everyone must go through in order to enter the path back to our Heavenly Father.  Christ's mortal life wasn't a case of the supervisor coming down to the factory floor and walking amongst the "little people" to see what it's like to be working along the assembly line; He didn't come to earth out of idle curiosity or to check-off an item on his "Bucket List": Christ came to earth to save God's children.  That is the condescension of God: Christ "descended below all things" (D&C 88:6)--there is no suffering or guilt or sorrow that He Himself hasn't also felt.

Rather than the usual "small talk"
we engage in around the water
cooler at work, Christ turned this
seemingly chance encounter into
a missionary opportunity.

A final point to make about the symbology of the "fountain of living waters" and how it fits with the Tree of Life and the condescension of God: Christ once visited a communal well where he met a Samaritan woman.  He told her that He could give her "living water." He said, "But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life" (John 4:14).  A few verses later, He explained to her that He was the source of that living water.  Think about that the next time you drink the water in the sacrament.

Once, when the children of Israel were pestering Moses for water, he strode
up to a rock and whacked it with his stick.  Water suddenly came gushing out.
Christ is the Rock of our salvation; it is upon the "rock of our redeemer that
[we] must build [our] foundation" (Hel. 5:12); just as the rock was smitten by
the staff of Moses in order for the children of Israel to live, Christ "was wounded
for our transgressions" and "bruised for our iniquities"--it is "with his stripes (wounds)
that we are healed."  From the rock came water; from Christ comes "living water."
Drink up.