The Doctrine of Christ

 This week we finish the book of 2 Nephi, and in so doing say goodbye to the prophet Nephi, son of Lehi.  One of my goals this year in my scripture study was to pay attention to mentions of the Savior in the Book of Mormon.  If you have been following my blog, you will know that I have been tracking how much Nephi and Lehi knew about Jesus at different times in their lives and travels.  When Lehi first saw a vision of God, he saw the Messiah, but didn't know who he was. (1 Nephi 9-10). Gradually, over the next decades, Nephi gradually learned that Jesus would come, suffer for our sins, die, and be resurrected (2 Nephi 11).  By the end of his life, Nephi understands the whole "doctrine of Christ".  Moreover, he has seen a vision of the future of not only his descendants, but also of the gentiles. 

It is interesting that Nephi seems to get this very vital information primarily after his people have separated from the Lamanites. I think we can guess that, by Nephi's death, the Lamanites are still trying, in some way or other, to live the Law of Moses.  We know that Nephi took that brass plates with him when he fled from his brothers, so it is possible that by this time they have already strayed from the worship they had experienced in Jerusalem and are now fully integrated in the culture and belief of the  native peoples of the promised land. In either case, they probably know very little if anything about Jesus and the atonement. As evidence of this, later when Ammon preaches to the king of the Lamanites, he doesn't have a clue about Christian worship. 

Here I have a confession. I also didn't really understand the Doctrine of Christ until recently.  Oh sure, I knew that 4th Article of Faith and the first four principles of the Gospel, but when I went to the temple made covenants during the Endowment, I wasn't sure what I was covenanting to when I promised to obey the Law of the Gospel.  I cast my mind for a meaning and decided that the Law of the Gospel probably referred to the "higher law" preached in the sermon on the mount. This was not a bad assumption.  Jesus did, after all, preach that sermon to both the old and new world saints, so it must have been important.  It wasn't until they changed the wording of the Endowment in February 2023 that I found out that the "Law of the Gospel" is the same as the "Doctrine of Christ" explained in the last 3 chapters of 2 Nephi.  I admit that it was a bit of a relief.  I understand that the Sermon on the Mount was given as much to comfort suffering saints as to encourage them to live a higher standard, but it still sets a pretty high bar for behavior that I knew I was daily falling short of. When I heard the new changes to the Endowment, I thought, "Is that really all it is: faith, repentance, baptism, the gift of the Holy Ghost, obedience to covenants and enduring to the end?  I can do that." Of course, those are no small things, but they seem more attainable then never getting angry, or being a light to the world, or plucking out my right eye if it offends me. (Matthew 5: 22-30)  So yay for the new changes to the temple ceremony and yay for the last three chapters of 2 Nephi.

Jacob's Sermon: 2 Nephi 9

 In 2 Nephi 6-10 Jacob, Nephi's younger brother, gives a sermon based on the writings of Isaiah which were found on the plates of brass. In this sermon, Jacob takes passages from Isaiah usually associated with the scattering and gathering of Israel and relates them to the mission and atonement of Christ. His teaching in 2 Nephi 9 sounds very Christian.  In many ways it could have been attributed to Paul or another New Testament theologian. I know I have said this before, but this is way earlier than anything known in the Old World. From the establishment of the Law under Moses until the Babylonian Captivity, the religion of Jehovah was that if Israel as a group were righteous, they, as a group, would be safe from other nations.  When the fall of the Northern Tribes began to seem imminent, Isaiah, Jeremiah and others began to talk about the Messiah who would come and free Israel from captivity.  There were hints in Isaiah that this was a spiritual redemption instead of a physical redemption, but this is all hidden in mists of symbolism.  Jesus was able to point out these ideas to his disciples later, and they didn't even really get it before his death and resurrection. 

It was a mercy from God that Nephi and even to a greater extent Jacob were given an understanding that the covenants of God didn't only pertain to the safety of a nation and its ownership of a land of inheritance.  Nephi left all that seemed to be promised by the Abrahamic Covenant when he left Jerusalem: the temple, inheritance in the promised land (i.e. Israel), and membership in the family of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  After arriving in the new Promised Land, Nephi and Jacob were gradually taught that the salvation of the Lord wasn't a physical group salvation from political captivity, but a spiritual salvation from Death and Sin.  They were made to understand that they hadn't left the God of Israel and all his covenants behind when they left Jerusalem, but instead had even greater understanding and hope of his eternal covenants than the people in Jerusalem had. It would have been a comfort, after all they had lost, to know that God's promises were sure and eternal.

So what are the main point of Jacob's sermon?

v. 1-3  Reassurance of God's Covenant with scattered Israel

v. 4-5 Christ will suffer to overcome Death and Sin

v. 6    The Fall brings about Death and Sin

v.7-13  The atonement overcomes Death and Sin

v.14-22 Final Judgement 

v. 23-24 Need for ordinances and obedience

v. 25-27 Those who don't have the law are not condemned

v. 28-39 Condemnation of the prideful and wicked

v. 40-53 Exhortation to righteousness

Clearly, by the time of Jacob's ministry, the Nephites had a fairly complete understanding of the doctrine of Christ.  They are missing a few things that were clarified later, but they had as much as the New Testament people had. It wasn't until Joseph Smith that the last few details were added in, like assignment to different degrees of glory after judgement, the eternal nature of families and necessity of eternal marriage, the universal access to priesthood power et alii.

2 Nephi 2 : Foundational Doctrines

 This week in Come Follow Me we read just two chapters, 2 Nephi 1-2.  2 Nephi 1 is Lehi's final admonitions to his posterity. 2 Nephi 2 is a longer discourse that Lehi gives to his younger son, Jacob.  It is hard to know how old Jacob was when he received this talk, but Lehi is clearly seeing Jacob as a future spiritual leader of the family.  He imparts to Jacob the most complete understanding of the role of the Messiah and the Plan of Salvation that we see anywhere in the scriptures.  It seems that Lehi has learned all of this as an adult.  His spiritual education began in 1 Nephi 1 where he first saw the Savior and didn't seem to recognize who he was, "And it came to pass that he saw One descending out of the midst of heaven, and he beheld his luster was above that of the sun at noon-day. And he also saw twelve others following him, and their brightness did exceed the stars in the firmament" (v. 9-10).  By 2 Nephi, he not only knows Jesus' name and role as the Messiah, but he has a clear understanding of why a Messiah was needed. 

Much of what Lehi expounds are beliefs that are shared among all Christians: 

• That Jesus brings about the resurrection of the dead (v. 8)
• That Jesus makes intersession for us to the father (v. 9)
• There will be a final judgement (v. 10) 

These are familiar principles from the New Testament, but we need to remember that these were not widely known to the ancient Hebrews.  Lehi received these truths 600 years before almost all other people did.  Isaiah might have seen a glimpse of it.  (Actually, According to Taylor Halverson, it might have been more widely known than we think, but the knowledge was later taken out of the record by the reforms under Josiah, but that is a discussion for another time). Still it is remarkable how fully Lehi, at this point, understood the plan of salvation.

Lehi, then goes into a discussion of Adam and Eve. Much of what he recounts about the Adam and Eve story is commonly held among Christians, but some of what he says is unique to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints:  

• The idea that Adam and Eve would not have had children if they had stayed in the Garden (v. 23) 
• The Fall was a good and necessary part of the plan and leads ultimately to joy.  (v. 25)

These two beliefs, so easily stated, change everything about what we see as our purpose on earth.  The Fall was not, as many believe, an unfortunate event caused by man's (or woman's) depravity, that broke the wonderful world God had intended for us to inhabit.  It was, instead, the way we gained free moral agency.  The story of Adam and Eve's fall is symbolic of the choice each of us made to leave the pre-Earth life and experience the vicissitudes of mortality. It enabled us to come to a world where we could could learn to choose between good and evil, be organized into family units, and ultimately return to God and enjoy eternal life with him. The passage, "Adam fell that man might be; and men are that they might have joy." is probably the most original Christian doctrine to come from the restoration.

Travels in the Wilderness: 1 Nephi 16-22

 This week in Come Follow Me we studied the time period from when Lehi and Ishmael's families leave the Valley of Lemuel, travel to Bountiful, build ships and sail to the Promised Land.  These are very familiar stories and I can't say I had many new insights about them.  Here are just a few:

1. When it says that the family of Lehi ate raw meat in the wilderness, (1 Nephi 17:2) the picture that came to my mind as a child was them taking dead animals, skinning them and then biting into the red meat.  That is, frankly, pretty disgusting and also pretty risky from a health point of view. Recently I read a survival story where the main character stops every 3-5 days, catches fish and then dries them to carry with him on his next part of the journey.  I am thinking this is what must have been going on.  They were traveling through the desert.  If they carried salt with them, it would have been possible to salt the meat and then dry it into jerky.  That would make it less likely to spoil, lighter to carry and safer and more palatable to eat.

2. I had never really connected the death of Ishmael with the lack of food,  but those two things happen back to back in the story.  Ishmael probably died because of starvation or he became susceptible to illness because of lack of food. It would further explain why his family was so angry at Nephi about their father's death.

3. One of the podcasters, I think it was Tyler Griffith, pointed out that Nephi had more confidence that he would be able to build a ship, cross the many waters, and make it to the Promised Land than his brother because he had seen in a vision that this is what was going to happen. The revelation strengthened his faith. It goes along with Joseph's Smith's teaching in the Lectures on Faith that in order to exercise faith we need to receive revelation of Heavenly's Father's will, and then move forward with confidence that His will would be fulfilled. (Lectures on Faith: Law of Sacrifice)

4. I have mentioned this before, but this whole Book of Mormon exodus narrative is told in such a way to draw parallels to the story of Moses leading the Hebrews out of Egypt and through the wilderness. Many of the same elements are there. The initial vision of Lehi is like Moses' vision.  Getting the brass plates are like the Israelites plundering the Egyptians.  Food is miraculously provided though Nephi's broken bow instance, like the mana in the Old Testament. The Liahona is like the fire that went before the Israelites by night and the cloud by day to lead their way.  Crossing the river Jordan is like building the ships and crossing the great waters. Then what do they do when they get to the new land?  They build a temple like Solomon's temple. By telling the story this way Nephi is legitimizing the decision to leave Jerusalem, which is compared to Egypt and captivity, and to establish a new center of worship in the new world. 

Beginning the Book of Mormon

 It is a new year, and with that comes a new course of study in Come Follow Me.  This year we are studying the Book of Mormon. 

I have mixed feelings about studying the Book of Mormon again. On the one hand, it is a wonderful book of scripture full of great stories with layers of deep meaning and symbolism.  On the other hand, I have read the book literally dozens of times before, and I am not sure what I can do this year to make it fresh and meaningful. I very much enjoyed approaching the Old and New Testaments in their original languages the last two years, but, unless someone has figured out reformed Egyptian and has a copy of the writing on the Golden Plates, that option is not open to me.  I have read it in Spanish before, and that was enlightening, but I am not sure doing it again would add new insight. 

I have been thinking and praying about it and have decided to use two study approaches that are often recommended by church leaders, but that I have never done before.  First, I plan to study the Book of Mormon this year with a focus on what it says about Christ. This has been suggested most recently by President Nelson, but I have never buckled down to do it. Second, I plan to make notes in my scriptures when I find those references. You may think, What? you don't make notes in your scriptures?  This is true.  I have not in the past made notes in my scriptures because I have not wanted past impressions t

o interfere with my current reading of the text. I didn't want to make "wheel ruts" in the road of my study that I would naturally fall back into when I read the book the next time. Plus, I am a librarian and the thought of writing in any book makes my skin crawl. 

Now, however, I read scriptures almost exclusively online.  With the LDS tools app, I can add notes that I don't have to see the next time I read the book unless I actually click on them. Somehow that feels better than writing in a book, and will still allow me to read the text unbiased by previous readings if I want. So I tell myself.  It is still hard to change a long standing practice, but I am committed.

So, here we go.  

The Reality of the Resurrection

This week in Come Follow Me, we read the chapters from each of the gospels that deal with the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ. Each tells the story slightly differently, agreeing on many major points, but with less or more detail.  John has perhaps the most detailed account and he seems really determined to show that Jesus had a physical body after his resurrection.  John tells that Jesus had Thomas touch his hands, feet and side (John 20: 27).  Later Jesus ate fish and bread with the disciples (John 21:15).  Other gospels show Jesus being touched (Matt 28:9, Luke 24:39). Why do the gospel writers make a special point of showing that the Resurrected Lord has (or at least had at that time) a physical body that could be touched and could eat?

One reason may be that the physical resurrection was one miracle that was completely unique to Jesus.  Other prophets had healed the sick and raised a person from death to mortality. (e.g. 2 Kings 5: 1-14, and 2 Kings 4: 18-37).  Other people who were dead had returned to visit the living. The best example of this was on the Mount of Transfiguration, (Matt 17:3).  But Jesus was the first to return from death clothed in a physical body that people could touch. 

Another reason is that there was no consensus among believing Jews as to the reality of the resurrection.  Earlier in Jesus' ministry the Sadducees tried to trick Jesus by asking him about the seven brothers who each married the same woman and then died (Mark 12:18).  This passage suggests that the Sadducees didn't believe in the resurrection, but the Pharisees did. It seems strange to us that there could be such radically different views of life after death within one religion. But is it not as surprising as you may think, since throughout the Old Testament there is very little said about life after death. The focus was almost entirely on finding peace and safety in this life through communal righteousness. One defining characteristic of Christianity that represented a dramatic switch from Judaism is a switch of focus from physical to spiritual salvation. 

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have a unique perspective on the importance of a physical resurrection. We are the only church I could find that currently believes that God, as well as Jesus, has a glorified physical body.  The other Christian churches believe the God is a spirit that fills the universe and many believe the Jesus is the physical incarnation of God. Members of the Church of Jesus Christ believe the Jesus and God are separate beings, and the Jesus is God's son, not just metaphorically, but in some literal way. We believe that one of the main reasons people come to earth is to gain a physical body so that we can eventually become like our Heavenly Father. If you are looking at just the New Testament it is not an outrageous belief.  Jesus repeatedly addresses God as his Father, said that if you knew him, you knew the Father. (John 14:9).  If Jesus is like the Father, so much so that if you see one, it is as if you have seen the other, and if Jesus made a special effort to prove he had a physical body after resurrection, it is not a ridiculous idea that Jesus' was physically resurrected so that he could be more like his Father who has a glorified physical body. 

Of course, every religion has their own logic that explains why they believe what they believe. The Bible is sufficiently vague on the nature of God that there is room for many different interpretations. But there can be no debate that Jesus was physically resurrected, and that this fact was, for some reason, very important.

The Prodigal Son

 The Prodigal Son (Luke 15: 11-32) is one of the most famous of all Jesus' parables. It is one that has touched me personally.  At various times I have felt like the prodigal, the father, and the older brother.  One of the podcasters I listened to this week (I think it was Michael Wilcox on Follow Him) pointed out that both the older brother and the young brother are the same in one respect. Both of them think their value is based on what they do.  The younger brother, at the end, feels useless because he has chosen to do bad things. The older brother feels like he should be valued because he has chosen to do good things.  But the father loves both children not for what they do, but because they are his children. This was a powerful insight to me and I began recognizing that principal in other places. 

I think it is in play in the parable of the hired laborers (Matthew 20:1-16).  This parable has bothered people before because it seems unfair that those who worked all day should receive the same reward as those who only worked one hour. Again, we are valuing people for what they do--the ones that do more should be valued higher. The parable seems to be trying be saying they are valued, not for how much they do, but for their willingness to do work. I think the line in the parable is significant when the lord says, "Why stand ye here all the day idle?" and they answered, "Because no man hath hired us." They were willing to work but were kept from it because circumstances beyond their control.  We could say the lord values them the same because they all have the same willingness.  But maybe that isn't even quite true.  Maybe the Lord values them because he values all his children, regardless of what they do or do not do. Maybe he is just generous, and would give a denarius to any in need.

My mind bounces to the sermon on the mount.  "Consider the lilies of the field..." (Matthew 6:28).  They don't work for their blessings.  God just blesses them. 

I guess this was impactful because deep down I have felt that I must do XY and Z so that when the time comes when I really need the Lord, he will be there for me.  If I do everything I possibly can to be the kind of servant God needs, I can rely on him in my time of need.  Maybe I need to rethink my motivations. Maybe I am trying too hard to earn God's love, sometimes to the point of making myself miserable because I always feel like I am falling short. But if that is not what God wants, for me to be as righteous and diligent as I can, then what does he want?  He certainly condemned those who are "wicked and slothful" servants (Matthew 25: 26).   

This, I guess, is the old works vs grace argument that theologians have debated for centuries.  I say I believe in grace, but I think part of me is still clinging to works. 

Finishing the Old Testament Year

I am sorry that the holidays overtook me and I never wrote about Haggai, Zachariah, and Malachi.  In all honesty, I was suffering from a little bit of "minor prophets" fatigue. Of course, Malachi in particular has a lot of meaning for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints as it was quoted to Joseph Smith in one of his early visions, and the idea of "Turning the hearts of the children to the fathers" is foundational in our church's practice of family history research. I actually had something interesting to write about all that three weeks ago, but I don't remember what it was. (This may partially be because I am in the final hours of my monthly fast, and my brain isn't working well.)

I did want to end the year with my overall takeaways from this year's study of the Old Testament. Since it is New Year's day I think I will do them in countdown style. 

5. More than ever before I see the Old Testament as a book that was composed/edited at a specific time for a specific purpose. Just as the Book of Mormon was compiled and edited by Mormon to show the hand of God in the lives of his people from their first arrival in the Americas, the Old Testament was written by some unnamed person who wanted to have a record of the workings of God in the lives of his people from the time of Abraham to the time of the return from exile.  Each book and each story was included for a reason to teach something to the author's present day audience, and to future Jews. 

4. It is super important to understand the historical and cultural context in order to understand the Old Testament.  There is a practice that often happens with Christians, to take a verse or a chapter of the Old Testament out of context and use it as starting point for a gospel conversation.  If that is the only way you use the Old Testament, you are pretty much missing the boat. I am so grateful for the podcasters I listened to this year that gave me more of a historical context and I look forward to doing a deeper dive into that in later years.

3. One of the greatest miracles of the Old Testament, is that the Jews have been able to maintain their cultural identity for thousands of years.  What other group of people feel connected to the religious practices of their ancestors 3 or 4 thousand years ago. I have no idea even how or where my ancestors were living in 2000 BCE let alone how they were worshiping.  Somehow at least a small group of Israelites still see themselves as Israelites even after all this time.  They still worship the same god and revere the same prophets. That is amazingly remarkable. 

2. Both the New Testament and the Doctrine and Covenants must be seen through the lens of the Old Testament.  New Testament writers chose the scenes they portray in the Gospels specifically to compare them to Old Testament ideas and people.  When you read the stories in the New Testament, they are supposed to bring to mind antecedent stories in the Old Testament. Likewise, Joseph Smith very much saw his role in the restoration as a continuation of the role of prophets in the Old Testament.  He was striving to restore or create a modern day House of Israel, with worship focused on the Temple, just as it was from the Exodus to Malachi.  

1. (And this one may seem contrary to all the previous ones)  Jesus' doctrine about personal salvation and hope for exaltation in a life after death, is a stark and dramatic departure from Judaism which focused on group salvation in the mortal world.  The prophets of the Old Testament, except for perhaps Isaiah, were primarily focused on saving their civilization by community righteousness, i.e. if they were righteous, God would protect and prosper them as a nation. The gospel of Jesus Christ, with its emphasis on personal righteousness and personal salvation was new and unique teaching, and it is no surprise that even his own disciples didn't understand it until after His death and resurrection.  Christianity, though born in the world of Judaism, is a fundamentally new belief system.

This year of study has been a delight.  I look forward to seeing the influence of the Old Testament in the next three years of study of the New Testament, Book of Mormon, and Church History, and revisiting the Old Testament in 4 years.

Daniel

 As I read the first two chapters of the book of Daniel in English this week, I said to myself that these stories sound like folktales.  The idealized and formal conversations, the drama of the miraculous deliverances of Hananiah, Michael, and Azariah from the furnace and Daniel from the lion's den, the way that the foreign kings all come to eventually acknowledge the supremacy of the God of Israel, all suggest a polished narrative with a specific moralistic agenda. Some scholars believe that the Book of Daniel was written by Daniel at the end of his life, when he was about 90.  That could account for the folk-tale like flavor of the stories--an old man recounting the exploits of his youth.  Other scholars believe that it was written many years later, in the 3rd or 2nd century BCE during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. Antiochus Epiphanes persecuted the Jews in the Holy Land, and some scholars believe that the book of Daniel was written to give the people under persecution hope that God was still with them and could do miraculous things for them.  

Whether the stories were written by Daniel or by later people recounting folk tales of the Babylonian Captivity, the message of the book of Daniel ties in really well with the main message of the book of Jeremiah. Last week I wrote about Jeremiah's main message, i.e. that the God of Israel had followed his people as they were taken from Jerusalem, and continued to sustain them in captivity.  In a way, the stories of Daniel are well placed directly following Jeremiah, because they illustrate his point perfectly. Daniel and his friends are the ultimate example how to survive and thrive in captivity without giving up your belief in the God of Israel. 

These stories are some of the best known Bible stories that every Sunday School child learns.  Reading them in Hebrew brought only one of two small insights.  One is that they are not written all in Hebrew.  As I read Chapter 2 of Daniel, whenever the king spoke, his words were in Aramaic.  Later in the book part is written in Greek. This is one of the reasons scholars think they must have been written later, because the Greek Language didn't really exist in the 6th century BCE.  Another small idea I had never thought of before concerns Chapter 1.  Daniel and his friends were captured in Jerusalem and taken to be groomed to be wise men in the land of Babylon.  They were entrusted into the head of the eunuchs. I always assumed that was because they were very young when they were captured, even pre-adolescent and thus belonged with "the women".  One of the podcasters this week suggested another reason.  Maybe when they entered into the king's service they were neutered and became eunuchs.  A argument in favor of this assumption is that none of them are ever mentioned to have taken a wife. I don't know why that fact should be particularly important but, to me, it made their service in the court of the King seem like an even greater sacrifice. 

Jeremiah 30-52: Jesus knew Jeremiah

 As I was reading Jeremiah over the last two weeks I was surprised how often passages from Jeremiah sounded like passages in the New Testament.  New Testament writers don't ever name Jeremiah by name, but they were clearly familiar with his writings as they composed the New Testament.  I found a website that lists Jeremiah references in the New Testament. Here are some of my favorites.

Jeremiah 7:11
...Has this house, which is called by My name, become a den of robbers in your sight
Matt 21:13
He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.

Jeremiah 31:15
 Thus says the Lord, “A voice is heard in Ramah, Lamentation and bitter weeping. Rachel is weeping for her children; She refuses to be comforted for her children, Because they are no more.”
Matthew 2:18
A voice was heard in Ramah,
weeping and loud lamentation,
Rachel weeping for her children;
she refused to be comforted, because they are no more

Jeremiah 31: 31-33
“Behold, days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, 32not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the Lord. 33“But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the Lord, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.
Hebrews 10:16-17
This is the covenant that I will make with them
after those days, declares the Lord:
I will put my laws on their hearts,
and write them on their minds,”
17 then he adds,

“I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.

There are other ways the Jeremiah is a type of Christ.  In both Jesus' time and Jeremiah's time, the Jews were living under a vassal state. The temple was the center of worship, but was soon to be destroyed. Jeremiah, like Christ, was largely ignored by the Jewish community. Jeremiah, like Jesus, was captured, imprisoned, beaten and eventually died for speaking what he believed. 

"Hast thou considered my servant, Job?"

 This week in Come Follow Me we are studying the book of Job. It is the second book of the "Wisdom Writings" after Esther, and scholars can't agree about when it was written or even when it is set. Most scholars believe that Job wasn't a historical character, and that the entire book is an extended parable. Some people believe that the book of Job is one of the greatest works in all world literature. There were a couple of things that stood out to me as I studied Job this week. 

The theology of Job stands in stark contrast to everything that has come before it in the Bible. In all that we have read so far, the Lord is portrayed as a national deity.  He is the god of the Israelites who helps them prosper when they obey his laws, and leaves them to be destroyed by their neighbors when they do not. There is little discussion of personal welfare and salvation. Obedience to God's law ensured community safety, and those who are obedient are blessed because they have contributed to the well being of the House of Israel. In the book of Job, there is no discussion at all about how Job's obedience or disobedience will affect the community.  Even his detractors don't ever say, "Hey, Job, you better shape up or you will bring the wrath of God down on our city".  This is our first look at God and his relationship with the individual. 

This is also the first time that the Bible authors address the question, "Why do bad things happen to good people?"  We see, in the words of Job's "friends" that there is a prevailing idea that good people receive blessings and bad things happen to bad people.  Much of the narrative from Joshua to Nehemiah seems to be written to show that the House of Israel was conquered and taken into captivity because of their wickedness. The southern tribes last 120 longer than the northern tribes because they had a couple of righteous kings. After all that, here is the book of Job arguing that even though Job is righteous, the Lord allows him to suffer.  Could this parable be push-back from Jews written during or after the Babylonian captivity because their leaders always said they were conquered because of their wickedness? Could it be their way of saying, "Hey, we weren't captured because of wickedness, but just because it was God's inscrutable will that we should be conquered."

The most intriguing argument I heard on my podcasts this week was one mentioned by Taylor Halverson on Book of Mormon Central.  It is the idea that this story could be an early hint of the Plan of Salvation and that it represents the pre-earth life, life on earth, and the post-life paradise prepared for the righteous.  I really liked this idea, though I admit it is probably not the way that ancient Hebrews would have seen the book. Job's prosperity in the beginning of the story could represent the pre-earth life.  Earth life is represented by Job's trials.  Like Job, everyone enters mortality will eventually lose everything they ever had.  They can't take their possessions with them when they die.  Most people see many of their family and friends die before they do as well.  As Job says "Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither."  Then, in the end of the story, Job is admitted into God's presence. After Job is examined, and is brought to acknowledge that the Lord's ways are just, has restored to him all that he had lost, and more. This is like the final judgement when the righteous shall receive their reward.  Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Later-Day Saints are the only Christians that preach this progression, but the Book of Job may indicate that there may have been groups among the ancient Hebrews that understood this as well.

One last note.  Although the Book of Job is a discussion about why good people suffer, the book doesn't really give a clear answer to the question.  God never explains to Job why he let him suffer.  His only response to Job's questions about why all the terrible things happened to him, was to show Job how God's power, glory, and greatness exceeds Job's, and indeed, all human's.  I actually think this is really the only answer to the question of suffering.  The Earth and all the universe are under God's command, so we should trust that he knows best. 

 

The Return to Jerusalem

This week's reading in Ezra and Nehemiah recounts the return of a few members of the tribe of Judah to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple and city walls. Some things happened in this time period that ended up influencing the culture of the Jews from that time forward.  To understand the social structure at the time of the New Testament, you have to understand the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.

Prophets vs Scribes: 

Many scholars believe that it was during the Babylonian captivity that the traditions and stories of the Jews were written down and compiled into book of scripture. The leaders of the Jews knew that it would be easy for the people, while they were living in Babylon, to give into social pressure and be absorbed into Babylonian culture.  To resist this influence, someone or ones compiled a book of scripture that was focused on confirming Jewish identity and giving hope for a life of freedom after captivity. Once this scripture was compiled, people began to rely on it to inform them on the will of God instead of relying on contemporary prophets for guidance.  Of course, not many people could read the new scripture because they were illiterate. Moreover, the book was written in the language of the ancient religion, Hebrew, while most of the people switched to speaking Aramaic as their common tongue during their captivity.  This gave rise to a new class of religious leaders that were to become the "Scribes" mentioned in the New Testament.  Their role was read and study the written law and then interpret it for the unlearned masses. From this period on, people tended to look to the Scribes as the source for the word of God instead of to prophets.

Insuring Clan Purity

After the Jews returned to Jerusalem, they were a bit shell shocked.  Before their capture they had believed that Jerusalem and the Temple could never be destroyed because of the Lord's covenant with David.  After their captivity they began to realize that the safety of the city and the Temple was dependent on their obedience to the commandments of the Torah. As a result, they went a little overboard in their efforts to ensure that certain rules about clan purity were observed. In Deuteronomy 3:7 the House of Israel is commanded not to intermarry into non-Israelite tribes. The rules for priests were even more strict (Lev 21:15).  It was at this time that the Jews began to require people to present a genealogy to become a priest, or even work on the temple. They needed their mother's genealogy, because status as a Jew was passed through the mother.  Priests also needed their father's genealogy because eligibility to serve as a priest came through a patriarchal line. This requirement of clan purity led to the alienation of the Samaritans who had been left behind when the northern tribes where carried away by the Assyrians, but who intermarried with people the Assyrians had transplanted into the region.  During the Babylonian captivity, the Samarians, (later Samaritan) continued to worship the Lord with sacrifices in local shrines, but when the Jews returned from captivity they condemned the way the Samaritans were worshiping.  Because they did not have pure bloodlines they were rejected and despised. 

Zerubbabel's Temple

The temple that Zerubbabel built was smaller and less ornate than Solomon's temple. The Temple was defiled and then rededicated after the Maccabean revolt of 167 BCE,  but when the Herod family came into power, they expanded the temple complex to the state that existed in Jesus' day. Although the temple was rebuilt, and many of the implements of the temple were returned from Babylon, there is no evidence that the Ark of the Covenant was ever recovered or rebuilt. Evidence is that the interior of the Holy of Holies was empty from this time forward.

The End of the Biblical History

The stories found in Ezra and Nehemiah stand at the end of the timeline covered by the Old Testament.  All the stories and wisdom writings that follow these books occurred before or (a few) during this period.  The walls of Jerusalem were rebuilt around 440 Century BCE and the last recorded prophet was Malachi who wrote in about 430 BCE.  It would be interesting to read a version of the Bible where the books were all arranged chronologically. 

Elisha

It is interesting how Elijah is somehow more famous than Elisha, yet Elisha has way more miracles recorded than his mentor Elijah.  Some of the podcasters this week mentioned that Elisha asked for a double portion of the spirit (2 Kings 2:9), and so the writers of 2 Kings recorded twice as many miracles performed by Elisha than Elijah. Despite that, Elisha seems to get second billing under his mentor Elijah.  I think the difference is that Elisha learned from Elijah's mistakes.  Last week I talked about how Elijah challenged the priests of Baal to a contest which he won in the most spectacular way possible.  Then afterward he was disconsolate and wanted to die because his showy miracle didn't bring about the change of heart he wanted to see in Israel's leaders. Remember that while Elijah was struggling, the Lord made his presence known, not in the wind or the earthquake, but in the still small voice (1 Kings 19:12).  Elijah chose Elisha after that experience.  Did he choose Elisha because he had a quieter, less showy personality more likely to listen to the still small voice, or did he teach Elisha what he had learned? Either way, Elisha mostly did quieter kinds of miracles, though no less spectacular. Still, since there were no big showdowns in front of hundreds, Elisha's fame never spread like Elijah's did.

So what kind of miracles did Elisha perform?  While Elijah was all about calling down fire on people, not only on the priests of Baal, but also on the leaders of the delegations of 50 later on (2 Kings 1),  Elisha never called down fire on anyone or anything. He never directly attacked anything.  He did curse the youths who mocked him (2 Kings 2: 24) but the curse was carried out by bears, who "tear" them, not necesarily killing them. He helped armies win battles by prophesying troop movements and instructing leaders how deceive their enemies, but the outcomes were mostly passive--the armies were frightened by the water that looked like blood (2 Kings 3:22), or were scared away by the sound of a rushing wind (2 Kings 7:6) etc. Once he cursed an army with blindness, but then he just led them to the capital and then restored their sight (2 Kings 6:20). Many of his miracles were performed to help individuals.  He blessed the Shunammite woman that was infertile, and then later raised the resulting child from the dead (2 Kings 4).  He helped the man who lost the borrowed ax head (2 Kings 6:6) and miraculously helped people get the food they needed several times.  His most famous miracle, the one with the potential of garnishing for him the most praise of men, was the healing of Naaman (2 Kings 5).  In that story, Elisha deliberately minimizes his role in the story.  He doesn't go down to meet Naaman in person and doesn't accept the huge reward Naaman offers after he is healed. 

In his meekness in power, Elisha may be the Old Testament prophet that is most like Jesus.  Many of the kinds of miracles Elisha performed, Jesus also performed.  I guess it is fitting, therefore, that Elisha's name means el=God, isha=Savior=Jesus, or God is Jesus.

Elijah

 Elijah is one of the most famous prophets in the Old Testament.  His showy standoff against the priests of Baal is a favorite, especially for young people. Later, the writers of the New Testament make a point of showing the Jesus did the same kind of miracles that Elijah did--healing the sick, raising the dead, miraculiously multiplying food--thus proving that he was a true prophet. In Matthew 16:14, the deciples even mention that some people saw Jesus' miracles and thought he might be Elijah, come back from the dead. I think is was Taylor Halverson, from Book of Mormon Central, who said that there is a lot of Jewish folktales about Elijah showing up, even after his death, and saving people. 

So if Elijah was such an amazing prophet, why wasn't he happy with what he accomplished. After his amazing smackdown with Ahab, Elijah runs away and sits under a juniper tree and refuses to eat. 1Kings 19:4 "...and he requested for himself that he might die; and said, It is enough: now, O Lord, take away my life; for I am not better than my fathers."  Why was he so depressed that an angel had to urge him to eat?  I think that the answer is in the last line, "for I am not better than my fathers."  I think Elijah was expecting that if he did this great miracle, all of Israel would recognize the Lord is God.  Instead, the people sought his life. He learned the sad truth that Moses learned before him.  Miracles don't convert people. Miracles confirm the faith of believers, but if people don't believe in God, they won't believe in the miracle.  A Christian would say that it is the Holy Spirit, whispering to the soul, that really converts   I think that is what God was trying to teach Elijah in 19:11-13.  Elijah was standing at the door of the cave where he was hiding and a great wind past by, and then an earthquakem, and then a fire "but the Lord was not in the earthquake...and after the fire a still small voice."  It is as if the Lord was saying, "yes, I can do the big miracles, but my greatest power is in my spirit."

It seems like the Lord was not angry with Elijah, either for doing the showy miracle, or for being super disappointed when it didn't cause the results he wanted.  Instead the Lord sends angels to help him through is disappointment, and finally gets him on his feet again. Elijah hasn't turned away from the Lord, but has clung to the Lord and has done his best to defend the interests of the Lord.  The Lord seems to honor his zeal and effort. 

I think this is a great message for anyone who has ever wanted very hard to do something big for other people. Sometimes we don't get to do the big thing, and sometimes, we do the "big" thing, but it turns out not like the person was expecting.  God is great and God is good and he will help us through our disaapointments. 

Ruth

 After reading Judges, the book of Ruth is like a breath of fresh air.  We leave the warfare and political strife, and take a peak into the lives of normal people who are trying to do what is right. 

Why do we have the Book of Ruth?  

After the Babylonian captivity, Josiah was zealous to set temple and religious observance back on course.  Since they were in captivity for about 70 years, or two generations more or less, Josiah wanted a way to verify who were true Isrealites, and who were legally able to serve in the Temple. He, therefore, required people to produce geneologies that showed that each was:

     1. of Israel, and/or 

    2. eligible to serve in the Temple, i.e. Levite or Aaronic descendency. 

 The right to work as a priest was handed down father to son, but the identity of being a Israelite was determined through the mother.  So far in the Old Testament, all the stories where non-Hebrew women play a primary role are included because those women are ancestors of prominant Israeli leaders. This is the case here.  Ruth was the great grandmother of David, so we need a story to show how she, born a Moabite, was adopted into the house of Israel. 

Symbolism in Ruth. 

Some of the podcasts I listened to tried to see a lot of symbolism in the book of Ruth.  I must admit that their arguements are not as compelling as some of those in favor of symbolism elsewhere.  There is some symbolism in their names.  Naomi נﬠמי means "pleasant" and Ruth רוּת means friendship. After Naomi's husband and sons die, she wants people to call her "Mara" which means, "bitter".  beyond that  I really think this is just a sweet story about good people being kind to each other. 

Culture.

This book gives a lot of insight into how the Law of Moses was enacted in people's lives.  We see the rule from Leviticus 9:19 that farmers were to leave the grain in the corners of their fields for the poor. It also shows how an extended family unit was supposed to run.  There was a family chief who had the responsibility to take care of any woman who was widowed, or of anyone who was having financial problems. It was often the eldest son of the eldest son.  Later this role was called the Father of the Family, but here it is called "Near Kinsman." Below that person, there were leaders of smaller family units.  In this story Boaz was not the highest "kinsman" in charge of taking care of the widow, Naomi, but he was a second tier "kinsman," so that is why he had to check with the chief kinsman to see if it was OK to marry Ruth. This family structure is a reason why it would not be odd for a Jew to call Jesus both a father and a son.  He was the Son of God, but had the role of Father of the family, or the eldest brother who was in charge of redeming other family members. 

Story Line.

The story is about how Ruth becomes converted, but it is also a story about how Naomi leaves home, becomes bereft, returns to home, and is redemed.  It is also, I think, a romance.  Even though Boaz was older, he seems to have really fallen for Ruth as soon as he saw her.  It is cute when she proposes to him, that he is so pleased that a young beautiful woman would choose him over  a younger man.  But why not?  He was very nice to Ruth, and she knew she could trust him to treat her right.  When Boaz marries Ruth, Naomi's future is secured.  She takes up the role of nursemaid to her grandchildren, and is called blessed. 

Exodus 1-6

 The story of Moses is so familiar it is difficult to gain new insights about it.  I listened to several different podcasts about the reading this week, and here are just a few of the comments that I found interesting. 

Moses' Ark

When we talk about the ark we usually think about Noah's Ark. In this story an ark, or תבת, shows up again, but this time it is child sized.  Just as Noah covered his ark with pitch, Jochebed covers her ark with slime and pitch to make it water proof.  It is set adrift on the waters, commended to God. Like Noah's ark, this one holds the head of a new dispensation, the beginning of a new covenant era. I think the paralells are intentional.  The editors are using symbols to communicate something about God's relationship to man and His role in the destiny of his chosen people.  I was also touched by one of the commentators that talked about how all mothers are like Jochebed.  We bring forth and nourish our children for a short while, and then send them out into an uncertain world.  We hope, when we do, that we have done a good enough job creating a spiritual ark for them that will carry them safely through into their new life. 

Moses' Character

Another podcaster talked about Moses' compassionate character. Moses initially got into trouble in Egypt because he was defending a Hebrew slave against an Egyptian. Later when he comes across Jethro's daughters having trouble defending their flocks at a well, he jumps in and helps there, too. Finally, when he talks with the Lord through the burning bush, he is clearly uncomfortable with the idea of returning to Egypt to free the children of Israel, but after the Lord gives him some assuances, he agrees to go.  Even though he was raised in Pharaoh's palace, somewhere he learned compassion.

Some number symbols

In this story we have a lot of occurances of the symbolic numbers forty and seven.  Forty is a number that represents "a lot".  Seven is a number that signifies completeness.  When the house of Israel comes into Egypt at the time of Joseph, there are 70 people who come, or in other words, all the house of Israel at the time. The Priest of Midian had seven daughters, a complete family.  Moses dwelt in Midian for 40 years, or a long time. The House of Israel had been in bondage 400 years, a very long time.  

The Women

There are not a lot of women mentioned in the Bible, so it is remarkable that women play a big part in the Moses story.  First with have the two midwifes, Shiphrah and Puah, who defy Pharaoh by refusing to kill the male infants.  Then there is Jochebed, Moses' mother, and Miriam, his sister, who help Moses survive and find his way to Pharaoh's daughter. Finally, there is Zipporah, Moses' wife, who saves Moses from the wrath of the Lord by circumsizing their son.  All of these women played essential roles in Moses' success. Later, Miriam, Moses' sister, becomes a priestess and plays an important role in the exodus. Zipporah and Jochebed also have roles to play later. I watched a short YouTube video about the roles of women in Egyptian society.  Women had more rights in Egypt than in many other contemporary civilizations.  When women married in Egypt, they kept control of their dowery assets during their marriage, and if there was a divorce, the woman would take her pocessions with her when she left.  Maybe the more progressive role of women in Egypt rubbed off on the Israelites. I also find it interesting that at the end of Exodus 3, it is the women who are asked to get the treasure from Egypt.  They are specifically asked to ask of their masters to have gold, silver and cloths, and they would give them.  It makes me think, what would have happened if the men had been given this job? How would they have handled it.  

Jacob's Faith Journey

When we talk of the patriarchs, we talk of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  As I already discussed, Abraham is portrayed as the ideal faithful follower.  We actually don't hear a lot about Isaac's faith journey. He seemed to have walked in obedience and faith from the beginning, always building alters and digging wells, both forms of covenant worship.

We do hear a lot about Jacob's faith journey.  It started before he was born.  In Genesis 25:22-23 Rebekah prays about her pregnancy and is told that she is carrying twins, and that "the elder shall serve the younger."  In Jacob's early years he seems to have been guided primarily by his mother.  The text states that Jacob was Rebekah's favorite (Gen 25:28) but the reader is left to wonder how much Rebekah told Jacob about her revelation about his destiny.  We do know that when Jacob has food and Esau is hungry, Jacob suggests that Esau sell his birthright to get food (Gen 25:31-33). Later when it is time for Isaac to pass on covenant blessings to his eldest son, Rebekah convinces Jacob to deceive Isaac and obtain the blessing instead, thus fulfilling, she thought, her revelation about Jacob.

The result of Jacob following his mother's direction to deceive his father, was that, to avoid Esau's revenge, Jacob had to leave his parents to find refuge, and a wife, among extended family. Before he left, Isaac blessed him with all the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant (Gen 28:3-4). This is another example of faith coming from a parent, this time his father. 

It wasn't until Jacob started traveling toward Haran that he had his own revelatory experience. He had a dream of the Lord confirming the promises Isaac had pronounced upon him before he left (Gen 28: 12-15).  In the revelation, the Lord didn't mention that he required anything from Jacob. When Jacob woke up he recognized that he was in a sacred space (Gen 28:16) and he built a monument to his experience there (28:18).  He didn't, however, at that time, fully accept the Lord as his god.  He made a vow to the Lord, but it was conditional. "If God be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, so that I come again to my father's house in peace; then shall the Lord be my God" (Gen 28:20-21). 

Jacob goes on to Haran, and meets Laban, Rachel, and Leah.  In an ironic twist of fate, Laban deceives him into honoring birth order (which Jacob had defied) and marrying Leah before Rachel.  Jacob toils for many years for Laban.  Presumably, Esau stays at home and enjoys, in the absence of his rival, if not the actual birthright, the effectual benefit of a firstborn son. Jacob seems to be humbled by his years in service.  As he becomes more humble and submissive, both to Laban, his wives, and the Lord, his flocks and progeny grows. 

After Jacob has worked for Laban for 20 years, the Lord appears to him and shows him that He had kept most of his end of the bargain.  The Lord led him to Haran and prospered him there. The Lord tells him that it is time to do the last thing in the bargain, which was to return to the home of his father in peace. (Gen 31:13)  Jacob is nervous about this.  He is worried about what Laban will do when he tries to leave and what Esau will do when he arrives at home. The Lord takes care of the first concern.  Laban is pacified by a dream (Gen 31:24) so he eventually lets Jacob go in peace (Gen 31:55).

Jacob is about to face his final, and it seems his most dangerous trial, facing Esau.  As he is about to face his brother, and his brother's army of 400, Jacob says a prayer that shows that he has finally developed faith in God, and true humility. He prays "I am not worthy of the least of all the mercies, and of all the truth, which thou hast shewed unto they servant." (Gen 32:10)  It is when Jacob reaches this place of humility and submission (symbolized in wrestle with the angel and breaking of his hip, Gen 33:28) that he becomes a new person, a heir of the covenant.  The Lord commemorates Jacob's acceptance of the covenant by changing his name from Jacob, which means Supplanter, to Israel, which means Let God Prevail. (Gen 32:38)

It is interesting that Jacob's reunion with Esau comes after his experience with the angel.  One of the podcasters I listen to compared Jacob's embrace with Esau to God's embrace when we pass through the veil into immortality.  Jacob had wronged Esau and was cast out from his presence. In order to return to his brother, he humbled himself, sacrificed all he had, and begged for forgiveness.  Esau, like the Lord, accepted Jacob's offering and received him back into full fellowship.

There is one more account of Jacob's faith journey that brings it full circle. In Genesis 34 there is an account where Dinah is raped by men of a neighboring tribe.  Her two biggest brothers, Ruben and Levi, retaliate by tricking and then slaying the perpetrators and ravaging their village.  Jacob recognizes this as a great sin.  The Lord, in chapter 35, commands Jacob to take  his family back to Beth-el (the place of his covenant with the Lord) and purify them and make sacrifices for them.  Jacob started out relying on the faith of his parents, and now he has become the parent, taking upon himself the responsibility of passing on his faith tradition to his sons. 

So we have the faith journey of Jacob.  It starts by him relying on his parent's faith.  Then he comes to recognize the existence of God, but puts conditions on him--you grant me this and I will acknowledge you as my god. Over time, Jacob humbles himself completely, repents of his sins, offers all he has, and is accepted back into God's symbolic embrace.  Then he takes upon himself the role of the parent who is passing on his faith tradition to the next generation.

 

Some thoughts about Rebekah

Just as Sarah is the ideal wife, the story about Rebekah in Genesis 24 shows what it means to be the ideal daughter.  She is fair and chaste (v 16), respectful (v 18) eager to serve and hardworking (v. 19-20).  She accepts the Lord's will and sacrifices her own (v. 58).  Later we see that she has her own faith enough to inquire of the Lord about her unborn children (25:22).  

So how do we reconcile her virtuousness with the story of her deceiving her husband to secure the birthright for Jacob? Every time I have studied this story in the past, study guides and Sunday School teachers have suggested that she did what she had to fulfill the revelation she received at the time the twins were born that "the elder shall serve the younger".  That never really set well with me.  Is deceiving your husband and including your son in that deceit ever a good idea?  One of my pod casts suggested another way to look at it.  Maybe Rebekah was trying to fulfill the prophecy given to her earlier, but she went about it the wrong way.  The result of her and her son's deception was a rift in the family, and Jacob's need to exile himself from his home for a long of time. Rebekah essentially lost her son, and Jacob, who participated in the deceit, ended up being the recipient of trickery, when Laban made him marry Leah first when he wanted Rachel. I kind of like the idea of this as a cautionary tale.  If you dish it, it comes back to you.

That being said, it is also a tale of redemption.  Yes, Esau wants to kill his brother, and Jacob has to flee to preserve his life, but it all works out in the end.  Jacob finds his true love in Haran, and gains an additional wife and many flocks in the process. Somehow the experience and time apart heals the family and Jacob and Esau are reconciled once Jacob returns. 

In some ways Rebekah reminds me of Eve.  Yes, she transgresses, and the transgression has immediate negative consequences, but the Lord is able to turn her transgression into something good. 

Podcasts

 I thought it was important to mention the podcasts I listen to each week.  I gain a lot of insight from them, and I don't want the reader to think the things I blog about all came from me.  So here are the podcasts I listen to

Book of Mormon Central by the Maxwell Institute
BYU Maxwell Institute Podcast

Come Follow Me Insights with Taylor Halverson and Tyler Griffiths
Talking Scripture with Mike Day and Bryce Dunford 
Unshaken Saints by Jared Halverson

The Sacrament

The bishop (local congregational leader) has asked me to give a talk in church in October.  I am thinking I will use as my topic the Sacrament (like Catholic communion).  The Sacrament has incredibly rich symbolic meaning. Of course, the center of the Sacrament symbolism is the Savior.  Jesus established the ordinance during his last supper with his disciples. "Take, eat, this is my body..." (Matt 26: 26).  He clearly stated that the bread represented his body and the wine represented his blood that he was about to sacrifice for the sins of the world. 

So, what does it mean that we eat and drink emblems of Christ's body and blood?  

In one sense, by taking the bread and wine (or water in my church) we acknowlege that we are each a part of the need for an atonement.  "All have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:23) and cannot be justified without the atonement and grace of Jesus.  I am a sinner, the person sitting next to me is a sinner, the person on the stand is a sinner.  We are all equal in our need of the grace of God so we all partake of the Sacrament.

But, also, by taking of the emblems of the sacrament, we also accept the grace of the atonement that is offered us. Jesus said, "I am the bread of life.  He who comes to me shall never hunger, and he who believes in me shall never thurst." Just as bread feeds our physical body, God's grace through the atonement can nourish our spirits. Each person who partakes the bread and water can be strengthened.  The Sacrament reminds us that we are all both condemned as sinners, and enabled to become saints. 

During Covid-19 restrictions members in my church were permitted to administer the sacrament in our homes.  For me and others I have talked to, this was a very special and sacred experience.  But this is not the ideal. I don't think the church will ever perminantly do away with coming together to take the sacrament. 

Meeting together to partake of the sacrament was a test of faith for early saints in the Holy Land.  Jews were raised to be very careful not to eat with Gentiles.  Their dietary laws prevented them from even using plates and utensils that might have touched foods that were considered "unclean".  That is one reason why the Lord had to give Peter the vision of the unclean animals (Acts 10: 9-16) before he was convinced it was OK to share the gospel and a meal with gentiles.  As the gospel spread to the Gentiles, the practice of meeting together to share the sacrament helped to unify the Jewish members and Gentile members

In the Book of Mormon the people who were witnesses to Christ's visit to the America "did meet together oft to partake of the bread and wine, in rememberance of the Lord Jesus." (Moroni 6:6)  It is a great unifying ordinance.  Each Sunday church members all over the world take the sacrament in the same way after hearing the same prayers.  The connection also goes back through time.  The Book of Mormon records that the sacrament prayers were the same then as they are now.  With one ordinance we have a shared experience with all the saints from the present and from the past. 

So why is it important that saints come together to partake of the sacrament?  By partaking of the sacrament which symbolizes the body of Christ, we acknowlege that we are part of the Body of Christ. (1 Corinthians 12:12-30.)  What does that mean?  Christians generally agree that it was important for Jesus to obtain a physical body so that he could accomplish his work on this earth.  What did he do with his physical body?  He reached out and touched the unclean (Matt 8:3)  He fed the hungry (John 8: 1-11).  He blessed the sick (Luke 4:40) He comforted those that were mourning (John 11 32-35) and he cleansed the temple (John 2:15).  Now that Jesus assended into heaven we are his physical body on earth.  We are supposed to do the same kind of things.  We are supposed to do what he would do with his physical body if he were here.  We are his body, the Body of Christ.

By taking the sacrament we acknowlege all that; that we are all sinners,  that we are all blessed with grace through the atonement, that we are all the Body of Christ, and that we all have the responsibility to do what he would do if he were here.  Acknowleging that together unifies us and equalizes us.  It also strengthens and enables us to keep the commandments and always remember him as we promise we will do.  And God promises that if we do, and as we do, his spirit will be with us and help us. 

So there are some thoughts about the Sacrament.  There are even more symbols, but this is starting to be a long post, and so I will stop there.