THE KINGDOM OF
GOD
Chapter 1.
Is it a Spiritual
Kingdom?
Not of
this World
When Jesus was
brought before Pilate He made a statement, "My kingdom is not of this
world". (John 18:36) From this stems the belief that the kingdom of Jesus
Christ is a spiritual kingdom that does not come in conflict with the earthly
kingdoms of this world.
That the
kingdom of Jesus Christ is to be an
earthly kingdom can be discerned from passages in Daniel 2:44; 7:13‑27;
Zech. 14; Rev. 5:10; and 11:15 which says, "The kingdoms of this world are
become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ". Following the beleif
that the kingdom of our Saviour is a spiritual kingdom is the beleif that it
should come on earth by spiritual means. Yet "It was accepted Mormon
doctrine that the political kingdom of God was to be established by human
efforts rather than through divine intervention." (The Rise and Fall of
the Kingdom of God in Pioneer Days page 51 / Millennial Star XXIV (1862))
While thousands
thank God for Joseph Smith and the restoration of the Gospel and church of
Jesus Christ, few understand it was only one step in bringing about a full and
complete restoration of all things, even the restoration of His kingdom. This
is most reasonable as we look back and see the Lord saying to Israel "ye
shall be unto me a kingdom". (Exodus 19:6) Joshua saying "choose you
this day whom ye will serve ... but as for me and my house, we will serve the
Lord." (Joshua 24:15) And Isaiah (33:22) saying, "the Lord is our
judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, and the Lord is our king".
A Holy People
Moses in
speaking to the children of Israel tells them, "Thou hast avouched the
Lord this day to be thy God, and to walk in his ways, and to keep his statutes,
and his commandments, and his judgements, and to hearken unto his voice: And
the Lord hath avouched thee this day to be his peculiar people, as he hath
promised thee, and that thou shouldest keep all his commandments; and to make
thee high above all nations which he hath made, in praise, and in name, and in
honour; and that thou mayest be an holy people unto the Lord thy God, as he
hath spoken." (Duet. 26:17-19) To say the kingdom of God, or to say the
House of Israel, is to virtually say the same thing.
The Law/Gospel of Israel/Jesus Christ
This at least was
true when Israel kept the law of God, or abided in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
"Perhaps our friends will say that the Gospel and its ordinances were not
known till the days of John, the son of Zacharias, in the days of Herod, ... It
will be noticed that, according to Paul, (see Gal. 3:8) the Gospel was preached
to Abraham. We would like to be informed in what name the Gospel was then
preached, whether it was in the name of Christ or some other name. If in
another name, was it the Gospel? And if it was the Gospel, and that preached in
the name of Christ, had it any ordinances? If not, was it the Gospel? And if it
had ordinances what were they? ... We find also, that when the Israelites came
out of Egypt they had the Gospel preached to them, according to Paul in his
letter to the Hebrews, which says: "For unto us was the Gospel preached,
as well as
unto them: ... (see Heb. 4:2). It
is said again, in Gal. 3:19, that the law [of Moses] was "added"
because of transgression. What, we ask, was this added to, if it was not added
to the Gospel? It must
1.
be plain that it was added to the
Gospel, since we learn that they had the Gospel preached to them." (TPJS
page 60)
The Law
of Moses
Jesus Told the
Nephites, "... in me is the law of Moses fulfilled. ... ye shall offer up
unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt
offerings shall be done away, ... ye shall offer for a sacrifice unto me a
broken heart and a contrite spirit". (3 Nephi 9:17-20)
Joseph Smith
elucidated on this statement when he said, "It is not to be understood
that the Law of Moses will be established again with all its rites and variety
of ceremonies; this has never been spoken of by the prophets; but those things
which existed prior to Moses's day". (TPJS page 173) An example of which
is found in Matthew 19:3-9: "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife
for every cause? [A prominent Rabbi who lived prior to the coming of Christ had
taught just that, that a man could put his wife away for every cause, every
cause being anything from getting fat, or old, to accidently burning his toast,
... literally every cause imaginable.] ... "What therefore God hath joined
together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then
command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto
them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away
your wives: but from the beginning it was not so."
The same thing
can be said of us in these days as pertaining to the law of consecration or
tithing. We do not live the law of consecration or the full law of tithing, if
we did we would give our all. Where would one get 10% to give if one has
already given their all? And it is for the same reason, the hardness of our hearts.
In essence the Lord, through Moses, gave two laws, one which stood forever and
one which would pass away as Israel attained maturity.
Life and Death
Moses, before
leaving Israel, goes over the law that God has given Israel through him, and
after going over the blessings they will receive if they abide in the law, or
the cursings they will reciece if they do not he says, "I call heaven and
earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and
death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed
may live:" (Duet. 30:19)
Jesus, when
asked by the young man what he should do to have eternal life is answered, "if thou wilt enter
into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which?" (Matthew
19:17) Whereupon Jesus begins quoting the ten commandments. Yet in another
place He says, "I am the way, the truth, and the life". (John 14:6)
Is it reasonable to believe that Jesus is the embodiment of the law that
bringeth life, even the Gospel? And that Gospel or law was with Ancient Israel,
at least to some extent? And that if we are to become joint-heirs with Him we
too must become "like Him" embodiments of the law?
The Laws Rejection but Ultimate Return
Going back to
Ancient Israel and Moses we find him telling them, "I know that after my
death ye will utterly corrupt yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I
have commanded you;" (Duet. 31:29) "And it shall come to pass, when
all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have
set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations,
whither the Lord thy God hath driven thee, And shalt return unto the Lord thy
God, and obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and
thy children, with all thine heart, and with all
2.
thy soul; That then the Lord thy
God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion on thee, and will return and
gather thee from all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath scattered
thee." (Duet. 30:1-3)
When Moroni came
to Joseph Smith he "quoted part of the third chapter of Malachi, and he
quoted also the fourth or last chapter of the same". (DHC Vol. I page 12)
Malachi 3:7 reads: "Even from the days of your fathers are ye gone away
from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me and I will return
unto you, saith the Lord of hosts." [Mention is made in this chapter about robbing God in tithess and offerings.
Are we with our understanding of the Law of Consecration i.e. a full or true
tithe, still robbing God?] And Malachi 4:4 reads: "Remember ye the law of
Moses my servant, which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, with the
statutes and judgements."
A Different
Arrangement or Order
If the ancient
kingdom of Israel was the kingdom of Jesus Christ then why did he say his
kingdom was "not of this world"?
The word world used in this instance was actually the Greek word Kosmos,
Cosmos to us, indicating the order of things. His kingdom is simply not of the
order or arrangement as the kingdoms of this world are. Further substantiation
comes from Joseph Smith stating "It will not be by gun or sword that this
kingdom will roll on: the power of truth is such that all nations will be under
the nessecity of obeying the Gospel." (TPJS page 366) Compare Joseph's
words to the words of our Saviour; "if
my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, ... To this
end was I born ... that I should bear witness unto the truth." (John
18:3637)
Although this
may seem ludicrous and completely unrealistic it is simply, like Jesus, of a
different "order of things". Consider "A government comprised of
murderers, rapists and theives who murdered their way to power; then murdered
millions and, after more than forty years, is still murdering in order to
retain it, is not a legitimate government [but] ... There is one sphere in
which Communists excel, and that is in propaganda. And yet this sphere is by
far the most important for it is not governments, not wealth, not power but
opinion that rules this world; and governments, with all their wealth and power
respond to it. No less a statesman than Abraham Linclon acknowledged this when
he stated; "In this and like communities public sentiment is everything.
With public sentiment nothing can fail; without it nothing can succeed;
consequently he who moulds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts
statutes and decisions. He makes statutes and decisions possible or impossible
to be executed." ... without the support of public opinion, even a
statesman of Linclon's stature conceded he could accomplish nothing. >From
this it follows ... we can never hope for a really effective anti‑Communist
[anti-Satanic] government unless anti‑Communism [anti-Satanism]gains the
upper hand in the realm of thought." (Thugs and Communists supplement
pages 9‑10)
Since "Only
the truth can uniformly and consistently agree with itself and with nature;
while all false principles are internally at variance with themselves, and
externally contradict the testimony of experience which, at every step, records
its silent protest." Schopenhauer (ibid. page 53); and since Communism
stands squarely on lies and deception, having been established by such; then it
should seem perfectly natural that the kingdom of God should come forth by the
power of truth?
3.
Summary
Jesus Christ said His kingdom was not of this world, meaning
it was not after the order of this world. That His kingdom was and is to be an
earthly kingdom can be seen in ancient Israel and its restoration in the latter
days, "be unto me a kingdom" (Exodus 19:6). If His kingdom had been
of
this world His servants would
have fought for Him, but He came into the world to "bear witness unto the
truth". It is by the power of truth that the kingdom of Jesus Christ will
roll forth. This is seen as a rational and reasonable approach as it is by
public opinion that the world and its governments turn. The Communists, and all
other ungodly governments and entities, accomplishing their designs by
manipulating public opinion via their lies and deception. As lies are
constantly in contradiction one with another, and truth alone is consistent, it
is inevitable that truth should roll forth like the stone cut out of the
mountain without hands. Truth being
greater than lies must ultimately triump, and when truth triumps so also shall
the kingdom of God triump over the kingdoms of this world.
4.
Chapter 2.
What
is America?
The
Constitution
America could be
thought of as land with all the life resing thereon both of animals and plants;
including the people with all their structures ect. And though certain animals
and plants may be endemic (native only to this land), and certain structures
may be found nowhere else, it is not in these things that America is to be
truly comprehended. America is is to be comprehended in its
Constitution/government which was established by the people; the two being
virtually one and the same.
Memshahlah ‑ Government - Misrah - People
Joseph Smith
explained that "Every man is a government of himself". (DHC vol. 6
page 292) John Taylor reiterated this, saying, "... we are the people of
God; we are his government." (JD 5:187) In Young's Analytical Concordance
there are two words for government in Hebrew; Black's Law Dictionary also gives
two definitions: 1. The constitution, body of law, statutes ect. This
corresponds with the Hebrew word "Memshahlah" which in English would be "rule". 2. The officers who give the laws
application. This corresponds with the Hebrew word "Misrah" which in
English would be "princely
power"
Perhaps James Madison made the point best in
asking, "But what is government itself but the greatest of all reflections
on human nature?" (The Five Thousand Year Leap page 165) A government (nation)
is only a reflection of its base parts, the people. To comprehend our
government, the Constitution, we must first comprehend the people,our
forefathers, their background, and upon what principles they were based.
A
Holy Commonwealth
"When the
Pilgrims and Puritans came to America they hoped to find more than freedom of
religion. In Holland there was no persecution;
they had their freedom. The Mayflower Compact and other such documents
leave no question as to their purpose. They were seeking to re‑establish
with themselves the covenant relationship that had existed in ancient Israel
where He was their God and they were His people. Having been persecuted in
England they went thither to Holland but found, in their quest, that as a
church seeking to serve God was not enough. They had to be a separate and
distinct people whose laws (civil) were those given by God. ""... the
idea of a covenant or contractural relationship was the central and pivotal idea
of the organization of the church." ... It was inevitable that the
theologians who wrote about church government and sacred history would also
write about the origins and limitations of civil government and would apply the
same principles. The Pilgrims and Puritans who came to Massachusetts attempted
to put their Christian ideals into practice in civic life. In the Mayflower
Compact, the Pilgrims agreed to "covenant and combine [them]selves
together in to a civil body politic" ... . Their intent was to establish a
theocracy ‑ a "Holy Commonwealth." "... the settlers of
Guilford, Mass., organized their town government by "gathering together in
a church way." The "Fundamental Orders" adopted by the river
towns of Conn. in Jan. 1639, which has been called "the first written
constitution in history," opened with the explicit acknowledgement that
"God requires" his people to form their civil government "by
common consent according to God." ... "The New England Clergy
preserved, extended, and popularized the essential
5.
doctrines of ... the fundamental
principle of American Constitutional law". Covenant theology put
individual rights of conscience [obedience to God] at the top of the list of
moral duties where prior philosophies had put obedience to established
authority.
The Americam
Wilderness was settled by God‑fearing people who came to establish a
"Holy Commonwealth." To merit the blessings of God, they beleived
they had to be virtuous. ... They clearly believed that God expected
"strict obedience" of his laws if they were to enjoy his blessing in
their new land. By the time of the American Revolution, the oppressions of the
British government were viewed as God's punishment for iniquity, as well as a
trial of the faith and obedience of his American Israel. ... "The
eighteenth‑century mind was thoroughly convinced that a popularly based
government 'cannot be supported without virtue.'"
The principles
of constitutionalism and covenant were of little benefit to anyone while the
government denied their validity and prevented their implementation. Thus,
perhaps the greatest contribution of covenant theology and theologians was ...
the practical political establishment of the Constitution of the United States.
... They firmly believed that the new world was a special land of opportunity
prepared and reserved by God for his special purposes, and that they had been
brought by the hand of God to work his will in this chosen land. ... After the
war, "American destiny" became a "civil religion." The war
was seen as another Exodus from Egypt, and Washington was considered to be the
Moses of the new world.
The clergy believed in a constitutional God who grounded
his universe in laws that could be perceived and understood by rational men,
who administered his immutable laws in conformity with natural‑law
reason. Covenant theologians believed that the will of God was manifest through
reason and nature as well as divine revelation. ... The thinking of the
covenant clergyman was markedly legalistic: "He started with a written
document; he applied his logical faculties to its interpretation, and to the
application of its teachings and its examples or precedents." If God's
holy laws could be written in the Bible, then man's basic covenants could also
be written. ... For more than a century after the first colonies were planted
in the New World, ministers, as a class, exercised predominant leadership in
civic and social affairs, as well as ecclesiastical matters. [Ancient Sumaria
had Priest‑Kings, Israel was to be a nation of priests and kings]
... American
revolutionary history are filled with stories of the colorful, firebrand,
liberty‑preaching clergymen of the day, such as the pastor of the German
church in the Shenandoah Valley, who, after preaching from Ecclesiastes 3:8
("A time of war, and a time of peace") ended his sermon with the
declaration: "There is a time to fight and the time is here."
Removing his clerical gown, he appeared in a colonel's uniform; whereupon,
three hundred men of his congregation enlisted under him.
The most
fundamental concepts and institutions that were incorporated into the
Constitution of the United States evolved out of the values, and institutions
of covenant theology, including popular sovereignty, limited government, and
the notion of supreme, immutable law." (The Constitution as a Covenant by
Lynn Wardle / Brigham Young University Studies, Vol. 27, Summer 87, #3)
Thus we see
America as a people deeply grounded in their relationship or covenants with God
i.e. their religion. The Constitution of the United States, being a reflection
of that people, is therefore
quintessentialy religious. For those who might find the thought of the
Constitution being a religious
document ridiculous or repulsive,
perhaps a look at history is in order.
6.
Heavenly
Intervention
"... we find in Jefferson's writings and in writings of
others of our Founding Fathers, that upon numerous occasions heavenly
intervention helped to establish this nation. ... on one occasion George
Washington was almost completely surrounded by the enemy; he had no hope of
escape; he was cut off from all supplies and all assistance. ... at that
critical moment a fog rolled in and blinded the enemy long enough for Washington
and his troops to escape.
On another
occasion ... the British troops were sailing up the rivers on both sides and
were about to execute a pincer movement behind Washington and his men. Then, just
as the British were about to get into position, the wind ceased. Their ships
lay helpless in the water ... there was no wind with which to make the final
move ... He escaped again.
... when the
signers of the Declaration of Independance were contemplating the signing of
that document, they began to hesitate, ... their actions would mean the death
penalty if they were caught. ... when they were about to give up, they heard a
voice ring out from the balcony ... The speaker gave one of the most inspiring speeches [part of which was, "... the words of
that parchment can never die! ... The
British king may blot out the stars of God from the sky, but he cannot blot out
His words written on that parchment there. The works of God may perish: His
words never! ... Sign, and not only for yourselves, but for all ages, for that
parchment will be the textbook of freedom, the bible of the rights of man
forever. ... It is truth, your own hearts witness it: God proclaims it. ...
remember this truth ‑ God has given America to be free!" (The
Unknown Who Swayed the Signers of the Declaration of Independence)] ... the
Founding Fathers rushed forward eagerly and signed their names to the
Declaration of Independence. When they had finished, they turned to thank the
gentleman who had given the speech but he was gone. The doors were locked, the
windows were barred, and there were guards posted all around the building ... Yet no one saw him enter or leave and no
one knew who he was nor where he went. Now these occurences are recorded in a
book entitled "The Secret destiny of America".
According to
another book entitled Our Flag ... we can probably deduce that this same
gentleman appeared to Jefferson, Washington, and Franklin as they contemplated
the design of our first flag. ... That design was influenced by the gentleman
known as "the professor" who appeared when they were discussing the
design ... he advised them to include the Union Jack ... He said that later ...
the British symbol would be changed to "a field of blue that would be
filled with stars..." but ..."for now put the Union Jack there and
you will see the results in the war." ... Three days later George
Washington raised the new standard on the flagpole at Cambridge, Mass. As it
reached the top, the British ... camped across the way, viewed it through field
glasses. When they saw its design, the British officers ordered a thirteen gun
salute in honor of that new flag. ... The impact of the new flag began to weigh
upon the minds of the British soldiers and eventually broke their will to
fight.
The gentleman who helped to design the flag, referred to in
Jefferson's journals as the "professor", assisted the Founding
fathers on other occasions also. ... Thomas
Paine and others who were there refer to this stranger. He came again and again
to counsel them." (The American Dream preface pages 15‑17)
"You have
doubtless heard the story of Washington going to the thicket to pray. Well it
was not only true, but he used often to pray in secret for aid and comfort from
God, the interposition of whose Divine Providence brought us safely through
those dark days of tribulation. [During
Washington's, & America's
darkest hours, while at Valley Forge, Washington received a vision, what he
termed "my mysterious visitor" who showed him the future] ... saying,
"Son of the Republic, look
7.
and learn." [He was shown
the revolutionary war, civil war, and a war that is yet to come, wherein] ... "Instantly a light as of a
thousand suns shone down from above me, and pierced and broke into fragments
the dark cloud which enveloped America. At that same moment the angel upon
whose head still shone the word "Union", and who bore our national
flag in one hand and a sword in the other, descended from heaven attended by
legions of bright spirits. These immediately joined the inhabitants of America,
who, I perceived, were well‑nigh overcome ... I found myself once more
gazing upon my mysterious visitor, who ... said, "Son of the Republic,
what you have seen is thus interpreted: Three great perils will come upon the
Republic. The most fearful is the third, passing which the whole world united
shall not prevail against her. ... I started from my seat and felt I had seen a
vision wherein had been shown me the birth, progress and destiny of the United
States." (Vision of George Washington)
During the
Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin sunmitted a motion for prayer:
"how has it happened, Sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of
humbly applying to the father of Lights to illuminate our understandings? In
the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we
had daily prayers in this room for the divine protection. Our prayers, Sir,
were heard ‑ and they were graciously answered ... I have lived a long
time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth,
that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the
ground without his notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without his
aid?" (The Real Benjamin Franklin page 258)
I think it is
plain that America did not rise without the aid of the God of Israel, who had said, "Return unto me, and I will
return unto you". (Malachi 3:7) What then is America, or America to be?
The return of Israel to their God as a kingdom, a Theocracy, a government of
God!
A Theocracy is a Republic
"The
Constitution and laws of the United States resemble a theocracy more closely
than any government now on the earth, ... But few, if any, understand what a
theocratic government is. In every sense of the word, it is a republican
government ..." (Brigham Young JD 6:342)
The Pilgrims
intent was to establish a theocracy ‑ a "Holy Commonwealth".
(BYU Studies) Webster's Dictionary defines commonwealth: a nation, state, or other political unit
[that is]: a: one founded on law ["supreme, immutable law"]
and united by compact or tacit agreement of the people for the common good b:
one in which supreme authority is vested in the people c: Republic. The
Mormon people with Brigham Young at their head sought to establish a theocracy
via the State of Deseret. In its Constitution it states, "it is a
fundamental principle in all Republican Governments, that all political power
is inherent in the People ...".
The covenant
theologians of early America who studied and wrote about church government
eventually took the same principles and applied them to civil government.
Joseph Smith, referring to ancient Israel
said "Their government was a theocracy ... in both civil and
ecclesiastical affairs; they were both one, there was no distinction; so will
it be when the purposes of God shall be accomplished" (TPJS page 252);
showing the covenant theologians to be right on point, Thus, as "all
political power is inherent in the people", so then must all ecclesiastical power be inherent in the people,
else why have a nation of priests and kings?
Higher Priesthood Equals Titles of Nobility
Joseph Smith
explained "This, then, is the nature of the Priesthood; every man holding the
8.
Presidency of his dispensation,
and one man holding the Presidency of
them all". (TPJS page 169)
"This,
then, is the nature [inherent character of] of the Priesthood [authority to act
in the name of God or His government ... see John Taylor, JD 22:291]; every man
holding Presidency [having power to exercise
guidance direction, or controle] of his dispensation ["power and
authority to dispense the word of God, and to administer in all the ordinances
thereof], and one man holding Presidency [having power to exercise guidance,
direction, or controle] of them all".
["Now, I
ask, what is a dispensation? I answer, it is power and authority to dispense
the word of God, and to administer in all the ordinances thereof." (DHC
vol. 3 page 50)]
Here we have the
Priesthood, which is the government of God, which is a theocracy, which is a
republic; wherein "all political power is inherent in the People".
And what are the proper limits of power of the People/Elders? "... the
proper functions and limits of government ‑ that is, two or more persons
acting together have no right whatever to do collectively anything that is
forbidden to the individuals in the group. ... Thus the principle of collective
right ‑ its reason for existing, its lawfulness ‑ is based on
individual right." (Frederic Bastiat: Ideas and Influence pages 2‑3)
"... there
is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this
priesthood are conferred". (D&C 132:7) What power then does this one
man hold that the People/ Elders do not? Seeing all power is inherent in the
Elders [by virtue of the priesthood which they hold individually], the answer
is none. But as "The greatest temporal and spiritual blessings, which always
come from faithfulness and concerted
effort, never attended individual exertion or enterprise" (TPJS page 183)
the answer must be that "one man at a time", "holding Presidency
of them all", must hold the concerted power of all the
People/Elders; receiving his power from them [that is in the united or concentrated
powers of the priesthood]. So in Priesthood as in U.S. Government, higher
office denotes higher authority, yet the higher authority or power comes from
the body wherein "all ... power is inherent".
The difficulty
in comprehending this subject has to do with the diversity of offices [labels]
within the identical, or one priesthood. "I now give unto you the
officers belonging to my Priesthood ... patriarch ...presiding elder ...Twelve
... high priests ... elders ... seventies ... The above offices I have given
unto you ... for governments". (D&C 124:123‑143) The
label priesthood also has the label of government. The label offices also has
the label governments. Thus the Priesthood, priesthood offices, as well as the
individuals holding said Priesthood and or offices, can be synonymous. This
should not seem strange as we have a government of the United States yet when
we deal with the Mayor, Judge, or Police we consider we are dealing with the
government, and rightly so. Consider:
"The office [government] of an elder comes under the priesthood
[government] of Melchizedek. The Melchizedek Priesthood [government] holds the
right of presidency, and has power and
authority over all the offices [governments] in the church". (D&C
107:7‑8) Thus the office of "elder" has the power and authority
to function in all offices ... "all ... power is inherent in the
People[Elders]" There is nothing more! And why is this?
"What
ordination should a man receive to possess all the keys and powers of the Holy
Priesthood that were delivered to the sons of Adam? He should be ordained an Apostle of Jesus Christ. That office
puts him in possession of every key, every power, every authority, communication,
benefit, blessing, glory, and kingdom that was ever revealed to man. That pertains to the office of an Apostle of
Jesus Christ. ...Suppose that Sidney Rigdon and Frederick G. Williams had been
taken away or had apostatized, as one of them did soon after the revelation I
have referred to was given, and there had been only Joseph Smith left of the
First Presidency, would he alone have had authority
9.
to set in order the kingdom of
God on the earth? Yes. Again:
Suppose that eleven of the Twelve had been taken away by the power of
the Adversary, that one Apostle has the same power that Joseph had, and could
preach, baptize, and set in order the whole kingdom of God upon the earth, as
much so as the Twelve, were they all together.
Again: If in the providence of
God he should permit the Enemy to destroy these two first Quorums, and then
destroy the Quorum of Seventy, all but one man, what is his power? It would be to go and preach, baptize,
confirm, lay on hands, ordain, set in order, build up, and establish the whole
kingdom of God as it is now. Can we go
any further? Yes; and I think you will
see the reason of it, and how easy it is to be understood, and see the propriety
of it. ... Suppose the Enemy had power
to destroy all but one of the High Priests from the face of the earth, what
would that one possess in the power of his Priesthood? He would have power and authority to go and
preach, baptize, confirm, ordain, and set in order the kingdom of God in all
its perfection on the earth. Could he
do this without revelation? No. Could the Seventies? No.
Could the Twelve? No. And we ask, Could Joseph Smith or the First
Presidency do this without revelation?
No; not one of them could do such a work without revelation direct from
God. I can go still further. Whoever is ordained to the office of an
Elder to a certain degree possesses the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood; and
suppose only one Elder should be left on the earth, could he go and set in order
the kingdom of God? Yes, by revelation."
(JD 9:88-89, Brigham Young) I answer: It is because in having the Priesthood,
which is the power behind all of the offices, one has as much priesthood power
as can be had, to excercise over his family and in whatever office(s) he may be
called to serve.
Since the church
is only the people, the kingdom is only the people, the priesthood is only the
people, and all power lies only in the people; claims of "Higher
Priesthood or Authority" must be
authority that corrresponds with the authority of the individual priesthood
holder. "... the proper functions and limits of government ‑ that
is, two or more persons acting together have no right whatever to do
collectively anything that is forbidden to the individuals in the group. ...
Thus the principle of collective right ‑ its reason for existing, its
lawfulness ‑ is based on individual right." (Frederic Bastiat: Ideas
and Influence pages 2‑3) Any claims made contrary to this would be to
establish "Titles of Nobility" under the guise of Priesthood, which
is forbidden in the Constitution, and our God.
Separation of
Church and State
If America
is basicly a theocracy wherein civil
and ecclesiastical affairs are one, why was it not so established in the
beginning? Perhaps before answering the question we should ascertain if the
above is true. If President Clinton were a part of the body of Christ would he
have homosexuals in the military? Would he have condoms and sex education, ect.
in our schools? Would he have sanctioned the action at Waco? Would he be
pushing for Hillery's health care program? I think it is safe to say that every
bit of our politics is directly linked to our religion, ... our belief in God
and his laws.
So why wasn't
there a union of Church and State in the beginning of our nation? I have concluded that it was nesessary to make the
transition in stages; the Pilgrims ect. coming to America and having a degree
of religious freedom was a step towards establishing the United States where a
full freedom of religion could be had, at least in theory. Thomas Jefferson
stated, "I hold the precepts of Jesus ... to be the most pure, benevolent,
and sublime which have ever been preached to man. ... and consider all
subsequent innovations as corruptions of His religion ... If the freedom of
religion
10.
guaranteed to us by law in theory
can ever rise in practice under the over bearing inquisition of public opinion,
truth will prevail over fanaticism, and the genuine doctrines of Jesus, so long
perverted by His pseudo‑priests, will again be restored to their original
purity ... but to late for me to witness". (The Real Thomas Jefferson page
366)
As we look at
the history of Joseph Smith and the church we can see that there was indeed an
inquisition of public opinion. Had the law also been against God's church it
should not have had a chance. A union of church and state wielded by pseudo‑priests
would have most certainly wielded its power against the church of Christ. Yet,
it may be asked, what will be the difference if the church of Christ wields
that power?
Creeds of the Fathers
... Superstition
Jefferson
answers this question magnificently; "It is error alone which needs the
support of government. Truth can stand by itself." (ibid. page 645) What
did Jesus say to Pilate? "To this end was I born ... that I should bear
witness unto the truth." (John 18:36‑37) And Joseph Smith, "It
will not be by the gun or sword that this kingdom will roll on: the power of
truth is such that all nations will be under the necessity of obeying the
Gospel (which is both civil and ecclesiastical law). (TPJS page 366) The Lord
tells us the "influence of ... the creeds of the fathers, who have
inherited lies, upon the hearts of the children ... is now the very mainspring
of all corruption". (D&C 123:7) The religious influence that pervades
the world is the "mainspring" of all the corruption that exists.
An example of
this can be seen easily in India where "Superstition, among the Indian
peoples, knows few boundary lines of condition or class. Women in general are
prone to beleive that disease is an evidence of the approach of a god. Medicine
and surgery, driving the god away, offend him, and it is ill business to offend
the Great Ones; ... Therefore, when a woman is seen to be about to breath her
last, her child yet undelivered ‑ she may have lain for days in labor for
a birth against which her starveling bones are locked ‑ the dhai, as in
duty bound, sets to work upon precautions for the protection of the family.
First she brings pepper and rubs it into the dying eyes, that the soul may be
blinded and unable to find its way out. Then she takes two long iron nails,
and, ... drives a spike straight through each palm fast to the floor. This is done to pinion the soul to the
ground ... that it may not rise and wander, vexing the living." (Thugs and
Communists page 72)
In the same book
Spinoza is quoted, "As the mind's understanding is smaller, ... so will
its power of coining fictions be larger, whereas, as its understanding
increases, its capacity for entertaining fictitious ideas becomes less."
Joseph ran into this within the church,
"there has been a great difficulty in getting anything into the heads of
this generation. ... I have tried for a number of years to get the minds of the
saints prepared to receive the things of God; but we frequently see some of
them, after suffering all they have for the work of God, will fly to pieces
like glass as soon as anything comes that is contrary to their
traditions". (TPJS page 331) Is it any wonder that Joseph should say, "I do many things to break down
superstition". (TPJS page 193)
Called to be ... Ahman Christ ... God Anointed Ones ...
Priesthood
Though the
Constitution should be written, and the true church of Christ established,
there can be no true kingdom of God until there is found a body of men who will
set aside their superstitions, overcome their ignorance, and put upon
themselves the priesthood (government) of God. (see D&C 113:8) That
thousands have been called to the priesthood there is no doubt. That "the
11.
rights of the priesthood ... may
be conferred upon us, it is true: but ... We have learned by sad experience
that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a
little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise
unrighteous dominion. Hence many are called but few are chosen." (D&C
121:36‑40)
When Joseph
organized the Kingdom of God shortly before his demise, reason infers, he chose from among the many
who had been called. The title of the Kingdom was, "'The Kingdom of God
and His Laws, with the Keys and power thereof, and Judgment in the hands of his
Servants, Ahman Christ'; ... when condensed to its "Key Word" ‑
"Ahman Christ" ‑ means, according to the Mormon lexicon,
"God Anointed Ones". (BYU Studies) Back to labels. The members of the
Council of Fifty, i.e. the Kingdom of God, were "Ahman Christ(s)" or
"God Anointed Ones"; when one is called to the Priesthood i.e. the government of God i.e. an office,
officiating or acting for God, as God, Saviours on Mt. Zion, ect.; does it not
make sense that when one has become a part of the body of Christ (God), that
they are then a part of God, and being a part of God what does that make them excepting Gods
themselves? Jesus quoting the scriptures stated, "He (God) called them
gods, unto whom the word of God came"; "the rights of the priesthood
are inseparably connected with the
powers of heaven", thus making a (functional) priesthood holder a god
according to the words of Jesus Christ. We have already determined it is one
thing to be called, and another to be chosen, and it is plain that if the
priesthood is functional it must have a connection with heaven. According to
Nephi, being connected to the Holy Ghost is equivalent to "feast[ing] on
the words of Christ", and what can be more than that; recieving directions
from our own dear Saviour? (II Nephi 32:3) And this is needed because
"When a man is called to the Priesthood, he is then and there ordained to
put down evil. [No unrighteous dominion] ... The world are to comprehend God
through us. As God was said to be "written in the face of Jesus
Christ" so he is to be told out and made plain in our words and ways."
(Mil. Star 20:641‑644 John Taylor)
Even though the Council of Fifty eventually
ended, the kingdom of God shall not end as long as there is one righteous Elder
on the face of the earth. What is lacking is not ordinations. What is lacking
is those who having been ordained/called, to the priesthood, failing to
overcome the "mainspring" of all corruption, superstition, and in
failing they thereby invariably assert "unrighteous dominion". As
long as those who have been called to represent God will [metaphoricly] rub
pepper in the eyes of those seeking light, and nail to the ground the hands of
those whose desire it is to serve Him, they will not be chosen, the kingdom
will not be conferred upon them, and Zion will not come.
Put on thy
Strength O Zion and Every Knee Shall Bow
When Isaiah's
admonition is heeded, "which saith: Put on thy strength, O Zion ...
[which] is to put on the authority of the priesthood" which we have a
right to by ordination as well as "a right to by lineage" (D&C
113:7‑8), as did the Founding Fathers of this nation; then will, and this
is the only way that God has given, for
Zion to come. "It was accepted Mormon doctrine that the political kingdom of God was to be
established by human efforts rather than through divine intervention. [Perhaps
this would be best said "with Divine help" as was the United States,
as] ... it was also believed that more or less concurrently with the
establishment of this kingdom, a conflict would erupt, destroying the
governments of the world". (Mill. Star XXIV (1862) pp. 337‑338)
"And it
shall come to pass among the wicked, that every man that will not take up his
sword against his neighbor must needs flee unto Zion for safety. ... and it
shall be the only people that shall not be at war one with another."
(D&C 45:68‑69) If those who flee to Zion are from "among
12.
thewicked" then Zion is
definately not an exclusive country club wherein only the pure and righteous
shall reside; at least not at first. Yet who is the King of Zion? And what are
its laws? Before the wicked enter into Zion they will bow the knee to its
soveriegn, and will swear (covenant) to keep His laws. (see Isaiah 45:23)
The Kingdom
In one sense one
might consider that the United States will be no more, yet what is the United
States ... America? Its Constitution which guarantees the "rights ... of
all flesh". (D&C 101:77) Those eternal principles embodied in that
document are inherently those of the kingdom, and though a more perfect order
will be established, it should be considered more of a transition of the
kingdom than the destruction of the one and the rise of another. Yet America as
we see it today, corrupted and going in defiance of the Constitution itself,
will be destroyed; while Zion will gather to it all who support the eternal
principles of the Constitution ... free agency ... the rights of man. Whether
or not one is a member of the church (body) of Christ they will have the same
"rights ... of all flesh". What should we expect to see in Zion? The
same basic things that were hoped for
when the Pilgrims came to America, and what Jefferson had revealed to him when
these United States of America were formed. A true church, a true government
... pure and unmitigated truth!It is the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is
the law of the universe that holds all things in motion. It is that which will
set us free. It is America! It is Mormonism!
And if we will ... it is us!!!
13.
Chapter 3.
Render unto
Ceasar?
Nessecity, Willingness,
or Ignorance
"Render
therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things
that are God's." (Matthew 22:21) This scripture has established, in mens
minds, as unalterable fact, that we should pay homage to the powers that be, as
well as serve God. However Jesus said "No man can serve two masters ...
Ye cannot serve God and mammon."
(Matthew 6:24) This is not an area that can be easily cut and dried for
certainly there are things we all must do that pays some homage to
Ceasar/Mammon. Yet is it because of nessecity, willingness, or ignorance that
this is so?
Under Duress
That we are held
hostage, as it were, makes the nessecity of "rendering unto Caesar"
an action of ours born of duress. Homage paid under such circumstances cannot
be considered either legal or binding; leaving one, in reality serving but one
master, Jesus Christ. Though this appears to answer the question and indeed be
the end of the issue it must be remembered that when a hostage is presented
with an opportunity to escape said duress and willingly remains he is no longer
a hostage making his homage legal and binding. This leaves him in a position of
seeking to serve two masters which Jesus said could not be done. I ask, is it
because of ignorance that we are under duress? Or do we simply will it to be
so?
The Tithe is the Lord's
As with all coins,
there are two sides; though we are told to render unto Caesar, we must remember
we are also to render unto God the things that are God's. Virtually all will
agree that the tithe is the Lord's. But what is the tithe? It is designated
as a tenth of ones increase, income, ect. in dictionaries and such. Yet is
this so?
The Lord says,
"I require all their surplus property ... And this shall be the
beginning of the tithing of my people." (D&C 119:1‑2) Here
the Lord designates "all ...
surplus property" as tithing; yet this is only the "beginning".
This revelation was given after the saints had been driven from Jackson County
for not living the Law of Consecration about which the Lord stated, "It is contrary to the will and
commandment of God that those who receive not their inheritance by
consecration, ... that he may tithe his people, to prepare them against the
day of vengance and burning, should have their names enrolled with the people
of God." (D&C 85:3)"The Lord has told us, that it is required of
every man in this Church to lay all things, not one‑tenth alone, but to
lay all things ... consecrate the whole of it ‑‑ everything he has
... they are the Lord's" (Orson Pratt JD 2:98) This is also corroborated
by Temple covenants, made even more plain in that, all of our time, talents,
ect. are all to be consecrated to the Lord for his purposes. The Lord informs
his people that none are exempt from the Law of Consecration and that those who
will not live this law should be cut off or not have their names enrolled with
the people of God. (see D&C 51:2, 70:10, 85:3) Here again, while speaking
of consecration, which required all, the Lord uses the word tithe. From the
above we find that tithe means: 1. a tenth 2. a persons surplus 3. everything. What
can be deduced from the above is that the tithe is anything that belongs to the
Lord period. Therfore those who
faithfully pay their tithes i.e. 1/10th beleiving "he that is tithed shall not be burned" (D&C 64:23
also see Malachi 3 & 4) may not
have the foolproof fire insurance
they beleive they have.
14.
The Law
Researching the
Law of Consecration is difficult, even among the Twelve there were differences
of opinion. Orson Pratt was very clear in his beleif that all
properties consecrated were to be held in trust by the church. Though it is
broadly beleived that the individual
stewards were to have the deeds to their stewardships, deeds being held
by individuals (Doctrines of the
Kingdom page 230) was a pattern which
came over two years after the Law of Consecration was initially revealed (D&C 42), and some five, six, months prior to the Saints being driven from Jackson County,
Missouri. The evidence seems to infer that individual deeds was a concession
given by the Lord to rebellious Saints,
for the purpose of trying to
make it easier for them to make good, which they did not do.
The Church / Body of Christ
According to
Pratt all the properties were to be deeded
to the Church and held in trust, for the Lord. This idea is very
repugnant to those who have studied the Constitution and comprehend the ownership of property as a key ingredient in sustaining our liberty. To
their understanding allowing the church to hold all the property would be
tantamount to returning to the Dark Ages.
Yet to truely understand this issue one must understand the Church The question should not be asked, what is
the Church, but who is the Church? The Lord says "whosoever repenteth and
cometh unto me, the same is my church." (D&C 10:67) This establishes
each individual within the church as the church. "So we, being many, are
one body in Christ, and every one members one of another." (Romans 12:5)
The chief reason
people dislike, and rightly fear, the
idea of not having property in their own names is that the entity who holds the
property has the ability to controle, and to enslave them via the property. Yet
what entity holds the property, in trust? The Church! Who is the Church? Every member of the body.
As long as the
Church is looked upon as an outside entity [something other than ourselves and
people we love and trust] this fear will exist, and for good reason. Only as
the Church is comprehended as an innate part of ones self, as well as visa
versa, does one realize the right of controle [rights and responsibilities]
which each individual holds as a part of the Church.
Our concept
seems to be that the President is the embodiment of the church with autocratic
powers. Yet, "inasmuch as a President of the High Priesthood [President of
the Church] shall transgress, he shall
be had in remembrance before the common council of the church ... Thus,
none shall be exempted from the justice and the laws of God". (D&C
107:82‑84) Although the President holds a very high and exalted position
in reality he is only one member of the church (body of Christ. "And all
things shall be done by common consent in the church". (D&C 26:2)As in
the United States the power is in the
vote and each member has as much power as any other, irregardless of office or
position. Who then holds these properties in trust for the Lord? Who is to be
held responsible for negligence, waste, ect.? As members of the body of Christ
we not only have our personal stewardships, but stand also as stewards over the
whole. The Body of Christ is remarkable in its oneness or unity. Yet its
economic unity is something that few if any truely understand. Yet a gleam of
it was seen by some;, "In reality, said Bastiat, capital is always put at
the service of other people who do not own it ... In that important sense, all
capital is truely owned in common by the entire community ‑ and the
greater the accumulation of capital, the more its benefits are shared in
common." (Frederic Bastiat: Ideas and Influence page 31)
15.
Although
Capitalism is hailed as a system that produces wealth in abundance, and rightly
so, it is also the system that allows great wealth to be accumulated in the
hands of a few. It is at the hands of these few that our greatest danger comes
as nearly "every man has his price". Communism would be a thing of
the past if Capitalism had not had not succored and nourished it. Only as a
body in Christ does our salvation come, spiritually, economicly, and in every other way.
Catching a Glimpse
The people were
unwilling to live the Lord's economic
law and the Lord began to whittle, as it were, at his law(s), to find where the
Saints might finally begin. Yet in 1838, five years after the saints were driven from Jackson County, it was
considered that "All kinds of necessary articles will soon be manufactured
... that we may be under no nessecity of purchasing of our enemies. ... The
operation of these firms enables a man to get a comfortable house in a very few
days, when he gets about it, first by working for the firm for 70 or 80 days,
then the firm turns out stone cutters, teams, carpenters, masons, etc., to
complete the house and nearly everything is paid for by the man's own labor ...
arrangements will soon be made that a person can get every necessity to eat,
drink, live in, and to wear, ... and the best part of it all is that they want
no better pay than labor." (From Journal History of the Church, The United
Order page 76) God intends for us to be "our brother's keeper".
(Genesis 4:9) To "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of
Christ." (Galatians 6:2)
Consider for a
moment where we would be if the people had obeyed the Law of Consecration, and
all properties were held in trust by the Church? Would we owe any taxes on our
lands, homes, vehicles, ect.? As we formed our own communities would we be
hampered by governmental restrictions, codes, regulations, ect.? Would there be
anything, according to the Constitution of the United States of America, where
we would, in any way, by any means, be
obligated, by law, to "render unto Ceasar"? To render anything to any
entity besides our Lord and Master Jesus Christ?
"Although
the law was given "Did the people carry out this law? No. Why? Because
they had imbibed the notions which had prevailed among the people of the whole
earth, and these notions were in direct opposition to the order of heaven. ...
"No I will not consecrate all my property, I will go ... and purchase for
myself, and I will buy largely in order that I may sell to my poor brethren
when they come up here ... and make my fortune." That was the feeling ...
of some of the latter‑day Saints." (Orson Pratt JD 16:5)
Though the
gospel teaches us to love one another and to use things, instead we love things
and use each other. This is caused by "covetousness one of the three most
disgraceful things, ... meaning literally "a desire to have more."
... all of the wisdom literature are based upon the promise that God will
provide enough, and the righteous individual, who is liberal with his God‑given
possessions, always has the blessings of life. The covetous and the righteous
are contrasted, the one greedy for more, the other making generous use of his
material possessions". (Smith's Bible Dictionary) "Ye cannot serve
God and mammon." (Matthew 6:24) [Do we even want to beleive it?]
A Stone Cut Out of the Mountain
Until the United
States, unconstitutionaly, broke the political power of the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter day Saints, wherever it went, it was a political power. In
Jackson County violence broke out when they tried to prevent
"Mormons" from voting. Nauvoo
became the largest City in Illinios, wielding such political power that without
the "Mormon vote" politicians could not hope to win.Yet that
political power was only broken because
the body of Christ was not one, and that in
16.
many ways. As with the Nephites
of old there is the church of God and those who profess to belong to the church
of God. (see Helaman 3:33) What is the difference? The one will have kept their
covenants and have the Spirit, the
other will not. The Spirit leads to the fountain of all truth, that truth leads
to freedom, spiritualy and politically.
The church was broken politically; which in its fall also eliminated
plural marraige, and the United Order, as they were political issues. Yet who
is the church? And is its power, in any way broken? When the Priesthood counsel
is given to be "politically active" what can that mean?
Is the stone
referred to by Daniel essentially any different than the church? And how is it
to roll forth and fill the whole earth? Shall not this nation, gifted to us by
our founding fathers, not yet become the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ? Is it not in our power to bring the communities, of which we are a
part, within the bounds of their proper Constitutional limits? Or is it not in
our power to form communities that function according to the law and order of
God? Is it not in our power to roll forth, by the power of truth, and begin to
fill the earth, though we might begin in a very small way?
Summary
Though we hold to
the concept that we should "render unto Ceasar" and that the tithe is
the Lord's; in not having a full comprehension of what the Lord means by these
things, our concepts are mechanically false. The Lord does not require a tenth
but the whole of our properties and even of ourselves.
As members of
the body of Christ i.e. the church, we
find ourselves responsible not only for
our individual stewardships but also for the whole as "all things are to be done by common consent", we
having as much power [in our vote] as anyone, the President of the church not
excepted.
In rendering to
the Lord his just due we find nothing left to "render unto Ceasar".
This is especially true in the United States where, according to the
Constitution, "Congress shall make no law respecting ... religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof".
On this
principle we can see the stone as ourselves, cut out of the mountain, without
hands i.e. directed by the Spirit and
not man, with small beginnings rolling forth to fill the whole earth.
Had the body of
Christ, the Church, been willing to be one, to abide by the Law of Consecration,
there would be no need of rendering to
Ceasar, there would be no economic want, there would be no Saints held hostage,
or under duress.
17.
Chapter
4.
When Will It
Come?
"A Stone Was Cut Out
Without Hands"
Daniel speaks of
"the God of heaven set[ting] up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed" signified as a
"stone .. cut out of the mountain without hands" and "became a
great mountain and filled the whole earth." (Daniel 2:44, 45, & 35)
A stone cut out
of the mountain without hands indicates that it is not the work of man, but of
God. Though outwardly men might do the work, it is something beyond them,
greater than their intellect could devise, and greater than their ability to
accomplish.
It has been said
the Founding Fathers in establishing the Constitution cut the stone out of the
mountain as they had not had hands laid on them, or been given the priesthood.
The fact does exist that many nations have emulated their Constitution.
Joseph Smith
said, "I calculate to be one of the intruments of setting up the kingdom of Daniel by the word
of the Lord, and I intend to lay a
foundation that will revolutionize the whole world." (TPJS page 366) In
1844 Joseph Smith organized the Kingdom of God, commonly called the Council of
Fifty, "the singular importance of the Council of Fifty is that it reveals
Joseph Smith Jr., as Mormonism's greatest Constitutionalist. The 1844 minutes
of the Council contain hundreds of
pages of the Prophet's teachings about the meaning of the U.S. Constitution and
the application of that document to the Latter‑day Saints in the world
and during the Millenium." (BYU Studies 20 (Winter 1980)
It might make
for an interesting discussion whether the stone was cut out when the U.S.
Constituton was ratified, when Joseph organized the Council of Fifty, or we
might even want to go back to when the Pilgrims drew up the "Mayflower
Compact". Yet I think it is worthy of note that Joseph's statement was
that he intended to lay a foundation, and though a foundation is surely a part
of the edifice, I do not believe it is the edifice itself; and surely a peruser of history would not discount the
Founding Fathers nor the Pilgrims as having done preparatory work, or
groundwork, needed prior to laying the foundation. Yet at this point it
certainly doesn't seem that Christ's Millenial reign has begun.
Equality
Thomas Jefferson
wrote in the Declaration of Independance that "all men are created
equal". King Arthur had a round
table where all were seated as equals. In an Epistle of Paul's he states,
"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in
the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God". (Phil. 2:5)
And Joseph Smith stated that "The mind or intelligence which man possesses
is co‑equal with God himself." (TPJS page 353) It is upon this foundation of equality
that America, Mormonism, and or the Kingdom of God is based.
Critical Elements
The Declaration of Independance is "the textbook of
freedom, the bible of the rights of man forever." (The American Dream page 86) In it Jefferson
dealt with four critical elements of the
kingdom, equality, inalienable
rights [the right of free agency, or individual choice], the principle of
consent, and just powers. Inalienable rights is based on the principle of
equality; for when there is an
18.
inequality (iniquity) it
establishes as fact that some men will have more rights than others; and it
will invariably lead to some ursurpation of some individuals "inalienable
rights".
This of course
precludes government, excepting by "the consent of the governed." [It
is interesting to note that Joseph Smith was intructed to have the
"sanction" or consent of those baptized before being ordained an
elder. (see DHC vol. I page 61)] The principle of consent is doubly based on
equality in that: 1. as equals, no man has the right to act for another without
his first giving that right by consent. 2. As equals this "power of
attorney", thus given, grants no special privledges, bestows no higher
powers, as all powers bestowed are common (equal) powers held by all by virtue
of the equality that exists.
This equality
being a principle of the kingdom of God establishes that, as in God, so, in us
rests the common "just powers" of government. It can also be deduced
that as we act in the name of God, i.e.
a higher power, we are in reality acting for the President of the kingdom,
which is simply to say, for the kingdom itself. Thus the higher power that is
so much touted simply is comprehended in the power of the kingdom at large
which is the concerted or united powers of all within the kingdom, an example
of which is readily discernable in the government of the United States,
especially as it was originally intended.
I think it would
be safe to say that all of us have a false
concept of God which has been enhanced and extended by our environment
and educational systems. That the kingdom of God is the only government that establishes an actual equality, with
its accompanying principles is
astounding! Why? Because whereas the
governments of men do not allow an equality of men one to another, in
the kingdom of God, our Father‑in‑heaven establishes a strict
equality of men on earth with Himself.
These "just
powers" cannot be innumerated as they are as miriad as the stars
themselves, but which can be amply understood in the words of the Lord Himself,
speaking in conjunction with the powers of His government: "That they may
be conferred upon us, it is true, but when we undertake to cover our sins, or
to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to excercise controle or dominion
or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of
unrighteousness, ... Amen to the ... authority of that man." (D&C
121:37)
I believe the
authority conferred upon men by the U.S. Constitution has been so perverted as
to establish as fact that we have no Government of the United States but a De
Facto government that masquerades as such, in effect 'Amen to the ... authority
". I also believe our inability to comprehend these "just
powers" comes from the fact that our only experience in these matters has
been that of a De Facto, i.e. illegitimate, government. Yet the government of
God is a natural, family government. Father‑in‑heaven is indeed,
just that, our father, and as such he stands at the head of the family. When we
elect anyone to any office we elect them to take a father's role for us, in
that office or capacity; thus the "just powers" of government can be
comprehended as the just powers of fatherhood.
The
"generation gap", "spouse abuse", and "breakdown of
the family" is only a clear
indication of our disfunctional ability, as fathers, as government, in its
smallest and most powerful form. I say most powerful form as it is upon this
family structure that everything rests [remember the power of the atom bomb is
caused by messing with those tiny little atoms].
These "just
powers" spoken of by Jefferson are comprehended in the character or
characteristics of Jesus Christ, or are reflections therefrom, as are the men
and women themselves who seek after and
attain these self‑same characteristics i.e. "just
powers". [Accept no substitutes i.e. Clinton and his ilk.]
19.
The Most
Critical Element
The Jews
"had a very definite but false concept of God's character. ... This factor
was so fixed and powerful that it influenced them to reject the Saviour because
He did not perform as their concept of God's character led them to expect and
desire of Him. ... He had the power. Therefore, they reasoned, it was His duty
to use that power to favour them. If He refused to do it, then He was nothing
short of a traitor to His own. They found Him guilty of treason and determined
to be revenged. Because they possessed the character which they believed He
had, they did to Him with the power at their command, what they believed He
should have done to the Romans. ... Thus the question of the character of God
and Christ was the most critical element ... there is a terrible danger that we
will repeat their history by rejecting the message [of the true character of
Jesus Christ] because it does not suit our personal ambitions and dreams."
(from a paper given me by a Seventh Dat Adventist friend) With this we find all
the critical elements of the kingdom wrapped
up in one, the character of God.
A
Living Constitution
When Joseph
Smith established The Kingdom of God he also received its Constitution;
"'Ye are my Constitution and I am your God and ye are my spokesmen,
therefore from henceforth keep my commandments.' ... John Taylor said: These
words are pregnant with meaning & full of intelligence & point out our
position in regard to these matters ‑ it is expected of us that [we] can
act right ‑ that our interests [are] bound up in the kingdom of God. That
we should consider we are not acting for ourselves, but that we are spokesmen
of God selected for that purpose in the interest of God & to bless &
exalt all (humanity). We must acknowledge him as our God and all men who enter
this body must acknowledge him here. ... Orson Pratt ... said: In the Church we
take the Law of God & his Priesthood as the Constitution of his Church ‑
here in this Council we have (a) living constitution not a written one which we
must conform to." (BYU Studies Fall 1980) [It is interesting to note that
the church is a living body, the
kingdom a living stone, and the Priesthood a living constitution.]
Oath and Covenant of the Government
of God (Priesthood)
King Arthur and
his knights had a code of chivalry and each took an oath to abide by the same. With the Constitution
there was also an oath which Washington made or took when taking office. "
'Do you solemnly swear that you will faithfully execute the office of President
of the United States and will, to the best of your ability, preserve, protect,
and defend the Constitution of the United States?' Washington answered,
repeating the oath in first person. Then ... added the words, "So help me,
God," and bowed and kissed the Bible." (The Real George Washington
page 520)
Everyone who is called to serve the people of the United States is also called upon to
"preserve, protect, and
defend the Constitution of the United States." Yet thousands take upon themselves this oath without any apparent
understanding, or committment to the same. Nor is it the written Constitution
that they take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend; it is the the organic
and fundamental law, the basic principles, those things that establish the
character of our nation that they are taking an oath to preserve. (see Blacks
Law Dictionary)What is it then that every officer of the United States takes an
oath to preserve, protect, and defend? The critical elements of the kingdom,
the "unalienable Rights" of man, to hold sacred, in the words of
Washington, "the eternal rules of order and right which heaven itself has
ordained." (The Real George Washington page 523) Let us
20.
remember "whenever any Form
of Government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to
institute new Government".
The government
of God (Priesthood) has an oath and a covenant also. In this we are talking
about more than pledging to preserve,
protect, and defend the principles of equality, inalienable rights,
consent of the governed, and just powers; for no man will have the wisdom,
strength, and ability to do so without attaining to the most critical element
i.e. characteristics of Jesus Christ. In essense it is an oath to be like God,
to act like God, indeed to be a God, in our
dealings with one another, or to fail in ones oath and covenant.
Perhaps it was
said best by John Taylor, in the Millenial Star (20:641‑4).
"When a man is called to the
Priesthood, he is then and there ordained
to put down evil. He is not merely called to form part of a splendid
organization ... We are not called simply that God may have a number of men
called priests upon the earth. No. The Holy Priesthood has been conferred upon
us for the express purpose that the Father and the Son may have representatives
of their Spirit and their actions upon earth. We are ordained and appointed to
act them out. The world are to comprehend God through us. As God was said to be
"written in the face of Jesus Christ" so he is to be told out and
made plain in our words and ways."
Brigham's
Deseret
This was
possibly accomplished most perfectly in Mormondom's State of Deseret. Where "The administration of justice is
[was] of the most simple kind, and based on equity and the merits of the
question, without reference to the precedents and technicalities, referring to
the rules of the Mosaic code, and its manner of punishment, when applicable.
... there is nothing known as the "law's delay", and the quibbles
whereby the ends of truth and justice may be defeated. ... [It was] the duty of
every Justice of the Peace, to examine strictly and faithfully into the merits
and demerits of all civil and criminal cases ... and to execute justice without
respect to persons or favor, or the technicalities of the law, ... Unparalleled
in the history of the times, not a solitary case was reported for trial, before
the regular sessions of either the county or supreme courts ... no offense
beyond the controle of a justice of the peace seems to have been committed ...
partly owing to the requirements of the law, making it the duty of all officers
to seek to allay and compromise differences, instead of promoting litigation."
(The Rise and Fall of the Kingdom of God in Pioneer Days pages 21, & 28)
The Stone Cut Out a
Living Stone!
Jesus Christ is
referred to as "the shepherd, the stone of Israel". (Genesis 49:24;)
"A tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation". (Isaiah
28:16) "The chief corner stone" (Ephesians 2:20) And "a living
stone". (Peter 2:4)
As we become
"the body, the church" (Colossians I 1:18) of Jesus Christ, so also
we become "lively [living] stones ... an holy priesthood". (I Peter
2:5)
The word stone
is used to denote firmness and strength, characteristics of Jesus Christ and
true Christians. An example of which might be the Christian King "Arthur
[who] in his person is the most manly
man alive, and likely to conquer all the world." (King Arthur and
the Knights of the Round Table page 190) This statement made of a legendary
figure, who actually lived, might well be applied to Joseph Smith, to any elder
who takes seriously his covenants and his oath of office, or any man who
desires and attains the characteristics of Jesus Christ, i.e. becomes a living
stone. Why? Because these are the living stones cut out of the mountain without
hands who cannot be held back
21.
but go rolling forth in doing
good and establishing the kingdom [i.e. its principles] within others who in
turn become living stones. How was the stone cut out of the mountain to become
a great mountain and to fill the whole
earth? Not by merely rolling forth but by adding to itself as indeed the
kingdom of God shall surely do, as the stone cut out of the mountain seen and
recorded by Daniel some 2600 years ago.