THE KINGDOM OF GOD

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

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

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?

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

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.