The Perfections of the Godhead

Read the previous post in this series here.

Lecture Five of the Lectures on Faith is where we start getting to the really fascinating doctrine: the Godhead. This is also the lecture that was one of the main excuses the 1921 committee used to remove them from the scriptures. The first reason was that they were "not received as revelations by the prophet Joseph Smith"--so what? He vouched for them and was willing to "be called to answer to every principle advanced." The second reason is supposedly that they are explanations of the principle of faith, but not doctrine. I disagree with this wholeheartedly. The preface to the original edition specifies that the lectures cover the "important doctrine of salvation": they represent the "Doctrine" in the title Doctrine and Covenants. And as I have said so many other times, there is only one true doctrine: the doctrine of Christ, as set forth in 2 Nephi 31 and 3 Nephi 11, and the first principle of this doctrine is faith in God--exactly what these lectures are about. I don't understand how anyone can say that these lectures are not doctrine, unless they are simply restating that the administration of the Church has removed them from the official canon. But the fact that they are not part of the canon doesn't take away the fact that they are still about the doctrine of Christ. The third reason the committee removed them was that they believed the explanation of who the Godhead is to be incorrect. They were wrong, and I'll address this in my post today. But consider this: who do you want to believe about the nature of God: Joseph Smith, who talked to Him face to face, and who vouched for the accuracy of the explanation in the Lectures on Faith, or a committee almost a century later, none of whose members ever claimed to have seen or spoken to God, making executive decisions without the sustaining vote of the Church? I'll let you decide.

Note: I highly recommend that you study Lecture Five along with D&C section 93. You'll see why shortly.

So let's get started! The first bit of confusion for me comes immediately in the second paragraph, when it begins talking about two personages, instead of the usual three. However, the lecture does specify that the Godhead consists of three people: the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, so I'm sure it's not a mistake. These two personages "constitute the great, matchless, governing and supreme power over all things--by whom all things were created and made." We are speaking of the Father and the Son. The Holy Spirit is currently being excluded from the description of the governing and creating power. More about him later.

A Correct Idea of His Attributes

Read the previous post in this series here.

I've neglected the Lectures on Faith a bit over the past few weeks; I've had a lot of other things on my mind. But in the past few days, the importance of knowing God in order to exercise faith in Him keeps coming to the forefront of my mind. So the fourth Lecture on Faith is a great place to start, with its discussion of the attributes of God.

As I said previously, I think characteristics are something you have, whereas attributes are something you are, and that is perhaps how the list of qualities in lecture Three differs from lecture Four. I'm not actually sure the difference is important. The purpose of the fourth lecture is to "show the connection there is between correct ideas of the attributes of God, and the exercise of faith in him unto eternal life" (4:1). This is a good time to remind ourselves that we are still talking about the doctrine of Christ, which is to have faith, repent, be baptized, and press forward in Christ until we obtain a sure promise of salvation from the Father (2 Ne 31). Put in context, we are still trying to figure out what it means to have the kind of faith that gets you from the first step to the last.

"For without the idea of the existence of the attributes which belong to God, the minds of men could not have power to exercise faith on him so as to lay hold upon eternal life" (LoF 4:2)--it is the mind which exercises faith, so it is essential that the mind have a correct understanding in order to "enable [us] to exercise faith in God, and through this means to be partakers of his glory" (LoF 4:3). To lay hold upon eternal life means to be partakers of his glory: something worth the effort and faith, no? So in order to exercise faith in God to reach that goal, we must know what kind of being He is (attributes), in addition to knowing what kind of powers He has or what kinds of things He can do (characteristics).

This lecture has an interesting structure: it covers each attribute three times. The first pass is just a list of scripture references referring to each quality; the second is a detailed explanation of what it means, and the third is a quick summary. I will address each attribute once, and integrate the material.

Autoritatea Credintei

Citat din Prelegeri despre Credinta care am folosit in lectia duminica trecuta. Tema: ce trebuie sa cunoastem despre Dumnezeu ca sa credinta noastra sa aiba putere pentru salvare.

Dar, de asemenea, este necesar sa stie ca El nu este partinitor, sa aiba o idee despre toate celelalte lucruri minunate din caracterul Lui, iar daca acest lucru ar lipsi atunci nu si-ar putea exercita credinta in El. Pentru ca daca El ar fi partinitor, ei nu ar stie care sunt privilegiile lor, nici nu ar avea de unde sa stie pana unde au autoritate de a-si exercita credinta in El, sau daca chiar au vreo autoritate. Totul ar fi o mare confuzie. In momentul in care mintiile oamenilor ar intelege adevarul cu privire la acest lucru, ca El nu este partinitor, ei ar intelege ca au autoritate prin credinta de a obtine viata eterna, comorile cerului, deoarece Dumnezeu nu este partinitor si ca toti oameni din fiecare natiune au privilegii egale.

Prelegeri Despre Credinta 3:23


Vezi, de asemenea:

• 2 Nefi 26:33
• Alma 32:23
• Faptele 10:34-35

Daca stii engleza, iti recomand articolul acesta, care scrie foarte clar despre drepturile oamenilor inaintea Domnului: http://www.whatsoeverisgood.com/what-ordain-women-and-men-dont-understand-about-the-priesthood/

Predice lui Alma #1: "Aceasta mareata schimbare in inima" (Zarahemla)

Citeste blogul anterior despre Alma cel tanar.

Alma cel tanar a inceput misiunea lui in Zarahemla, orasul lui, capitolul nefitiilor. Chiar in cel mai mare oras, orasul in care traia liderul lor spiritual, unde a fost fondata biserica lor, oamenii aveau nevoie mare de "cuvantul lui Dumnezeu" (Alma 4:19).

In acordare cu cele trei motive al lui (vezi blogul anterior), Alma incepe cu un pic de istorie, si le aduce aminte de intamplari din ultima generatie: Alma cel varstnic, Regele Noe, Abinadi, scapare de la Noe, scapare de la Amulon, etc. Le aduce aminte pe poporul ca ei au scapat numai prin puterea lui Dumnezeu. Tot asta este usor de reamintit. Dar, in versetul 6: "Si mai mult, ati pastrat suficient in amintire ca El a eliberat sufletele lor din iad?" Sa nu uitam ca miracolul, sau "scapare" cea mai mare a fost ca ei au fost mantuiti.

In continuare: "Iata, El a schimbat inimile lor; da, El i-a trezit dintr-un somn adanc, iar ei s-au trezit la Dumnezeu. Iata, erau in mijlocul intunericului; cu toate acestea, sufletele lor erau iluminate de lumina cuvantului nepieritor; da, ei erau incercuiti de legaturile mortii si de lanturile iadului si distrugerea nepieritoare ii astepta" (v. 7). Salvarea spirituala a fost mai valoroasa decat salvarea fizica, si robie actuala a fost nimic fata de intunericul spiritual.

Versetul 9: "Si va spun voua ca ei sunt salvati." De ce sunt, si nu erau? Nu erau o alta generatie, si probabil toti decedati deja? De ce nu vorbim de ei in trecut? Pentru ca "a fi salvat" nu este un eveniment, ci o stare de a fi. Ei au fost, si acuma sunt in starea salvarii--este ceva vesnica, indiferent daca mai traieste omul pe pamant sau nu.

Predice lui Alma cel Tanar

Alma, fiul lui Alma, a fost un profet mare si invatator foarte bun. El a fost votat ca judecator sef in tara Zarahemla, dar dupa opt ani, a aflat ca nu poate fi un mare preot bun, daca simultan trebuie sa se ocupe de politica. S-a dat demisie si a plecat sa predice dintre poporul lui, ca "el insusi sa poata merge printre oamenii lui sau la poporul lui Nefi, pentru ca el sa poata sa le predice cuvantul lui Dumnezeu" (Alma 4:19). Avea trei motive:

1. Sa le aduca aminte la datoriei lor (vezi Eclesiastul 12:13)
2. Sa poata dobori toate mandria si tot viclesugul lor
3. Sa opreasca toate conflictele care erau printre oamenii lui

Why I Write, De Ce Scriu

(In limba romana mai jos)

I have recently been feeling a bit down because I feel so inadequate. I have this whole list of things that I feel need to be written about--like my current series in English on the Lectures on Faith, or one that I'm planning in Romanian about the discourses of Alma the Younger, but I'm not a spiritual genius, and I don't feel particularly insightful as I study or write. Mostly I just feel like somebody needs to write about these things, for two reasons.

First, as people who aspire to be members of the Lord's church, as He defined it in D&C 10:67-68, we sure preach a lot of stuff that violates the standard He gave us in those same verses, and we teach for doctrines the commandments of men (Matt 15:9). I cannot stress enough how important it is to realize that any teaching that is not faith in Christ, repentance, and coming unto Christ, is not His doctrine. Our talks, our lessons, our manuals and publications and handbooks are all full of commandments that are not doctrine, and it's not healthy for us. We need to invest a lot more effort in understanding what Christ's doctrine is, so that we can actually be His church, and not just another worldly imitation. (Hence my series on the Lectures on Faith.)

Second, in September of 1832, only two and a half years after the LDS Church was established, the Lord gave Joseph Smith a revelation that is quite shocking if you think about it: He declared that the "whole church," "the children of Zion, even all," was "under condemnation" (D&C 84:55-56). If you read the whole passage of D&C 84:54-58, you will find that we are condemned because we do not believe the Book of Mormon and have treated its teachings lightly. And unless we manage somehow "not only to say, but to do according to that which [the Lord has] written," a scourge and judgment will be poured out upon us.

And lest you doubt that this condemnation still rests upon us today, consider the fact that Ezra Taft Benson, whose teachings we study this year in Relief Society and priesthood quorums, taught this same principle when he was president of the Church. You can read a bit of it in our lesson manual.

We need to spend a lot more time with the Book of Mormon: reading it, studying it, applying it to our lives today, and praying for understanding. I worry that we pass through it superficially only once every four years in our Church curriculum. I can't do anything about the worldwide curriculum, but maybe by writing about the Book of Mormon and my own efforts to learn from it, I can help myself and a few others. That's all I want, even if I'm not very good at it.

What Ordain Women (And Men) Don't Understand About The Priesthood

This post was published on whatsoeverisgood.com, which is no longer available. Sometime in 2016 I realized the link was broken, and decided to track down the original post on archive.org. Below is the original article.

What Ordain Women (And Men) Don't Understand About The Priesthood

Tanner Gilliland, February 9, 2015

Think about a neighborhood. It’s an association of neighbors. You can’t hold the neighborhood, but you can hold a position in it; you can have responsibilities in it. Such responsibilities, like being a neighborhood watchman, do not make one more a member of the neighborhood than anyone else in the area. Neighborhoods are defined by proximity.