My institute teacher recently gave us some material that made a lot of things make a lot more sense. A lot of times in the church we tend to split hairs over things like "What did Isaiah mean," or "What was Nephi trying to say with this." We also look very strongly at our own personal feelings and the impressions we get when we read Isaiah or Nephi or any of the other prophets. While I was at BYU, some students almost drew up battle lines over this issue, trying to divide the religion department into the more academically trained teachers and the more seminary / EFY type teachers. Each group of students had their own reasons for claiming that their teachers, and their corresponding methods of interpreting the scriptures, were superior.
In the end, we can all see that all these different methods have value in their own place, but sometimes it can be hard understanding how all the different ideas fit together. My institute teacher said that this was actually a problem that the Jews have had for centuries, and we can actually learn quite a bit from the way they approached it. (He also basically said that any time he wanted to understand academically how to deal with issues like this regarding the scriptures, he would usually look to the Jews because they have been studying the scriptures longer and more faithfully than just about anyone.)
Essentially, for hundreds of years the Rabbis had been interpreting the scriptures to help the people understand how to apply, and how the Law of Moses did apply to their lives. Then, about the 11th century, people began to take a more academic, contextual, historical, even archaeological view of the scriptures and they found that many of the interpretations were actually quite the opposite of what Moses probably meant in context. This caused a major controversy. What interpretation should the people use to guide their every day lives? Should they throw out the Rabbinical interpretations because of the work of the academics? After a great deal of discussion and debate, they decided that the Rabbinical teachings were still authoritative because (and this is the part that really hits home with me as a Latter-day Saint) the Rabbis held independent authority to interpret the scriptures. In other words, even though what the Rabbi said may not have been exactly what Moses meant, it is still the word of God, because he has authority to give (or at least interpret) the word of God. The work of the academics was still important, but it did not negate the Rabbinical interpretations.
This is a lot like what we see today. If we look at Isaiah 2:2, "And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it." We all know that this refers to the temple, or even specifically the Salt Lake Temple. (one reference here.) However, we read in verse 1, "The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem." Most likely, if we were to go back in time and ask someone who heard Isaiah speak, "What did he mean by this paragraph?", they probably wouldn't have understood it to be a talk about Utah or the Salt Lake valley. Most likely, they would have understood it to be a talk about their temple, in Jerusalem. (However, knowing Isaiah, he might have had both fulfillments (and several more besides) in his mind when he gave the talk. He was really good at keeping two or three different epochs straight in his head at any given time. The whole "eternal now" thing must have really rubbed off on him.) Nonetheless, I can say with complete certainty that Isaiah 2:2 refers directly to the Salt Lake Temple (as well as other temples), Utah, and the 2002 Winter Olympics, not because I have to go back and ask Isaiah or his listeners or some literary scholar what he meant, but because I know that the modern prophets have authority to interpret and give the word of God. (This exact example might not be the best one, but I hope my message is clear.) (Wow, I'm really getting long-winded on-line too.)
Well, this is summed up in two kinds of interpreting the scriptures that (according to my institute teacher) are known as Dera&scaron and Pešat (pronounced "Derash" and "Peshat").
Two kinds of interpretation
Pešat
Dera&scaron
When?
Then
Now (whenever "now" is)
Who?
As applied to, or understood by, original audience(s)
Us (whoever "we" are)
How do we get this interpretation?
Academic means (knowledge of languages, history, culture, etc.)
The Holy Ghost
Main Difference?
Contextual -- "What did Isaiah mean?"
Non-contextual -- "What does Isaiah mean to me?"
Examples?
FARMS, commentaries, scholarly papers, etc.
The scriptures, the Ensign, General Conference
How many interpretations?
One or a few
Many possible (The Lord can help different people understand the same scripture in different ways to give them the individual help they need.)
(Most of the previous table comes from a handout my institute teacher gave us, so this is not my original work.)
The main point of all of this is that both types of interpretations are important! Even though I doubt that Alma or Mormon had my, specific mission in mind when they penned Mosiah 24:13-14, doesn't mean that the Lord can't use that scripture to speak to me on that subject. (And I imagine the Lord had me, and each one of us in mind when He inspired those words -- He just might not have let Alma or Mormon know all the details, but that's beside the point.) So, that interpretation is valid and authoritative for me. Even Nephi did this exact same thing when quoting Isaiah. Elder McConkie tells us that Nephi "gave, not a literal, but an inspired and interpreting translation. And in many instances his words give either a new or greatly expanded meaning to the original prophetic word." (Source: "Keys to Understanding the Bible" in Sermons and Writings of Bruce R. McConkie, ed. Mark L. McConkie, 290-291.)
I guess the point of what has turned into a very long-winded post (my wife knows I get long-winded in real life too) is that we don't need to think that a personal, spiritual interpretation is any less authoritative then trying to understand what Isaiah "meant". Nor do we need to put down all the academic and archaeological scholars as second rate, because their work is valid and important too.
27 January 2008 -- President Gordon B. Hinckley passes away. President Hinckley was probably the most amazing man I ever knew. I have to confess, when I was little, while President Benson was the president of the Church, I remember always thinking of President Hinckley as the boring one in the First Presidency. I mean, President Benson was the prophet, so it was always neat when he spoke, especially when, later in his ministry, it got to be a much rarer occasion. President Monson has always been the story teller, so that has always been neat (especially if you're a five year old). President Hinckley always just seemed to be the one to deal with all the business and stuff like that. However, when he became the Prophet, I distinctly remember seeing the mantle fall on him, so to speak. His was always the voice of optimism, the voice of faith, the voice of motivation, the call to repentance, the voice of leadership.
He reached out to the youth at a time when I needed it most. I distinctly remember one conference talk while I was on my mission where I really felt the power of his loving, but firm, calls to repentance. I remember noting to myself that President Hinckley had gotten "Old Testament" on the bretheren -- i.e. he had spoken with the power and strength that we normally associate with prophets of the Old Testament. (In saying this, I do not want anyone to presume me guilty of the crimes of which he was speaking, but rather to illustrate the conviction that I felt that President Hinckley was a prophet of God just as much as were Moses, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, and all the rest.) His "six B's" have guided and refocused a generation of youth who will be forever grateful to him.
He was also a prophet who brought temples to the people. Under his ministry, the number of temples in the world nearly tripled from 47 to 124, with plans laid for 13 more. Under this surge of temple building there were many firsts. For example, 14 November 1999 saw the first time two temples were dedicated on the same day (Halifax Nova Scotia and Regina Saskatchewan). In speaking about these temples, President Hinckley said, "I wish to say to everyone here, come to the temple. Live worthy to come to the temple. Live the commandments of God so that you may come to the temple. Do those things which will make you eligible to serve in the house of the Lord. It has been built for you, my brothers and sisters, that you might have the opportunity of coming here and receiving the wonderful blessings that can be had nowhere else in all the world, except in other temples, where you may be sealed together as husband and wife, where your children may be sealed to you, where you may work in behalf of your forebears, who have gone beyond. That great and marvelous and wonderfully unselfish work occurs in the house of the Lord. Come to the temple" (meeting, Aba, Nigeria, Aug. 6, 2005).
President Hinckley refocused our attention on retention. He was always concerned with "the one," the individual member. I remember Elder Holland of the Twelve speaking of President Hinckley, "For the Church at large, we have so many things to associate in our minds with the visionary ministry of President Gordon B. Hinckley, including (perhaps especially) the vast expansion of temples and temple building. But I dare say for those of us on this rostrum, it is likely that we will remember him at least as emphatically for his determination to retain in permanent activity the converts who join this Church. No modern prophet has addressed this issue more directly nor expected more from us in seeing that it happen. With a twinkle in his eye and a hand smacking the table in front of him, he said to the Twelve recently, “Brethren, when my life is finished and the final services are concluding, I am going to rise up as I go by, look each of you in the eye, and say, ‘How are we doing on retention?’ ”"
There are many other things which I could list which President Hinckley can and will be remembered by, but this is what I have for now. There have been many tributes made by people much more talented than I am. One of my favorites is posted below. All in all, the long and the short of this, however, is that I know that President Gordon B. Hinckley was a Prophet of God.
Praise to the man... We thank Thee, O God, for a Prophet.
2 February 2008 -- Funeral Services for President Hinckley were held in the Conference Center. As with many others, I want to take one more chance to honor President Hinckley as a Prophet of God. It was impressive to see thousands of people waiting hours to pay their last respects to this great man. (As with many others, I wish I had been able to pay my respects personally, but living a couple thousand miles away makes that difficult.) It was so moving to see people lining the streets saluting the funeral procession with canes and white handkerchiefs. I will never forget that amazing man. He moved us to "stand a little taller" and "be a little better" (here, here, and here). He really made me want to be a better person. I hope, one day, to be able to tell him personally what his faith and example meant to me. I thank the Lord for His Prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley.
4 February 2008 -- The First Presidency is reorganized with President Thomas S. Monson as President, President Henry B. Eyring as First Counselor, and President Dieter F. Uchtdorf as Second Counselor. As always, I am impressed by the power in the First Presidency. From the start, this was a united team. I know these men are Prophets of God and serve under His direction.
2007 - 2008 -- The "Mormon Moment." I wasn't sure where to put this post, because the "Mormon Moment" is quite long for a moment. Every once in a while, we are presented with unusual opportunities for ignorance, "distrust and stereotypes to yield to understanding". Our task is simply to know what to do with these opportunities. We need to always reach out in love and understanding to our friends and neighbors. Let us "be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you" (1 Peter 3:15), even to those who are simply "curious".
9 February 2008 -- A Worldwide Leadership Training Meeting of the Church focusing on the theme of "Building Up a Righteous Posterity" is held for all adult members. First of all, I was so impressed by the personal and familiar tone of the conference. I was also impressed by the spirit of complete unity and respect that I saw between the bretheren and sisters. You could tell that they knew why they were there and what their purpose was.
The continual and renewed focus on the family sent a message to me. We all want peace and joy in our family lives. I believe that we can all know that this is where real peace and joy in this life is to be found. As we read in The Family: A Proclamation to the World, "Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ." I know that this is true. I am trying every day to live it. I can really tell the difference between those days when I am doing fairly well and those days when I am doing not so well. I am so grateful for the guidance of the leaders of the Church.
5 April 2008 -- A Solemn Assembly of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is held in which the new First Presidency of the Church is sustained, and Elder D. Todd Christofferson is added to the Quorum of the Twelve. As I said before, it is exciting to see the power and unity among the brethren. I was impressed how over and over again speakers in conference testified of the love that we all held and hold for President Hinckley and their testimony of him as a Prophet, and then testified of President Monson as our Prophet today. It is the same mission, the same course. I think this was a comfort and reassurance that the church needed to hear. I know I did.
What a blessing it is to be able to sustain our leaders, individually and independently! I am so grateful to be able to sustain these people as my leaders and pledge my faith, loyalty, and support for this work, recognizing them as the people that the Lord has chosen to direct the affairs of His church on the Earth.
I know President Thomas S. Monson is a Prophet of God. I have felt the power of his testimony. One of my favorite videos of the new First Presidency is posted below.
"We thank Thee, O God, for a Prophet."
May 2008 -- The California state Supreme Court rules that the California State Constitution requires that same gender "marriage" must be recognized by the state. This is an especially hard post for me to write about. I know this is a very hot topic, so for the time being I have set comments to be moderated. The Church has made repeated stands on this subject here, here, and here. I really can't express how much this ruling upset me. The official church news release said that "Yesterday’s California Supreme Court decision is unfortunate." I find that to be an extreme understatement. I am a firm believer in the democratic system and in the strength of diversity, but what is, by this ruling, being called "marriage" is not, never has been, and never will be marriage as the word was intended to be used. My wife and I have been married for four years this summer. We have a little boy who recently turned two and a half, and I sincerely worry about the type of world in which he will live. I do not want people trying to convince him that certain things are acceptable, when they are not acceptable.
I know many people wonder what the big backlash is about, supposing that extending the definition of marriage cannot harm traditional marriages, but I feel very strongly about this. Re-defining marriage does harm existing marriages. It is a significant harm. You cannot re-define an institution without changing those items already covered by that institution. I know many will decry traditional marriage as "discriminatory," but there have always been restrictions placed on what types of unions can be legally considered to be marriages. Laws exist restricting marriages to be monogamous. Laws exist restricting marriages prohibiting marriages between close relatives. I doubt that the natural restriction prohibiting "marriage" between a person and an animal has ever even been brought up in court, as it is such a natural restriction that almost no one would even think of it as a restriction. Up until recently, relationships between people of the same gender were considered in this category -- too obvious and natural a restriction to really be considered a restriction. There are many relationships, committed, enduring, reciprocal, loving, powerful relationships that cannot and should not be considered as a marriage.
The Family: A Proclamation to the World states, "We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
"All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose. ...
"The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. ...
"We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society."
As with many others, I hold nothing but love and concern for those that have same gender attractions, but to love the person is not to condone the action, nor should love for the person be a motivation for us to seek to legally justify the action. Such is not acceptable. Marriage between a man and a woman is what has always been, and will always be the fundamental backbone of society. I urge all people everywhere to more urgently and diligently take those steps that will protect and establish the traditional family and marriage between a man and a woman as the fundamental unit of society.
Well, this year has been a big one. There have been a lot of major changes in the church and in the world. I figured, first of all, I would just go through some of them and give some commentary.
10 August 2007 -- President James E. Faust, second counselor in the First Presidency, passed away. For me, personally, this was one of the most challenging deaths to deal with in recent years. It was interesting that the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve under President Hinckley remained unchanged longer than at just about any other time. From the time that the First Presidency was organized under President Hinckley (12 March 1995) until the deaths of Elder Maxwell and Elder Haight in July of 2004, both quorums remained unchanged. President Faust's death in August was the first time under President Hinckley that the First Presidency needed to be reorganized.
For me, Presdient Faust could always be counted on to bring a smile and comfort in times of need. I remember seeing him during the last few general conferences, and I remember seeing how he was in obviously poor health, but he was always in high spirits. I can never really say how much his attitude and optimism meant for me. I thought that the last conference talk he wrote really summarized his ministry well. He was always helping people see that they had "The Power to Change" through faith on, and power from, the Lord Jesus Christ. He was a powerful and loving servant of the Savior.
6 October 2007 -- President Henry B. Eyring was called to be the second counselor in the First Presidency, replacing President Faust, and Elder Quentin L. Cook was called to fill the resulting vacancy in the Quorum of the Twelve. Remembering this General Conference was rather interesting to me, because I remember before the conference my wife and I were talking with each other, understandably guessing and speculating about who would be called to fill the vacancy in the First Presidency. (I have since learned not to do this, if nothing else because I never get it right.) I must confess that I never really suspected Elder Eyring. I always had thought him still very new as an Apostle, and never really pictured him in that position. I was clearly very wrong. I have since seen him as one of the most powerful leaders in a long time. He has a way of helping each individual member to connect with the power of the Holy Spirit and understand how the Lord really does reach to every person in every capacity. It really is true when the Lord says "For my athoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8-9)
15 December 2007 -- Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve gives the commencement address at BYU-Hawaii and invites Latter-day Saints to "join the conversation about the church" especially using the "new media" of the internet. The next event is, honestly, the impetus behind why I and thousands of other Latter-day Saints are blogging about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Shortly after his address, may people paraphrased the request of his talk as "Thou shalt blog." Today is six months since that talk, so I can tell that I need to be a good deal more diligent and punctual in responding to spiritual promptings and the words of the living prophets. (Better late than never, I suppose.) To "join the conversation", I guess I mostly want to testify that I also know that this church is the work of the Lord. I feel it and have felt it frequently and strongly. Despite my inabilities in conveying that message, I just want to state that I know it is true, and I hope that I can be an effective participant in this regard.
January 2008 -- The Joseph Smith volume in the Teachings of the Presidents of the Church series comes out for use in Priesthood and Relief Society meetings for 2008-2009. Honestly, this was the book I thought would never be written. I even remember talking with my wife a year or so ago about the different manuals that had come out recently. The question came up as to whether there was a specific pattern that the church was following in these manuals. As near as I could tell, there wasn't. I did speculate, however, that there were a few manuals that we would not see. First of all, I doubted that they would ever come out with a manual covering the teachings of the current prophet, simply because they aren't done yet. It just didn't seem like that was something that they would do. Secondly, I doubted that we would ever see a manual on the Prophet Joseph Smith. I said this because we study his teachings every four years in the Doctrine and Covenants anyway, and because there is just so much! I figured that it would be nearly impossible to effectively contain his ministry in a volume that would be even approachable in such a format. Well, I was wrong. They did it. I am awed and inspired by the work that has been done in putting together this manual. I guess our challenge now is to teach and learn effectively from it and to apply what we learn.
