The Sinner, the Accuser, and the Savior

Image from LDS Media

How often do we find ourselves looking down on someone for their sins? How many times have we ourselves been looked down upon? We've each been, at one time or another, either the sinner or the accuser in our own lives.

Studying the story of the adulteress woman in John 8 (watch the Bible Videos version for a powerful take on it), I noticed that this story exemplifies Christ's role as mediator between those who are accused and those who do the accusing.

In this story, the Pharisees rudely push a woman in front of Christ and present the question, "This woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?" (John 8:4–5).

If we had been there that day, where would we most likely be looking? A crowd has just come barging in, dragging a woman and accusing her of one of the three greatest sins (Alma 39:3–5). Not only is the accusation condemning, but the Pharisees had caught her "in the very act." She probably is not looking like someone who expected to be out in public. And by the time they got her to the temple, she would have been a mess. So again, where are everyone's eyes likely to be?

Directly on her.

What shame she must have felt. She must have sensed everyone's eyes boring into her as she hid her face from their stares.

But the very first thing that Christ does to answer the Pharisee's question shows his deep understanding and love for her: "Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground" (John 8:6). Again imagining that we are there, what is Christ doing to our attention in that moment? We are staring at the woman, when suddenly, our gaze is caught by his movement. All eyes would have been drawn to his finger, all thoughts focused on his writing.

No longer would the crowd be concentrated on the woman and her sin, staring at her with condemning or sorrowful eyes. He pulls everyone's attention away from the sinner and onto Him.

This is symbolic of what Christ does for all of us. We are all sinners to one degree or another, and we all have the opportunity to "go, and sin no more" (John 8:11). Through the Atonement, Christ has taken upon himself our sin. And because of the Atonement, we will no longer have to feel the shame that comes from our past mistakes.

But in this story, Christ doesn't just stop there. Not only did he stoop down and draw all attention onto him, but when he stood back up, he continued to teach. The first words out of his mouth were, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her" (John 8:7). This is the second lesson of the Atonement that we can find in this story. For Christ's role is to not only to take upon himself our sins, but also to encourage us to repent. With this invitation, Christ turns the attention of everyone in the crowd back onto themselves. 

All eyes started on the sinner but were drawn to the Savior and then were commanded to turn to themselves and their own lives. For that's what the Atonement is about. We can't experience the full saving power unless we stop judging others and change ourselves.

We've all made mistakes. We've all sinned. Maybe today, it's the adulteress woman in the middle, but what if it were you? For it could be you, couldn't it? Isn't that what Christ is saying here? That we all stand no higher than this woman? So why do we judge her?

Truly, none of us would be able to cast that first stone. 

Church v. Gospel: A House and Its Foundation

Photo by Peter Boccia on Unsplash

Consider the terms "church" and "gospel." They are very obviously distinct from each other. No one could ever get the two confused, right? At least, that's what I was thinking when my professor asked us how they differ.

And I was right, Christ's gospel is not the same as his church. The gospel refers to the principles, the doctrine, the teachings that he has asked us to live by, and his church is an organization that has gathered to help each other live those principles. Put simply, Christ's church houses his gospel.

But maybe "house" isn't the right word for it after all. A house can still stand without any occupants, but the church would collapse into a pile of dust without the gospel. In fact, I think a better analogy can be made based on the Book of Mormon scripture, 3 Nephi 27:8.

And how be it my church save it be called in my name? . . . If it be called in my name then it is my church, if it so be that they are built upon my gospel. (Italics mine.)

So, let me revise my statement a little. Put simply, Christ's gospel founds his church. Phrased this way, the church is no longer the focus, because really, the gospel is the most important thing. Which brings me to my next point: "Christ's church" is not referring to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

This may seem like I'm deserting, but let me explain. Let's go to 1 Nephi 14, verse 10.

And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to he church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.

For most of my life, I always thought that this verse was talking about (1) my church as the good guy, and (2) everyone else as the abominables. It's the whole concept of saying, "I belong to the one and only true church."

This, however, was a false way of thinking that I'm glad to be rid of.

Now, don't get me wrong. I have a strong testimony that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is God's restored church on the earth, with the fullness of his gospel. But that's just it. We have the fullness of the gospel. That doesn't mean that no one else has the gospel at all. Other churches do have it, at least in parts, and the people who live the best they can with what they have—I have full confidence that Christ would welcome them with open arms into his church.

So once again, when you look at the gospel and the church together, the focus should not be on the church itself. The church is just the vehicle that helps get us to our ultimate destination; it's the package that the gift of the gospel comes in. For it's the gospel that holds everything together, and it's the gospel that will help us connect with all members of "the church of the Lamb of God," no matter what denomination.

The Garden of Eden Part 2: The Tree of Knowledge

Photo by Aman Aman on Unsplash

Have you ever wished that you could live in the Garden of Eden and enjoy a happy, carefree life? I have once or twice.

Fortunately, having everyone live happily ever after in a beautiful garden wasn't part of God's plan for us. In fact, it wasn't even possible. Adam and Eve could not have lived in bliss forever and still become the parents of all mankind.

It just couldn't work that way. Thanks to the Book of Mormon, we have a pretty clear idea of why. In 2 Nephi 2, it says, 

22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end. 

23 Any they would have had no children. . . .

From this, we know that if Adam and Eve had not partaken of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, they would have never been able to raise children. Instead, they would have remained as children themselves—forever.

I've always understood that point. But there is one thing that continued to confuse me. In The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we teach that both Adam and Eve are heroic exemplars, because they chose to bring life into the world even though it required disobeying God. Eve is praised for her foresight and courage; Adam is praised for his loyalty and reasoning.

But neither Adam nor Eve had knowledge of good and evil until after they ate the fruit. They were children, knowing the what of the commandments but not the why.

If Adam and Eve were truly like children, innocent and unlearned, how could they have understood the magnitude of their decision to partake of the fruit? There's no way that Eve would have been reaching for that fruit with the full realization of what that action meant for her future.

That's what I never understood. Why did we praise Adam and Eve so much for their foresight and reasoning, when they really couldn't have known the significance of their partaking of the fruit?

But then I got to thinking about it as I read in Moses chapter 4, when the serpent is tempting Eve.

10 And the serpent said unto the woman: Ye shall not surely die; 

11 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. 

12 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it became pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make her wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and also gave unto her husband with her, and he did eat.

We don't know how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden, but I wonder how many months must Eve have been walking through the Garden, pondering the two commandments that God had given her and realizing that she did not have the knowledge to keep the first commandment? How long had she already been gazing at the tree of knowledge, wanting to be fruitful and multiply but not knowing how?

I imagine that Eve would have already worked out for herself that she needed to have more knowledge if she and Adam were going to keep the first commandment to multiply and replenish the earth (Genesis 1:28). So when Satan did come in, promising knowledge like unto the gods, partaking of the fruit might not have been so foreign an idea to her.

I don't know whether or not Eve fully understood before she ate the fruit that she had to fall in order to bring salvation to her offspring. Perhaps she did, perhaps she didn't. Either way, her act was valiant and praiseworthy.

I will say, however, that I don't believe that Adam or Eve fully understood their role in God's plan until after they partook of the fruit. Indeed, in both scriptural accounts of the creation, Adam is not said to have given Eve her name until their eyes have already been opened. Only after their reprimand from God do they say that Adam called her Eve, the mother of all living (Genesis 3:20; Moses 4:26).

I love to think of the moment when Adam must have turned to "the woman" with such love in his eyes and tenderly called her "Eve" for the very first time. Having just been told that the earth would be cursed for their sake and that they were destined to return to the dust, I can imagine him saying, "Eve... My wife and my companion, we will make it. We can and will bring life into this world, together."

And they did. They brought you and me into this world to make decisions of our own, and they showed us that even with a minuscule understanding of God's plan, we can still make the right decision. Sometimes, if not always, our knowledge of the why behind God's commandments will only come after we take the step of faith. We are all like Adam and Eve, for aren't we all little children when compared to God? And like in the Garden of Eden, God will always allow us to make mistakes so that we may learn and grow closer to Him. 

The Garden of Eden Part 1: The Fruit as Salvation

Photo by Vadim L on Unsplash

Eve. What was her role in the Garden of Eden? A good portion of Christians might answer that Eve is to blame for all sin and sorrow that exists in this world. But there are many others who would argue that Eve was the hero that brought freedom to humanity—agency for the human race.

I have never doubted that Eve's transgression in the Garden of Eden was meant to be. I've been taught to praise Eve for her decision that day, based on the additional details given by the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi 2:22–25) and the Pearl of Great Price (Moses 5:10–11), both showing that humanity could not have existed without the Fall. Eve could only be the mother of all living by partaking of the fruit. I know that.

However, I never thought too deeply about why Heavenly Father gave those two commandments: to multiply and replenish the earth, and to not partake of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil. Thinking about these commandments with the mindset that Adam and Eve could only multiply after they had partaken of the fruit, the two edicts seem contradictory. Why would Heavenly Father have given conflicting commandments, neither of which could be kept with the other?

While I couldn't have said an answer to that just three days ago, I learned some valuable information from my religion teacher, Professor Tyler Griffin, that led me to my own answer.

In the Book of Moses, there is one distinct difference in the account of the Garden of Eden that adds a new perspective to these contradictory commandments. In chapter 3, it says the following (the bolded text is additional information not found in Genesis):

16 And I, the Lord God, commanded the man, saying: Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat,

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee; but, remember that I forbid it, for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. 

 This bolded text contains a key word: "nevertheless." As my professor put it, anytime that the word "nevertheless" is used, it adds emphasis to the last part of the sentence, rather than the first. In simple terms, never-the-less means always-the-more.

AKA, what comes after "nevertheless" matters a lot more to God than what comes before. So what exactly is He emphasizing in the second part of the commandment? Incredibly, Heavenly Father is giving Adam and Eve agency. He is saying that while He is giving this commandment for them to follow, in the very act of giving them such a commandment, He also gives His greater gift: the freedom to choose. By giving them the tree of knowledge, He is also giving them the option to eat it—even against His will.

Now, when I read the verses in 2 Nephi, they add even more light to this question of conflicting commandments.

22 And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen . . . 

23 . . . Wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

24 But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things. 

The verses in Moses establish that Heavenly Father purposely created the tree of knowledge for Adam and Eve so that they could choose whether or not to partake. The verses in 2 Nephi further establish that if Adam and Eve had not partaken of the fruit (or had not been given opportunity to disobey God's command), they would have remained innocent of sin. And without sin, there could be no righteousness.

There must be an opposition in all things (2 Nephi 2:11). We wouldn't know to call something good unless we have seen something evil. Thus, for there to be righteousness, sin had to be committed. And for there to be sin, there had to be a commandment given by God.

If Adam and Eve had not partaken of the fruit, they would have kept living forever in perfection but never had the benefits of keeping the commandments. They would have been in an eternal state of neutrality, unable to experience joy because they had not yet experienced misery. It's the paradox of life, that we can't appreciate the good unless we see the effects of the bad.

Truly, in our mortal minds, it's hard to comprehend the wisdom of God. But I finally think I understand this point. Heavenly Father gave such a conflicting commandment, specifically paired with the right to choose, because Adam and Eve had to transgress in order to give the world agency--and all consequences that come with it. Sin had to be introduced into the world in order for repentance (and thus growth) to take effect.

If Heavenly Father had never provided the forbidden fruit of knowledge, He would have been giving the very thing that Satan had proposed in the pre-earth life: a world without agency, where "all"—but in reality, none—would be saved (Moses 4:1).

So when Eve partook of the fruit, was she damning mankind, or saving them? The answer is that she was, in fact, saving us. In her decision to choose for herself, she put into effect Heavenly Father's plan for us, including the gift of a Savior. By transgressing in the Garden of Eden, she allowed all of us to be able to choose our own salvation.

The Role of a Canon in Later-day Revelation

When I think of a canon, the first one that comes to mind is that of great literature, with books like A Tale of Two Cities, The Odyssey, Little Women, or Macbeth--books that have stood the test of time and made it into a list of "classics." I've always known that there are similar canons for most types of art, like movies, paintings, or music.

What I didn't realize about the word "canon" is that it also refers to an authoritative list of scriptures. But the thing is, not every religion has the same canon, even among Christians! I guess I had never thought about it, but with so many translations of the Bible and other ancient texts not included in the Bible, it's no wonder that there is a disagreement about what the scriptural canon should include.

It's the same with any canon, really. The books listed in a literary canon have been studied by scholars because of their timelessness and depth, but how does a text gets into the canon? When is it finally timeless, and who gets to decide how deep a text is? That's a question that causes debates like crazy.

How cool would it be if there was a way to know exactly which books were supposed to be on that list? No debate, just . . . divine guidance? Maybe there's nothing like that with classical literature, but after reading on the scriptural canon in the Bible Dictionary, I realized that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints doesn't have to debate about what is scripture. We have more than just scholarly knowledge to tell us; we have latter-day revelation, which is exactly what has given us the four main texts we consider authoritative scripture: the Bible (Old and New Testament), the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, and the Doctrine and Covenants.

That's awesome. The LDS scriptural canon is built on revelation! And what's more, the part of the Bible Dictionary entry that caught my attention most was this:

"Although the decisions were made in the past as to which writings are authoritative, that does not mean that the canon of scripture is complete and that no more can be added. True prophets and apostles will continue to receive new revelation, and from time to time the legal authorities of the Church will see fit to formally add to the collection of scripture."

This, I think, is a foundational concept. Basically, what this passage is saying is that (1) the Bible is not and should not be the only sacred text in a canon (and thus the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, and Doctrine and Covenants have every right to be a part of it, as long as they are revealed as authoritative), and (2) what books we have now are not the only scriptures that can be part of the canon. More can be added! God still isn't done, and neither should we be.

Learning about the canon in this way taught me that we need to continue with open minds and search for those texts that truly are lasting and authoritative, and cause us to come closer to the Lord.

Just like how a literary, cinematic, or artistic canon will continue to add new works to their list, so too can our scriptural canon continue to grow.

Mariah's Gift - Book Page Necklace

I have so much to say! It's no good when you don't blog for a whole week, especially when it's the first week of a semester! Now I've got to relate all the interesting things that happened! But really, there's only one that I'm going to post about right now, and that is my present to Mariah!

It's been quite a while since I first posted that I was making it, but I couldn't post what the present was until I had given it to her, in order to not spoil the surprise. And then I had a busy week of school, so I'm just barely getting around to it.

I made a necklace for her, after reading another person's how to. Here's the site so you can make your own! Mandipidy - Book Page Necklace

All you need is a 30-inch long chain, some pages of a book (or printouts), pearl beads, jump rings, and a clasp. Also some Modge Podge for the finish of the paper cutouts, and a lighter if you want to burn the edges like I did. Make sure that when you get the jump rings, they aren't the coiled ones, because those do NOT work (I speak from experience). 

This is a picture of my finished project:

I am so proud of myself for making this. And the reason both I and Mariah love it so much is because I made it special to her. For example, the pages that I chose are things that are a part of her life. There is: German, Italian, Music, The Hobbit, Marvel, the Book of Mormon, and a dictionary definition that pertains to her. It's awesome! So when she wears it, it isn't just a stylish accessory, but it symbolizes pieces of her heart.

If I were to do anything differently, I would put the same picture on both sides of the circle cut outs, so that when it flips around you can't tell. It's a hassle having to make sure they are always flipped the right way.

So if you need a gift idea, this is a great one! You can do a bracelet version too, or maybe even earrings.Just experiment with it and make it special to the giftee.

New Year's Resolutions

It's the NEW YEAR!! Happy first day of 2013! In honor of the holiday, I'd like to give my New Year's resolutions so that I'm not only held accountable to myself, but to you guys as well!

My goals for this year:

1. Read the Book of Mormon every day in English AND Spanish
2. Pray morning and night
3. Serve a mission for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
4. Study and know Preach My Gospel before going on a mission
5. Blog at least once a week (my weekly letters on my mission blog will count)
6. Be able to pay for half of my mission
7. Get at least a 3.7 GPA this semester
8. Exercise at the gym at least three times per week
9. Swim two times a week
10. Give plasma to earn money, as much as I can
11. Become the best friend I can be to everyone
12. Finish Book of Mormon in Spanish
13. Write in my journal about the whole year-and-a-half that I've missed
14. Flat stomach
15. Touch someone, in a way that betters their life forever

This list is not necessarily in order of most to least important, just as they came to my mind. I wish everyone a happy and productive year, and the best of luck in completing your own resolutions! Don't give up too soon!

Science and Religion Work Together

Gingerbread, frosting, gingerbread, and more frosting. My mind feels like it's going to melt into nothing. Although I'm unable to say that I finished my house, I did get the actual frame set up, and tomorrow is just for decorating!

One important item of business-- I'll have you know that the dates on most of my posts are one day behind, because I have a habit of posting at one or two in the morning. I am going to try and post before 12, but we'll see how that goes. :)

What I really want to talk about tonight is the AWESOME talk I had with my dad. We were able to talk about gospel and science related things, without it ending in someone huffing off. 

My dad is not a member of the church (of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), while I've mentioned before that my mom is a very stalwart member--and both of them are very stubborn. So naturally, they get into pretty heated conversations/arguments about the gospel. I often would sit for hours just listening to them go back and forth. This may be the reason I was so quiet when I was younger. I'm just not the type to cut in when others are speaking; I let people say what they are going to say, because I hate being cut off myself. But when there's people other than me, I often don't have room to add anything.

However, today the missionaries came and asked my father if he had ever read the Book of Mormon. He replied that he hadn't read it straight through, but had compared it to the Bible years ago. This is when I had the idea of what I wanted for my Christmas present, as well as my birthday (exactly three months from Christmas). After the missionaries were gone I proposed my wish: "For my Christmas present, I want you to begin reading the Book of Mormon, and for my Birthday I want you to finish it." I also requested that he not compare it to anything else, as I know this would take the Spirit away, so that he can just read it for what it is. He agreed! 

We continued talking about beliefs, which led to a discussion about how science and religion can be paired. My father agreed that these two do work together. My biggest problem with society in general is that Science is one thing and Religion is another, and we think that one disproves the other.

However, this is not true! God is Science. Science is not proving that things happen by chance, but rather proving that such intricate designs must have a designer. 

As "smart" as mother nature is, she's not a being and could not have naturally made such a huge immensity of complex organisms and elements.

I took Geology this last semester, and learned about things that I honestly didn't even think necessary to know, and yet they still existed. Each and every little detail matters in our universe. This world is so complicated of a subject, because of just how specific things have to be in order to make a world such as ours. Specificity is not natural. As my professor always said, mother nature is lazy and always takes the easiest way. There's no way "she" pays attention to detail. There's got to be Someone that does. 

Evolution was brought up after my father was trying to tell me his belief about the difference between facts and truth. I don't understand his reasoning perfectly, but I did glean something which I agree with: fact and truth are not the same thing. Fact has been scientifically proven, knowledge that the human race has accumulated. Truth, however, is what is-- always has been and always will be. The facts that we have today are only a small pinpoint of the truth. According to these definitions, anything having to do with faith cannot be called a fact, but it can be truth.

Evolution is a complicated issue, because it has scientific proof, and yet a lot of theory as well. It has been proven that species can evolve. Anyone who knows anything would not be able to say otherwise. However, it hasn't been proven-- and will never be-- how evolution started, how the world was created, or anything about the creation. This is where faith comes in. We can look at all of the scientifically proven facts, and still there is so much we don't know. The only way humanity can live with not knowing is to trust in God. Trust that he knew what he was doing, and he was in charge. 

As far as how we were created, that's another thing where you've got to have faith. Some religious people cannot accept that we came from something resembling an ape/monkey, choosing to take the Bible's creation story literally. And yet, how many instances did God, both in Old and New Testaments, speak symbolically? I would vouch that there's more symbolism than literal statements. What's to say that homo sapiens did not evolve until God deemed they were ready for his spirit children to enter them? 

I would like to point a couple things out from Genesis 2.

1. "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground"
   First of all, if we're okay with coming from the dust, what's wrong with evolving from a creature? But that's not the point I want to make. When it says dust of the ground, I'm reminded of the fact that the very first living organism technically came from the dust of the ground. So even through evolution, everything came from dust.
2. "And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
   This was my dad's acknowledgment-- the soul is the only thing that would make humans different from the previous homo sapiens. The soul is something that only God could have given us, and he chose when to.
3. In the garden, "the tree of knowledge of good and evil."
   This implies that Adam and Eve did not previously know good and evil. They were like children. But where did they come from? Yes, they could have been placed there by God, but why not have been born from a homo-sapien family? Thus they were born into a family that had the mental capacity more or less of children. And then they were given understanding after partaking of the tree, the true beginning of the human race and God's children. 

I'm not telling you what to believe, I'm just telling you what I believe and why. Once again, I'll just say that facts are few while opinions are many, but truth is everlasting. It's your job to use faith to find it. :)