Dispensation of the Fullness of Times

Joseph Smith: "The dispensation of the fullness of times will bring to light the things that have been revealed in all former dispensations; also other things that have not been before revealed."

In my reading of The Great Apostasy I have noted a few quotes from historians relating to the early Christian era and they mention how Pagans and Jews mocked the Christians because they didn't have temples as part of their worship.  This, of course, is a little troublesome to our Church since "we believe in the same organization that existed in the primitive Church".  We believe in the "restoration of all things" and so we usually say that we believe that our Church is the restored version of the original Church of Christ.  However, I would argue that perception is not complete and may lead us to inaccurately assume that anything not mentioned in the days of the primitive Church cannot be accepted.  This is the mentality of most protestant movements.  They recognized the obvious apostasy in the Catholic Church and so the reformers desired to return back to the original basic truths of Christianity.  This is why for them anything in addition to the Bible cannot be true, a belief which is rooted in their fear of another perversion through the evolution of doctrines that lead to Catholicism.  In the establishment of our religion, on the other hand, our main objective wasn't to simply return to what was taught in the Primitive Church (though this was necessary) it was also to progress in the direction the Primitive Church would have progressed had the apostles maintained control.  This is evident in the previous quote from Joseph Smith.  The first step of the restoration was to restore what Christ and his apostles taught.  The next step, to make this truly the dispensation of the fullness of times, is to reveal things that not even Peter or Paul revealed (that they knew of some of them* is hard to tell, but they may not have taught them publicly).  This is why Elder Talmage said that "the Restoration of the Gospel marks the inauguration of the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times" because it is a continuous process and was not 100% completed by Joseph Smith (and is still not complete), hence, "we believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God."  This is a possible explanation for why some say there is no proof of temples in the Primitive Church.  That being said, there are substantial evidences that the temple ordinances were known by the early apostles (see Temple and Cosmos by Hugh Nibley).  So it may just be that with an apostasy looming the apostles had to protect these ordinances from corruption by not propagating them openly.  It may also be that building a temple was an impossibility for this group of Christians persecuted even worse than our early members.  So maybe the Lord didn't require them to build a temple but allowed the administering of the ordinances on mountaintops like the example of the Mount of Transfiguration where Joseph Fielding Smith teaches that "it appears Peter, James, and John received their own endowments while on the mountain."

*The things that I am referring to here are things that may have not been revealed plainly until this dispensation.  Examples: the fullness of the temple ordinances, the three degrees of glory, the Atonement commencing in Gethsemane, the priesthood going to every worthy male, the pattern  for succession of the President of the Church, etc.

Abraham a Polytheist?

Abraham 4:1-"they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth."

So because LDS Doctrine acknowledges the fact that there are multiple Gods some people see us as pagans with heretical doctrine of ordinances and temples. However, I believe Elder Talmage's description of paganism in his book "The Great Apostasy" makes it clear that what made Paganism heresy was not the multitude of gods but rather the moral values of their deities.  He said, "Paganism was a religion of form and ceremony, based on polytheism-a belief in the existence of a multitude of gods, which deities were subject to all the vices and passions of humanity, while distinguished by immunity from death.  Morality and virtue were unknown as elements of heathen service, and the dominant idea in pagan worship was that of propitiating the gods, in the hope of averting their anger and purchasing their favor."  In no part of LDS scripture or talk do we ever think of other gods as having vices and passions of humanity.  Our belief stems from the fact that we believe in our divine potential as Paul put it "we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ".  We do not, however, worship a multitude of Gods, as Paul put it "to us there is but one God", meaning there is only one God in the sense of the God who created us, whom we worship, who has all power over us.

I find it interesting to point out that in the Pearl of Great Price we find Abraham speaking of many Gods.  However, most of the world recognizes Abraham as the first great monotheist.  Furthermore, the entire Jewish canon (the Old Testament) is recognized as being completely monotheistic.  I propose a solution to this seeming discontinuity.  Think about who Abraham was dealing with in Egypt.  All the wicked priests around him were polytheists and of the pagan fashion.  So he was raised with that mentality.  So when God spoke to Abraham it wasn't anything strange for Abraham to hear God speak of "the Gods".  So God started off by explaining to Abraham how polytheism really works, how it is about exalted beings counseling together and one presiding over all.  However, the Egyptian form of polytheism was abominable and so God had Abraham preach monotheism after explaining the true nature of "the Gods".  It was much more important (and still is) to focus on the one and only true God of all of us, the only one the matters for us.  That the others exist, yes, that they have any affect or say on our exaltation, no.  So since one of the great evils of Abraham's times and all of the Old Testament was pagan polytheism, God focused on helping them understand that He alone was their God.  In our days, however, we have religions that completely misunderstand the nature of salvation.  Thinking that our end goal is to be an angel throughout all eternity.  We, however, have a more complete vision of exaltation (not more than Abraham or the prophets but than our contemporaries) and for such it is necessary to recognize that the reason we can become a God is because there have always been more than one God.  Again, this doesn't change our worship or our respect for Deity, it just expands our view of the borders of the universe.

*I also find this quite ironic.  A renowned historian Edward Gibbon in his book "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" wrote that pagans were "representing the Christians as a society of atheists".  Even the original believers in the True Church of Christ had complete misrepresentation of their view of deity.  Because the early Christians denounced the plurality of the gods that the pagans felt was essential, the pagan persecutors called them atheists.  In other words, because the early Christians worshiped too few gods for the pagans it was as if they didn't worship any gods.  So too today people misrepresent the LDS Christians as being polytheists (in the common vulgar sense of the word) because we accept the existence of multiple righteous Gods.  They weren't atheists, we're not polytheists, both solely worship, honor, respect and pray to the Father in the name of his Son by means of the Holy Ghost.

Relying Alone Upon the Merits of Christ

D&C 45:3-5-"Listen to him who is the advocate with the Father, who is pleading your cause before him— Saying: Father, behold the sufferings and death of him who did no sin, in whom thou wast well pleased; behold the blood of thy Son which was shed, the blood of him whom thou gavest that thyself might be glorified;  Wherefore, Father, spare these my brethren that believe on my name, that they may come unto me and have everlasting life."

This passage is one of my favorites in all of scripture.  We speak of Christ often as the Judge, but I prefer his role as Advocate (lawyer) as well.  I just finished reading Tad R. Callister's book "The Infinite Atonement" and one of the last chapters is about Christ's dual role as Judge and Advocate.  I highly recommend at least reading that chapter.  The understanding that there are numerous Judges and the Father can be seen as a head Judge is important to understanding what relying alone upon the merits of Christ means (see Moroni 6:4).  Especially since we know Christ himself taught that "except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."  The whole issue comes back down to Christ pronouncing us clean because of His works.

We see that Christ's case before the Father's for our defense is not based upon anything we have done.  At no point does Christ say "look at all the good things they have done, or listen to these people that have been so good" (when he says "spare these that believe on my name" he is simply stating his request. Since this comes after the word "wherefore" it is clear that he has already presented all of his "evidence" in the previous verse).  Christ's only defense for us relies alone upon His merits.  What a unique case.  How many times have you heard of a lawyer standing before a judge and saying "listen judge, I know this guy is guilty, I mean he has repeatedly broken this law.  But, look at all the good things I have done."  That would never stand in court.  Amazingly though, that is our only hope with God.  This is part of why Tad R Callister explained that it had to be an Infinite Atonement because anything short simply would not justify any of us being saved.  We simply are not worthy of anything according to justice.  However, because there is a mediator (as Boyd K Packer eloquently explains) we stand a chance.  The Father doesn't have to pay any regard to what we have done, he can completely turn a blind eye at that and rely alone upon the merits of Christ.  He effectively says to his Son, "I see thy sufferings and death when thou wast sinless, and because of this I will allow thee to be merciful towards whomever thou pleasest."  The verse explains that the people for which Christ is pleading his case are those that believe on his name.  So there is the key for us (meaning the only things we can do, hence "all that we can do"), we must believe on his name (which implies repentance, righteous works, charity, and ordinances-since all ordinances are symbols of Christ's Atonement which is also explained in the "Infinite Atonement".)  

In other words, the only reason the Father will extend mercy to us is because of what Christ did.  So then Christ says to the Father that in honor of his grace, spare those that believe in him.  So the terms of the contract have been changed so that now they are reasonable (just like Boyd K Packer's parable between justice and mercy).  Now instead of us trying to stand before the Father and make a useless case for why we should be forgiven, we rely alone upon the merits of Christ and then Christ tells us his new terms.  He says, believe on me, come unto me, be cleansed in my blood, be thou perfect, even as I am.  So because of Christ's works-his Infinite Atonement- he can appease the Father and justices demands and then he is allowed to assign us whatever requirements he pleases.  So returning back to the subject of multiple Judges, we may be able to say: Christ's Atoning blood completely and 100% satisfies the requirements of the first Judge, the Father.  We really don't even appear in the court room, this is a one on one meeting between Judge and Advocate, Father and Son, Creditor and Mediator, Justice and Mercy.  Then, once the Advocate has satisfied the Judge we are all freed from the demands of Justice that we could never meet, this can be thought of what it means to be saved by grace.  The Advocate has saved us solely based on his actions.  We are no longer under justice but under grace or mercy.  Salvation is now possible 100% thanks to Christ.  However, he then turns to us and says that we still must meet his requirements, that of obedience to what he teaches us.  He explains that for us to live with him we must love him, which we all automatically reply "of course we will love you, you just saved us."  He then rebuttals, "if you love me, keep my commandments".  This is why other religions erroneously accuse us of believing we are saved by works, because we believe that we have a contract or a covenant with Christ that we will be obedient to him because he has done for us what we could not. 

Elder James E. Talmage puts it succinctly: "We will be saved through the merits and by the atoning sacrifice of our Redeemer and Lord; and our claim upon the salvation provided is strictly dependent on our compliance with the principles and ordinances of the gospel as established by Jesus Christ."

(I acknowledge that for some people viewing the final judgment as a debate between the Father and Son does not seem consistent with them being one in mind, purpose, justice and mercy.  But I do believe this scriptural figurative example helps us understand how Christ is able to save us from our sins.)

"Learning" our salvation?

2 Timothy 3:7- "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

(So I am going to skip the whole "sorry that I haven't posted in so long, the first semester of grad school was pretty demanding" routine and get right to the point)

Erica and I are gospel doctrine teachers now and we have very different visions for what our class should be like.  I prefer dissecting passages of scripture and pulling out lots of quotes for clarification, while Erica prefers applying the scriptures to our modern needs and circumstances.  Tonight we went on a walk and we were talking about how feeling the spirit is more important than knowing all the ins-and-outs of scripture stories.  I know that is true but its hard because for me learning is a lot easier than feeling the spirit.

This verse written by Paul in regards to the last-days has always been one of the more sobering scriptures for me.  Whenever I feel proud of myself, because I have been going a few weeks straight of studying the scriptures everyday, this verse pops into my head and I say to myself "is this referring to people like me?"  I always struggle with this apparent dichotomy of knowledge and humility.  In the Church we are taught to study the scriptures daily and that "whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection. And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come."  As well as "seek learning, even by study and also by faith" and "it is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance" and Joseph Smith taught that we must "learn our salvation".  So it seems clear that knowledge and learning are very fundamental principles to the economy of heaven.  But at the same time, I fear that sometimes I am simply studying the gospel for my own aggrandizement or to feel smart.  I know the simple answer is "well, what are your motives? Are you doing it for righteous purposes?"  But I feel like sometimes I try to tell myself that I am doing it for the right reasons when deep down it may not be the case.  I worry that all my gospel study is in vain because all I really want to do is learn the gospel and not really live it.

I guess the best answer can be found in the verses directly after 2 Timothy 3:7.

8-10: "so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.  But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience."

Those verses comfort me as I realize that as long as I don't resist the truth with corrupt motives I can feel safe that I am coming to the truth.  In addition, Paul makes it clear that knowing the doctrine is important but also it is important to know how to live, what our purpose is, to have faith, love, patience and overcome trials. In fact, that's probably a pretty good formula for living the gospel: knowledge, service, faith, charity.  (But there I go again, trying to reduce the glorious gospel into a mathematical formula).