High Priest Group Christmas Letter

We gave the following letter to the members of our High Priest Group on Sunday and I thought it would be a nice thing to post here. They're a good bunch of men.

Dear Brethren,

As a High Priest Group Leadership, we want to express our great appreciation to you for your dedicated service to the members of the Liberty Ward. We are honored to serve with you as we witness the selfless way you conduct yourselves.

We thank you for taking your Home Teaching stewardship so personally, continually watching over your families. We probably don’t appreciate it as much as those families do, as this is the only way some of them keep in touch with the Church.

We appreciate your attendance and participation during the lessons that our teachers are diligent in preparing each week. We have all learned and grown much from one another’s counsel and point of view.

We want each of you to know how important you are to our group. Each of us has unique talents and personality that add to the group, all of which are necessary for us to grow as individuals. As the scriptures state:

“For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. …
“For the body is not one member, but many. …
“And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
“Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.”
(1 Corinthians 12:12, 14, 26-27)

During this holiday season, we wish all of you a Merry Christmas, and look forward to continuing to serve along side some of the most valiant men around.

With love,

[Signatures of High Priest Group Leadership]

The Nativity

To help get in the Christmas mood, and because I taught this lesson on Sunday in my High Priests class, I thought it would be nice to write my thoughts on the Nativity.

In Luke 2:26-35, the angel Gabriel visits the virgin Mary to announce she would be the Mother of the Son of God. Sometime in July 1839, Joseph Smith received a revelation on the priesthood and revealed that Gabriel is actually the prophet Noah. (History of the Church, 3:386). There is beautiful symbolism in Noah, who was the prophet when the world was destroyed (except for 8 people), being the one who would announce to the world the means by which they would be saved.

We know that Mary was "chosen" or foreordained to give birth to the Savior. (Alma 7:10 and Luke 1:28 - Inspired Version). We also know that she was "most beautiful and fair above all other virgins" (1 Nephi 11:15).

Joseph is perhaps the most famous foster father of all time. There is very little we know about Joseph from canonized scripture. However, there is an apocryphal record called "The History of Joseph the Carpenter", which reveals that Joseph was a widower with children from his previous marriage, that he died at the age of 111, and married Mary when she was about 14 years old. This may seem odd when considered in our societal norms, but apparently was not out of the ordinary during that time. We also learn that Mary remained a virgin all her days. We also can assume that he died sometime during Jesus' ministry because according to John 19:26-27, Jesus commends Mary to John's care. Both Mary & Joseph are direct descendants of King David, and according to James E. Talmage "At the time of the Savior's birth, Israel was ruled by alien monarchs. The rights of the royal Davidic family were unrecognized; and the ruler of the Jews was an appointee of Rome. Had Judah been a free and independent nation, ruled by her rightful sovereign, Joseph the carpenter would have been her crowned king; and his lawful successor to the throne would have been Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews." (Jesus the Christ, p. 82).

Lastly we know that Joseph was a just man. Mary & Joseph were espoused, which was a contractual agreement to marry. It wasn't just a simple engagement like we refer to it today; one needed to go through a sort of divorce to terminate the espousal. When Joseph found out that Mary was expecting, and that he wasn't the father, he had two options; a public trial, which would most likely end with the death of the one who committed adultery (see Deuteronomy 22:22-24); or Joseph could end the espousal privately by signing an agreement in front of witnesses. Before Joseph found out the true nature of Mary's pregnancy, he "minded to put her away privily". (Matthew 1:19). After this "trial of his faith", an angel (perhaps Gabriel again) appeared to him and told him not to be afraid to take Mary as a wife, because "that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost".

Joseph & Mary, probably 8-9 months pregnant, had to travel between 60-80 miles from the town of Nazareth to Bethlehem. One might wonder why someone so late in the stages of pregnancy, would travel this rough terrain instead of just staying at home. There are a few reasons why Mary accompanied Joseph to Bethlehem; first, it was prophesied that the Savior would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2), and also because I think personally Mary wanted to be near her husband.

There were two ways to get from Nazareth to Bethlehem. One way was to travel through Samaria, which we learn through the Savior's later teachings that Jews avoided. The other way was to cross the mountains, and travel along the Jordan River valley, and then back up through the mountains into Judea. However, this path is known as "Red Path" or the "Bloody Way", and is the same path that the traveler took in the parable of the Good Samaritan, wherein he was nearly beaten to death. This would not be an easy trip.

It's pretty well known that the conditions in which the Savior was born were extremely humble. Most scholars believe that he was born in one of the limestone caves in the area. He was laid in a manger, which is a food trough, and probably he was cushioned with the same food that fills the trough - hay or straw.

After the Savior is born, we read in Luke 2:8-14
"8 And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night.
9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men."

Elder James E. Talmage summarizes this occurrence with these words: "Tidings of such import had never before been delivered by angel or received by man—good tidings of great joy, given to but few and those among the humblest of earth, but destined to spread to all people. There is sublime grandeur in the scene, as there is divine authorship in the message, and the climax is such as the mind of man could never have conceived—the sudden appearance of a multitude of the heavenly host, singing audibly to human ears the briefest, most consistent and most truly complete of all the songs of peace ever attuned by mortal or spirit choir. What a consummation to be wished—Peace on earth! But how can such come except through the maintenance of good will toward men? And through what means could glory to God in the highest be more effectively rendered?" (Talmage, Jesus The Christ, p.88)

We can all learn a lesson from the shepherds who said "Let us now go" and "they came with haste" to see the Savior of the world.

One last tidbit I want to write is the stark contrast between the life of the Savior, who was technically the rightful king of Judea, and the man who was king when Christ was born - Herod. Even though many scholars are quick to dismiss the "massacre of the innocents", the episode of infanticide as described in Matthew 2:16, Herod's life was full of murder, even among his own wife and children, so it's not beyond his personality to order all infants to be murdered.

Frederic Farrar, author of The Life of Christ, writes this of Herod:
"It must have been very shortly after the murder of the innocents that Herod died. Only five days before his death he had made a frantic attempt at suicide, and had ordered the execution of his eldest son Antipater. His death-bed, which once more reminds us of Henry VIII, was accompanied by circumstances of peculiar horror; and it has been asserted that he died of a loathsome disease, which is hardly mentioned in history, except in the case of men who have been rendered infamous by an atrocity of persecuting zeal. On his bed of intolerable anguish, in that splendid and luxurious palace which he had built for himself, under the palms of Jericho, swollen with disease and scorched by thirst, ulcerated externally and glowing inwardly with a, 'soft slow fire,' surrounded by plotting sons and plundering slaves, detesting all and detested by all, longing for death as a release from his tortures yet dreading it as the beginning of worse terrors, stung by remorse yet still unslaked with murder, a horror to all around him yet in his guilty conscience a worse terror to himself, devoured by the premature corruption of an anticipated grave, eaten of worms as though visibly smitten by the finger of God's wrath after seventy years of successful villainy, the wretched old man, whom men had called the Great, lay in savage frenzy awaiting his last hour. As he knew that none would shed one tear for him, he determined that they should shed many for themselves, and issued an order that, under pain of death, the principal families of the kingdom and the chiefs of the tribes should come to Jericho. They came, and then, shutting them in the hippodrome, he secretly commanded his sister Salome that at the moment of his death they should all be massacred. And so, choking as it were with blood, devising massacres in its very delirium, the soul of Herod passed forth into the night."

Such were the circumstances and state of the world into which the Savior was born. It was by all accounts a miraculous birth; born of a virgin, in the most humble of circumstances, a birth announced by angels and the heavenly hosts. As difficult as it is to believe logically, the story of the Nativity is true. With additional scripture to confirm what is written in the Bible, added revelation to shed additional light on the story, and the spirit that is felt while reading and pondering, it becomes that much easier to believe, regardless of how illogical it might seem.

Lesser Known Stories of Faith

I have read Acts a few times in my life, but as I was reading Acts 5 the other day, I came across a scripture that jumped out at me like it never had before. Either I didn't pay much attention to it before, or I am losing light (see D&C 1:33).

At this time in the Church, the Apostles have performed their first recorded miracle (Acts 3) by healing the lame man at the Beautiful gate of the Temple. Word of the miracle travels fast, and people are starting come in droves to listen to and be healed by the Apostles and join the Church. Then in Acts 5:15, it says "Insomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them.”

Imagine the faith of these people that they would be healed of their sicknesses just by having the shadow of Peter pass over them! This scripture is also cross-referenced with Acts 19:11-12
“11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:
12 So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them.”

People are able to be healed through an article of clothing from Paul! These two stories are great examples of faith and that, at least for me, are not as widely known as others.

We Are Different

I have a little book called Made For Heaven, by C.S. Lewis; well actually it’s a compilation put together by his estate, I think. The second section of this book takes chapter 10 from his book The Problem of Pain. I was reading this little section this morning and read the following:

“I am considering not how, but why, He makes each soul unique. If He had no use for all these differences, I do not see why He should have created more souls than one. Be sure that the ins and outs of your individuality are no mystery to Him; and one day they will no longer be a mystery to you. The mould in which a key is made would be a strange thing, if you had never seen a key: and the key itself a strange thing if you had never seen a lock. Your soul has a curious shape because it is a hollow made to fit a particular swelling in the infinite contours of the Divine substance, or a key to unlock on of the doors in the house with many mansions.” (Made For Heaven, p.21)

Oddly enough, a primary song that has been sounding through our house lately has been “We are Different”:

1. I know you, and you know me.
We are as diff’rent as the sun and the sea.
I know you, and you know me,
And that’s the way it is supposed to be.

2. I help you, and you help me.
We learn from problems, and we’re starting to see.
I help you, and you help me,
And that’s the way it is supposed to be.

3. I love you, and you love me.
We reach together for the best we can be.
I love you, and you love me,
And that’s the way it is supposed to be.

I think that maybe this universal truth of the difference of personality is what Paul may have been referring to when he wrote the following to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 12:14-27):

14 For the body is not one member, but many.
15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?
17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?
18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him.
19 And if they were all one member, where were the body?
20 But now are they many members, yet but one body.
21 And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you.
22 Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:
23 And those members of the body, which we think to be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness.
24 For our comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together, having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked:
25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

I like this scripture because it echoes other truths as found in the scriptures. The Savior said that “But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant” (Matt. 23:11) and “He that is ordained of God and sent forth, the same is appointed to be the greatest, notwithstanding he is the least and the servant of all.” (D&C 50:26) We each bring something unique and very important to the Kingdom of God. We need to be careful not to downplay certain callings and exalt others, but treat them like they are - different for a good reason.

Too many times (unfortunately, I think) we tend to compare ourselves to others and desire qualities or attributes that others possess rather than be thankful for our unique talents and personalities. Over the last several months, I have been thinking more and more about this. The overwhelming thought I have come away with is that we don’t know what others struggle with. To covet someone’s lifestyle is very shortsighted for we only see what others want to show us. We don’t see what is hidden from us, or worse the things that they deeply struggle with inside.

All in all, I have come away with two things.

First, I am trying to be more happy with the unique gifts, talents and abilities that I posses, regardless of my shortcomings. I continue to try to enhance my strengths and improve my weaknesses but not so that I can become like someone else, but so I can become who I know I can be.

Second, I have learned that everyone struggles with different things and just because on the outside others may seem to have it all figured out, we don’t know what hidden things they are dealing with. While I try not to be judgmental – or even worse, hopeful that others may be struggling in life – in a way I think this point of view allows me to have a little more empathy towards others, and it does help me to appreciate myself, something we all need to do.

"...if ye are not one ye are not mine."

I wouldn’t normally write anything political, but because of the election last week, and the hotly contested Proposition 8 in California, I felt the need to write down some thoughts.

Last night I was reading a talk titled “The Blessings of Being Unified” by Elder Hugh W. Pinnock of the First Quorum of the Seventy. There wasn’t much that stood out to me in this particular talk; a few stories about various stakes, wards, neighbors and families overcoming differences to try to be more unified in their various activities. As the talk was winding down, I was getting more and more tired, and almost skipped the last paragraph. I’m glad I didn’t. It reads as follows: “With gratitude in my heart, brothers and sisters, for you and for that which we are doing together, I pray that we may each resolve, in this era of social problems and economic difficulty, to follow as one our prophet-leader and others who have been called to direct us. May we avoid the pain and problems that come to families, neighborhoods, and institutions when they are not one, in the name of Jesus Christ, our Redeemer, amen.”

You would think that these sentences were spoken in our day because of the economic challenges we are facing, and with the widening gap of political differences, including Proposition 8, we definitely have our fair share of social problems. As I read that last paragraph, this is what came to my mind. As a nation, we are definitely not united. We are more split than I think we have been for a long time. More and more issues are causing people to take one of two sides. There is hardly any middle ground anymore.

Then this morning I received an email about Scott Eckern, an LDS member who donated money toward and voted “Yes” on Proposition 8. Scott was the former Director of the California Music Theater, and second in command of the theater; this week at least one actor and composer of popular shows sent emails “decrying Eckern’s actions” and urging the artists and theater workers across the country to boycott the CMT. The mounting pressure of the emails and boycotts caused Eckern to resign his position. When did voting become something that should be decried? The email also links to a website that has been set up that shows people's names, companies and amount of money donated to help Proposition 8 pass. The site header says “The following individuals or organizations have donated money to the California Proposition 8 campaign which seeks to ban same sex marriages. Please do not patronize them.” So apparently organizations like UCLA, Disneyland, Intuit, Home Depot, Price Waterhouse Coopers, Ernst & Young, Boeing, Morgan Stanley, Columbia Pictures and the cities of Long Beach, Claremont and Los Angeles to name just a few, are now in danger of being boycotted because some of their employees exercised their right to vote. These actions just amaze me. I can’t believe the bitterness and hostility that one group would go through to dismiss the will of the people.

Back to the talk I read last night; the last sentence hit me the hardest “May we avoid the pain and problems that come to families, neighborhoods, and institutions when they are not one…” I shudder to think of where we are heading as a nation, and hope that somehow we don’t end up like the societies we read about that were destroyed because they were so divided. In D&C 38:27, the Savior said "I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine." If as a society we are not one, we are not His. Who do we belong to, then?

A man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.

I was reading in the May 1987 issue of the Ensign last night, and during Elder William Grant Bangerter’s talk “What It Means to Be a Saint”, he included a story from President Spencer W. Kimball:

“One day,” he said, “a friend took me to his ranch. He unlocked the door of a large new automobile, slid under the wheel, and said proudly, ‘How do you like my new car?’ We rode in luxurious comfort … to a beautiful new landscaped home, and he said with no little pride, ‘This is my home.’

“He drove to a grassy knoll. The sun was retiring behind the distant hills. He surveyed his vast domain. …

“With a wide sweeping gesture he boasted, ‘From the clump of trees, to the lake, to the bluff, and to the ranch buildings and all between—all this is mine. …

“I saw him lying in his death,” said President Kimball, “among luxurious furnishings in a palatial home. His had been a vast estate. … I spoke at his funeral, and I followed the cortege … to his grave, a tiny, oblong area the length of a tall man, the width of a heavy one.

“Yesterday I saw that same estate, yellow in grain, green in lucerne, white in cotton, seemingly unmindful of him who had claimed it” (Improvement Era, June 1968, pp. 81–82).

This story brought to mind a favorite scripture of mine, found in Luke 12:15. At this point in the Savior’s ministry he was speaking to “an innumerable multitude of people”, and one of them asked the Savior to talk to his brother and tell him to split some inheritance with him. The Savior refused and said “Man, who made me a judge or a divider over you”, and then he gives this warning: “Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.”

I would like to know the rest of the story told by President Kimball; I have a feeling that there may have been similar disputes over that inheritance as the one the Savior was asked to settle. To me this is a reminder that the purpose of this life is not, as a bumper sticker that I saw a lot in my youth states: “the one with the most toys wins”, because we obviously cannot take any of our earthly possessions with us when we die. The things that really matter in life are relationships with family and friends, growing in knowledge (both spiritual and temporal) and doing our best to serve God and our neighbors. I particularly like the statement by President Kimball that as he looked over the man’s land, it seemed “unmindful of him who had claimed it”. We may feel that we own our possessions, but surely they do not feel owned by us.

"First Things" First - Mormonism is Christian

I read an article today from “First Things: The Journal of Religion, Culture and Public Life” titled “Is Mormonism Christian?” The article is a dual effort between Elder Bruce D. Porter, a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy of the LDS Church and Gerald McDermott, professor of religion at Roanoke College and co-author of Claiming Christ: A Mormon–Evangelical Debate.

I thought Elder Porter did an exceptional job summarizing our beliefs (of course, that is his job :)). The only thing I thought was lacking in Elder Porter's section was that during his explanation of our belief in the Bible and how we generally take it quite literally, he failed to mention that we believe in the Bible “as far it is translated correctly”. I think this is something that sets us apart, and in a good way. I think it should be apparent to everyone that there is no way that the Bible, especially the New Testament, could possibly contain everything that God wants us to hear, or everything the Savior had to teach during his ministry. Not only is the Bible missing information, but some of the translations either purposely (1 Nephi 13:26-29) or through simple human errors, are incorrect or lacking.

There are a few things about Mr. McDermott’s piece that I wanted to comment on. Not that I have any authority to do so, but more for both my peace of mind and practice. McDermott says that there are four reasons that it is “unlikely” that the same Jesus who preached in Palestine is the same as the Jesus who visited the American continent (as described in the Book of Mormon).


1. He states that there are “many voices testifying” of the Palestinian Jesus (meaning the four Gospel authors), but that the Book of Mormon has only one voice, that of Joseph Smith who translated the Book of Mormon. However, the Book of Mormon consists of many different prophets who all “testified” of the Palestinian Jesus Christ. Just because Joseph translated the book, does not make it one voice any more than a group of men translating the New Testament writings, make it one voice.

2. His second argument is that the testimonies to the Palestinian Jesus come from the same period of time, but that the “single” voice of the Book of Mormon comes 1800 years later. This again is incorrect because the writings that Joseph translated occurred both before, during and after the Savior’s lifetime. If we used Mr. McDermott’s same rationale for the Bible, it was actually written (or translated) in 1611 (at least the King James Version). At best, the actual Bible as we have it today wasn’t put together as a complete book until at least 200 years after Christ (see Wikipedia). Comparatively, The Book of Mormon as we have it today was compiled sometime around 400 AD.

3. I honestly had a hard time understanding his third argument. He states that the American Jesus is “fixated upon America” while the Palestinian Jesus “seems to think of the coming Kingdom as a worldwide phenomenon not limited to one geographical part of the earth…”. I think this is quite a stretch. It’s pretty clear that Jerusalem is a holy city, and that it’s future holds a prominent place in Christianity. However, both Isaiah (Isaiah 2:2-3) and Micah (Micah 4:2) state that “for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.” So it’s obvious that there will be a Zion, or New Jerusalem, in addition to Jerusalem the ancient city. It’s not a matter of “favoritism”, it’s simply prophesy. McDermott also seems to have a problem with the three Nephites who were promised to not taste death until the Savior comes again. I’m not sure why this is such a problem for him. He actually argues that John was not promised to tarry until He comes (John 21:23), but only that he said “what is it to thee?" if John were to tarry until He comes. I’m not sure how many Christians have a problem believing that John was granted this gift. Actually, further revelation through Joseph Smith (D&C 7), and also the Book of Mormon, shed light on this verse. In 3 Nephi 28:6, speaking to those three Nephites, the Savior said “Behold, I know your thoughts, and ye have desired the thing which John, my beloved, who was with me in my ministry, before that I was lifted up by the Jews, desired of me.” This is just one example of how the Book of Mormon, and additional revelation from God can clarify what is vague in the Bible.

4. The fourth argument is that the Book of Mormon preaches the Trinity, which to me seems kind of strange. Here McDermott takes all this time to state how we are so different, and looking for differences, but then argues that we really believe in the Trinity because the Book of Mormon supposedly teaches it. The truth is, and Elder Porter actually presents this quite nicely in the same article, is that the Book of Mormon teaches that the Father, Son and The Holy Ghost are one, in the same sense that Jesus described it in the Intercessory Prayer (See John 17). The Book of Mormon does not teach the Nicene concept of the Trinity (three in one substance) but that, according to Elder Porter, "they are one in mind, purpose, will, and intention".

McDermott then addresses a few other thoughts on why we are so different from “historic Christianity”, and by that I assume he means Nicene (or 300-400 BC) Christianity, and in that he may be right; but Mormonism and true historic Christianity - that of the Savior’s ministry and teachings and those of the apostles – are quite the same.