Pages

Showing posts with label godhead. Show all posts
Showing posts with label godhead. Show all posts

Friday, December 21, 2018

If Jesus Christ is the "Lord God" then was he raising himself up in 1 Nephi 10:4? Or does this imply that the "Lord God" is Heavenly Father?

If Jesus Christ is the "Lord God" then was he raising himself up in 1 Nephi 10:4? Or does this imply that the "Lord God" is Heavenly Father?

The next related question I have is who made the covenant with Lehi in 1 Nephi 13:30 that, "the land which is choice above all other lands...his seed should have for the land of their inheritance"? This is another reference to the "Lord God."

In the temple today, I learned that without any shadow of a doubt, the word "Lord" can refer to God the Father. So, yes, it is plausible that here "Lord God" could refer to God the Father.

1 Nephi 14:8 asks, "Rememberest thou the covenants of the Father unto the house of Israel?" This seems to imply that God the Father made the covenants with the house of Israel, therefore it's reasonable that God the Father could mean the "Lord God." 

1 Nephi 20:16 says, "Come ye near unto me; I have not spoken in secret; from the beginning, from the time that it was declared have I spoken; and the Lord God, and his Spirit, hath sent me." Here Nephi is quoting Isaiah who is speaking Messianically, i.e. as if Jesus Christ is speaking. It seems pretty clear that Jesus Christ is referring to the other members of the godhead here, so the "Lord God" as Heavenly Father, and the Spirit as the Holy Ghost. 

2 Nephi 6:9 says, "Nevertheless, the Lord has shown unto me that they [those who were at Jerusalem] should return again. And he also has shown unto me that the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel, should manifest himself unto them in the flesh; and after he should manifest himself they should scourge him and crucify him, according to the words of the angel who spake it unto me." This is Jacob, Nephi's little brother, prophesying. It's very unambiguous here that the "Lord God" refers to Jesus Christ. 

Then there's these verses in 1 Nephi 21:22-23 which exactly the same as Isaiah 49:22-24, which both start, "Thus saith the Lord God:" and later it is clarified that it is talking about the LORD, so Jehovah. Jehovah is always, always Jesus Christ. At least as far as I understand. 

So these are just a handful of examples of how the words "Lord God" could mean either Jesus Christ or Heavenly Father or perhaps both. Agh!

I think the only way to get any kind of satisfactory answer about this is by gathering some data from searching the scriptures with a computer. I'm really glad I have this wordcruncher tool. I wish that I also had all of the standard works in one big, fat corpus so I could use other tools. But at least it allows me to do case-sensitive searches in word cruncher.

Search for 'Lord God'

Search for 'LORD'

Search for 'Lord' - not 'lord'

Perhaps cases of '. Lord' will really refer to lord and not Lord. Hmm.

There are probably other terms like Lord Omnipotent, Lord Almighty - I have not thought of all of them; maybe they are covered in 'Lord'.

There's also 'Lord ... God' - usually my/his/their/our etc.

It is going to take some work to try to figure out how to solve this problem. It is also going to require creating (i.e. getting my husband to create) a tool that exports the data into a spreadsheet. It is going to take some time.

So, to answer the question I was originally asking:

Probably in this particular verse "Lord God" refers to God the Father. Certainly the words "Lord God" elsewhere in the scriptures do refer to multiple members of the godhead. There are really only seven possibilities:

- God the Father
- Jesus Christ
- the Holy Ghost
- God the Father and Jesus Christ
- God the Father and the Holy Ghost
- Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost
- All of them at the same time

The eighth possibility is unsatisfactory, and that is that the reference is ambiguous. It's unsatisfactory because:
- Ambiguity = unknowable. God is not unknowable. He is also not ambiguous. He is real.
- My understanding of God should not be ambiguous!
- Is it the understanding of the writer that makes it ambiguous?
- Is it the language of whatever translation that makes it ambiguous?

The final question is this: does it matter? Does it matter which specific member of the godhead is acting, being referenced or described since they are all perfectly united in harmony of purpose - since they are all "one" in this way?

Whether or not it matters to you, it deeply matters to me. I think it matters a lot. I really, really, really, really want to know the actual nature of God.

I know this is not the only way to discover it. I know it is not a perfect way to discover it. I know it is not a complete way to discover it.

But it is a way.

Coming to know God

How to express the feelings in my heart? I'm not sure that it's possible.

Today I went to the temple. The kind of worship in the temple is not the same as the kind of worship in church buildings. Anyone can enter into the church building when it's open (unlike some extremely beautiful Catholic cathedrals and churches in France, for example, which are open all the time). To enter a dedicated temple you must qualify to have a temple recommend. It's a piece of paper that is signed by both your bishop and your stake president after being interviewed separately by them. The first and most important requirement to enter is to have faith in the Lord, Jesus Christ. Other requirements include being baptized, paying a full and honest tithe, keeping the dietary/health code, and following the law of chastity (abstinence before marriage, total fidelity after).

At church, we worship God in these ways:
- we sing hymns
- someone says an opening and closing prayer to Heavenly Father in the name of Jesus Christ, and we end by collectively saying, "amen."
- we listen to people share their testimony and when they close in the name of Jesus Christ, we collectively say "amen" again.
- There is one ritualistic, symbolic practice: the sacrament. A priest prays to Heavenly Father in the name of Jesus Christ to ask him to bless and sanctify the bread and the water to the souls of all those who partake or drink of it. We do this to remember the body and blood of Jesus Christ which was shed for us, and it's a symbolic witness that we are willing to take upon ourselves his name. We are promised that if we do this, we will always have the holy ghost with us.
- we separate into classes which are divided by age and/or gender and the singing, prayers, and teaching continue.

Inside the temple it's not like that at all.

In the temple, you present your recommend at the front desk. An officiater scans it. If it's valid, they let you enter. You go to a changing room. You change into white clothes: a white dress with long sleeves (and pockets) for women, white pants, white shirt, white tie for men. White socks, white slippers. If you are doing baptisms, you actually get changed into a thick, white jumpsuit which the temple launders. Usually when we go to the temple we do endowments or sealings.

The temple endowment is totally full of symbolism and ritual. Basically, you sit in a room and watch a film for about half of it. It's a participatory film which occasionally stops for you to do various things which are all pretty simple, but loaded with symbolism. At one point, you go into a new room. I am not sure how much of it I'm allowed to talk about so I'll err on the side of less.

The film is a narrative story about the creation of the earth and the point of human existence. Some big takeaways from the endowment ceremony are these:
- Jesus Christ is completely, perfectly obedient to the Father
- Adam and Eve's story is at least in part symbolic
- It was always the plan that we would need a Savior

Today there was a deaf woman in the room so the endowment ceremony had a film playing the entire time with actors signing the words as well as close captions.

And this is what really deeply touched me: I realized because of the deaf film that at the very end of the ceremony, the final reference to the Lord, it's actually about God the Father, not Jesus Christ. That... Completely changed my perspective about the entire endowment ceremony.

Beyond that, it changed my perspective about the word "Lord."

Actually, it very deeply bothers me - something about it, but I can't exactly explain what.

I had previously assumed that the word Lord was almost always Jesus Christ in the scriptures. I know that LORD in the Old Testament refers to Jehovah, who is Jesus Christ.

The first page of 1 Nephi has a reference to praying to "the Lord." I assumed that as Jews, maybe they were misguided in their understanding of the identity of God. That seems like a very reasonable assumption, one that I share with all Christian faiths, I guess.

The last page of 2 Nephi is a reference to calling on God the Father in the name of Jesus Christ. This is how I worship God. I just assumed Nephi learned more about the nature of God as he got older and finished the record.

Turns out, the Lord can refer to God the Father. It is unambiguously a reference to God the Father in the temple. Therefore, mightn't it be similar elsewhere in the scriptures?

Ergo: I made mistakes in my interpretation of the scriptures. In my search to highlight parts of the scriptures that refer to Jesus Christ, I sometimes highlighted the wrong thing.

THAT BOTHERS ME. A LOT.

So here's the possibilities I came up with for what the words about God in the scriptures could refer to:
- God the Father
- Jesus Christ
- the Holy Ghost
- both God the Father and Jesus Christ
- both Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost
- both God the Father and the Holy Ghost
- All Three At The Same Time

(Oh how the medieval numerologists are shouting with joy to see there are seven possibilities.)

The eighth: it could be ambiguous.

I am really unsatisfied with the idea of worshipping and learning about an ambiguous, unknowable God. It actually...the feeling in my heart when I consider that as a possibility is complete incredulity and dissatisfaction. It neither fits with what I believe and feel to be true nor with any shred of logical reasoning in my head. Meaning: if God is ambiguous and unknowable, why should I worship him at all.

This new idea (to me) that the word Lord can refer to a member of the godhead that isn't necessarily Jesus Christ doesn't compel me to despair and give up my faith - ha! No.

But it does make me yearn with every piece of my soul to study this very carefully and thoroughly - and a highlighter, a book, and lots and lots of time is NOT going to be the most successful method to do that. It will take too long and be too subjective.

I need to find a way to search the scriptures for all references to all the names of God (including pronouns - eghh), export them into a spreadsheet including the verse in which they fall, label them as being one of the eight possible cases, and then study hard the ambiguous examples until I understand which "God" they actually mean.

I could spend my entire life doing this.

But though it seems daunting, I know it would be incredibly worthwhile. What is more worthwhile to study in the scriptures beyond the nature of God?

Just as ASL shed a whole lot of light on my understanding of this topic, so will studying the scriptures in other languages/translations. The word cruncher app I've been playing around with gets me all the scriptures in English, the Old Testament in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek.

How I wish it could also have a parallel translation of the Bible - the whole Bible, not a dumbed-down abbreviated version - in Czech. I don't get why my church doesn't have its own digital version of the Bible in languages other than English; there has to be a way to get this thing I crave. But how?!

Just as strongly as I believe that God could, if he wanted to, make himself known to me through a visitation of an angel, or a clear vision, or any number of miraculous ways - I understand that one of the main purposes of this life is to try to walk by faith. It would defeat the purpose if I had the answers given to me. I believe that the promise repeated in the scriptures is true: if I ask, if I knock, if I search, if I ponder, if I pray - I can come to know God. 

But there is within me still a deep feeling of terrible loneliness that it has to be this way, that I have to be separated from God at all. I do not like it. It is so unsatisfying in a way that words don't come close to describing. 

Also, it's kind of like researching my ancestors. I really enjoy hearing people describe my great grandparents. I enjoy reading the stories. I enjoy collecting the records. I feel a lot closer to them as I hear their words describe these dead people.

But I never fully believe anything that is said or written about these dead ancestors of mine, at least completely. Like, I always have somewhere in my consciousness an understanding that all the records, all the memories of these people contain blatant biases. All of the records are flawed. I am certain that the scriptures - and certainly many or perhaps most of the interpretations of them! - are flawed. It definitely does not make it worthless to search these extant records meticulously. I don't even care that it's a weird approach to spirituality, to try to use computers to come closer to God.

But won't it be so great when we finally, finally get to meet our ancestors and actually know them? Far better than that - won't it be incredible to meet God and talk to him face to face? 

He feels so far away to me sometimes.

And even at the times when I feel closest to him, it is still farther than I want it to be. 

I believe and trust that there are multiple epistemologically valid ways to get closer to him. For example, trying to keep the commandments as I understand them. Trying to be like him, even if I fail. Just because I personally feel very little confidence that asking a simple, humble prayer will get me the closeness and the answers I seek doesn't mean I won't try it.

As with all of my really, truly deep interests, a thorough, thoughtful analytical treatment is probably my favorite way to try to come to know something because I probably overvalue facts and logic. I hypothesize that as I search the scriptures, there will be less cases of "ambiguous God" than I thought, and that the cases that are ambiguous will bother me less the more I study them. I also hypothesize that the ones that do bother me might be solvable through reading other scriptures (or perhaps even nonscriptural texts). Or perhaps answers will emerge through searching the scriptures through a different translation in a different language. We will see.