LeGrand L. Baker

Alma 43 – LeGrand Baker – Covenant Names

I did not send an email last week because I didn’t have one to send. We have come to the war chapters in Alma and I was not at all sure how I could deal with them. I finally concluded that I couldn’t. The author of these chapters understood war tactics far better than I do, so there is no point in my commenting on what he explained to us. So I have decided to just skip them.

However, there is one part that cannot be passed over lightly.

The thousand year history that is the Book of Mormon is replete with wars, but only this one is described in much detail. There seems to be three reasons for Mormon’s choosing this one.

First, in the overall temple pattern of the Book of Mormon these war chapters map perfectly to the lonely, dreary part of the ancient temple drama.

Second, this war is clearly defined as a “holy war.” The key to understanding that is the series of covenants and new names in the accounts of the “title of liberty” and of the “sons of Helaman.”

Third, the story, as Mormon tells it, is a perfect example of the value of making and keeping covenants—-which is the only way we can navigate through the obstacles of this lonely world

In the scriptures and in the ordinances, whenever there is a new covenant there is also a new name. The new name is a way of identifying both the covenant and the covenant maker. For example, when we are baptized or take the sacrament we also take upon ourselves the name of the Savior, as did the Nephite Christians in this narrative.

A name is an identity. We use name-titles all the time to identify who people are: father, mother, bishop, elder, mayor. president. Each of these is a name-title that identifies us beyond the name one received at birth. That is also true with covenant new names it is with covenant new names.

The overriding message of these war chapters is that those who were true to their covenants and honored the names (that is, true to their covenant identity) are empowered to fulfill their covenants.

The story begins back when the Lamanites who were converted to the gospel “called their names Anti-Nephi-Lehies; and they were called by this name and were no more called Lamanites” (Alma 23:17). They covenanted that they would never again take up arms against their brethren and escaped to the Nephite territory where they were given refuge.

There are many wars in Book of Mormon history as the people struggle to overcome the aloneness of this dark and dreary world. But Mormon chooses to give the most detail about one, which he identifies as a sacred war between good and evil. He introduces it with a whole series of covenants and covenant names (There are always new names associated with new covenants).

Captain Moroni “rent his coat” (after that it is called “garment” so it is the outer of t he two—there are always two). He wrote a chiastic poem on it and he gives it the title of “Liberty,” and he made a covenant. “He bowed himself to the earth, and he prayed mightily unto his God for the blessings of liberty to rest upon his brethren, so long as there should a band of Christians remain to possess the land (Alma46:12-13)

At this point Mormon interrupts his narrative to insert the information that those who believe in Christ “took upon them, gladly, the name of Christ,” and are called Christians (Alma 46:14-18).

Captain Moroni then identified the land in terms of its geographical boundaries (measuring it and defining it as sacred space) and gave it the same name as the poem—“the land of liberty.” “And he said: Surely God shall not suffer that we, who are despised because we take upon us the name of Christ, shall be trodden down and destroyed, until we bring it upon us by our own transgressions (Alma 46:17-18).”

The people come and join in the covenant that they will keep the Lord’s commandments and he will preserve them in their Liberty (Alma 46:19-22).

Shortly thereafter we are told that the sons of Helaman “entered into a covenant to fight for the liberty of the Nephites,” and “they called themselves Nephites” (Alma 53:16-17).

The boys’ strength was a result of the teachings and examples of their parents who had been the original Anti-Nephi-Lehies. They had been taught by their mothers, that if they did not doubt, God would deliver them (Alma 56:47).” And their fathers, who could not participate in the war because of the covenant they had made, brought “many provisions” into the warzone for their sons (Alma 56:27).

The object of the story is to teach that because the fathers, the mothers, and their sons kept their covenants, all the boys were protected—-some were badly hurt, but they all survived.

“The Lord had supported them, yea, and kept them from falling by the sword, insomuch that even one soul has not been slain (Alma 58:39).

As I observed earlier, the lonely dreary world of the Book of Mormon’s ancient Israelite temple drama maps to these war chapters. That being so, these war stories are a metaphor of the way we should live our lives in this world. The message is singular: If we are true to the Savior and to the covenants we have made, then there will be empowered to keep our covenants—-there is no promise that we will not be hurt, but there is an absolute certainty that we will be triumphant in the end.

Alma 42:6, LeGrand Baker, “appointed unto man to die”

6 But behold, it was appointed unto man to die

Death always gets a bad press in human culture. The reasons are quite obvious. What is left over after the spirit is gone may be down right gruesome, or if it isn’t, it soon begins to stink and having it around becomes macabre. So we get it stowed away as soon as it is practicable. But that’s just the point: all we get to see is the left overs.

Like to country preacher said: “We shouldn’t be mournin’ fer good ole Sadie. Its only the shell that’s here in the casket. The nut still lives on.”

We are appointed to die, and however we may think of it, the fact remains: the assurance that we can die is one of the greatest blessings of the Atonement.

A much beloved and frequently repeated scripture is this one about Adam and Eve. It reads,

15 And I, the Lord God, took the man, and put him into the Garden of Eden, to dress it, and to keep it.
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. (Moses 3:15-17)

Every word in that scripture is important.

And I, the Lord God, commanded the man, saying…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.

God had to forbid it. The laws of justice and mercy insist that he do so. God could not have commanded them to eat that fruit, or even tell them that it would be OK, because if he had, then he would have been responsible for their expulsion from the Garden and into this world. If he had been responsible for putting us here, he also would have been equally responsible for getting us back. Had that happened, it would have left us without responsibility, without agency, purpose, or the freedom to be our Selves. We would have come, not to act, but to be acted upon. So his instructions were:

“nevertheless, thou mayest choose for thyself, for it is given unto thee.”

What was true of Adam and Eve was equally true of ourselves. We did not leave the premortal spirit world because we were forced to come to this earth, but we left because we understood our Heavenly Father’s plan and trusted in the Saviour’s atonement. We came here because we chose to come. And now, having made that decision, we are free to make the decisions about what we will do while we are here. And that is what this experience is all about.

In those same verses, we read the words of the very first covenant that our Father in Heaven made with his earthly children.

“for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.”

Because, from our this-world perspective, death is sometimes a fearful thing, those words are usually read as a curse rather than as a blessing. But they are not a curse, they are the words of the covenant that evoke one of our greatest blessings.

It is the promise that if God’s children chose to come to this earth, he guarantees that there will be a way to get out again. Being here forever—-living in this world’s tensions between good and evil forever—-would be a perpetual hell. We needed the experience of knowing and choosing, but there also had to be a promise that we wouldn’t have to be here forever. So Adam and Eve left the Garden with the knowledge that they could also leave this world, and that when that time came, the Atonement would make it possible that they take no baggage with them, except the products of their own choices.

The covenant to each of us is: “If you choose to go down into that dark and dreary world, then, after you have learned what you are supposed to learn, you may return home again. We are not compelled to stay there in this world because the Lord has provided a way for us to return to him. The fulfillment of that covenant is in the words: “thou shalt surely die.”

Alma 42:1-4, LeGrand Baker, symbolism of the tree of life.

Alma 42:1-41
And now, my son, I perceive there is somewhat more which doth worry your mind, which ye cannot understand—which is concerning the justice of God in the punishment of the sinner; for ye do try to suppose that it is injustice that the sinner should be consigned to a state of misery.
2 Now behold, my son, I will explain this thing unto thee. For behold, after the Lord God sent our first parents forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground, from whence they were taken—yea, he drew out the man, and he placed at the east end of the garden of Eden, cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the tree of life—
3 Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed cherubim and the flaming sword, that he should not partake of the fruit—
4 And thus we see, that there was a time granted unto man to repent, yea, a probationary time, a time to repent and serve God.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

The ancient Hebrew temple rituals at the time of Solomon’s Temple were a dramatic presentation of the cosmic myth and the plan of redemption. In that presentation, the sense of aloneness and longing for home that we find in the Hymn of the Pearl is shown to be a consequence of the fall of Adam and Eve, when they were expelled from the Garden of Eden. There they had walked and talked with God, and had unrestricted access to the fruit of the tree of life and to the waters of life. Jewish tradition holds that they had been clothed in a garment of light, which Nibley suggests was the Shechinah. (Hugh Nibley, Abraham in Egypt (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1981, 2000), 373; Nibley, Abraham in Egypt, in CWHN 14:373. See “Shechinah” in LDS Bible dictionary.) Their loss of all of these things their—their personal relationship with God, the clothing that defined them as sacred space, and the food and drink that kept their bodies forever young—the loss of those things left humankind naked, vulnerable, hungry, and increasingly feeble until only death could release them from their infirmities.

Yearning to return home again was the foundation principle of the ancient Israelite religion and of their temple service. It was an expression of hope that somehow they might regain access to the paradisiacal world, partake of the fruit, and participate in the society of the gods. (Essentially it was the same hope whose fulfillment is described in the last three chapters of the Book of Revelation.) That hope was most vividly expressed on the last day of their eight-day temple festival. For mankind, the wish to return to the presence of God is the wish to return to sacred time in sacred space.

According to ancient tradition, when Adam left the Garden of Eden, he took two things with him. One was the garment of skins that replaced his garment of light, representing his priesthood, and would be his protection from the things of this world. The other was a branch of the tree of life. This branch became his kingly scepter. Adam was thus the world’s first high priest and its first king.

In his book about of the menorah, Yarden suggests that at the time of the Exodus, the symbol of the tree of life was the almond tree. He reports that the “almond is the first tree of spring in the Near East” and “the last to shed its leaves.” It has large white blossoms that were chosen by the Lord to be the pattern for the bowls of the lamps at the end of each arm of the menorah (Exodus 25:33-34). When Aaron’s staff blossomed and bore fruit, it “yielded almonds” (Numbers 17:8).

There are many kinds of trees and other plants that have been used to represent the tree of life—the olive tree, date palm, and grape vines. Wheat might also represent the tree of life. The bread that is made from wheat is one of the most important symbols of the fruit of the tree of life. The Savior used it when he spoke of his body as the bread of life.

In the New Testament, the Savior also spoke of himself as a grape vine, and that it was symbolic of the tree of life (John 15:1-9). It appears that when the Savior described himself as a vine, he was citing an ancient prophecy that we do not now have in our scriptures. Apparently, from that same ancient source both Nephi and Alma used the same simile, suggesting there may have been a prophecy on the brass plates with which the people were familiar (Alma 16:17).

Nephi wrote of the “true vine” and the “true olive tree” as though they were the same representation of the tree of life (1 Nephi 15:15-16, 21-22).

Of the variety of trees that represented the tree of life, the one that is most frequently associated with it is the olive tree. Its fruit is edible; its oil was one of the most precious commodities in the ancient Near East. The oil was used for many things, most notably for cooking, for light, for healing the body, and for ceremonial anointing. Its fruit represented the fruit of the tree of life, while its oil represented the waters of life. In an excellent paper, Stephen Ricks cited a number of ancient sources to show that the olive tree was most commonly associated with the tree of life.Stephen Ricks cited a number of ancient sources to show that the olive tree was most commonly associated with the tree of life. { 1 }

In an incomplete Serbian version of the Secrets of Enoch, the tree of life is described as being “in that place where God rests.” Enoch saw the Garden and wrote:

Every tree sweet-flowering, every fruit ripe, all manner of food perpetually bubbling with all pleasant smells, and four rivers flowing by with quiet course, and every [thing that] growth is good, bearing fruit for food, and the tree of life is at that place, at which God rests when he goes up into Paradise, and that tree is ineffable for the goodness of its sweet scent, and another olive tree alongside was always discharging the oil of its fruit. { 2 }

The phrase, “another olive tree alongside,” suggests that the tree of life was an olive tree. In the Revelation of John, he says “the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Revelation 22:2). It is likely that Joseph Smith had that scripture in mind when he sent a copy of the revolution that is now section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants to W. W. Phelps. Joseph wrote,

I send you the “olive leaf” which we have plucked from the tree of Paradise, the Lord’s message of peace to us.

According to ancient tradition, when Adam left the Garden of Eden, he took two things with him. One was the garment of skins that represented his priesthood and would be his protection. The other was a branch of the tree of life. This branch became his kingly scepter. { 3 } Adam was thus the world’s first high priest and its first king.{ 4 }

Tradition also holds that the branch of the tree of life that Adam took from the garden was passed down through the generations until it became Moses’s “rod of God” (Exodus 4:20,17:9). Moses gave it to his brother Aaron, { 5 } for whom it blossomed as an evidence of his priesthood authority. Thereafter, it was kept in the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle.

As one would expect, in other ancient cultures, where the king had no legitimate claim to priesthood supported kingship, the kings adopted the forms and titles of legitimacy. Thus the tradition of a tree of life as a source of power and goodness is found in Mesopotamia, Egypt, Palestine, Greece, { 6 } and in ancient America. { 7 }

Almond represented the tree of life.

In his book about of the menorah, Yarden suggests that at the time of the Exodus, the symbol of the tree of life was the almond tree. He reports that in the Near East, the “almond is the first tree of spring in the Near East” and “the last to shed its leaves.” { 8 } It has large white blossoms that were chosen by the Lord to be the pattern for the bowls of the lamps at the end of each arm of the menorah (Exodus 25:33-34). When Aaron’s staff blossomed and bore fruit, it “yielded almonds” (Numbers 17:8).{ 9 }

There are many kinds of trees and other plants that have been used to represent the tree of life—the olive tree, date palm, { 10 } and grape vines. { 11 } Wheat might also represent the tree of life. The bread that is made from wheat is one of the most important symbols of the fruit of the tree of life.

Grape vine represented the tree of life.

In the New Testament, the Savior spoke of himself as a grape vine, and that it was symbolic of the tree of life (John 15:1-9). It appears that when the Savior described himself as a vine, he was citing an ancient prophecy that we do not now have in our scriptures. Apparently, from that same ancient source both Nephi and Alma used the same simile, suggesting there may have been a prophecy on the brass plates with which the people were familiar (Alma 16:17).

Olive tree represented the tree of life.

Nephi wrote of the “true vine” and the “true olive tree” as though they were the same representation of the tree of life (1 Nephi 15:15-16, 21-22).

Of the variety of trees that represented the tree of life, the one that is most frequently associated with it is the olive tree. Its fruit is edible; its oil was one of the most precious commodities in the ancient near East. The oil was used for many things, most notably for cooking, for light, for healing the body, and for ceremonial anointing. Its fruit represented the fruit of the tree of life, while its oil represented the waters of life. In an excellent paper, Stephen Ricks cited a number of ancient sources to show that the olive tree was most commonly associated with the tree of life. { 12 }

In an incomplete Serbian version of the Secrets of Enoch, the tree of life is described as being “in that place where God rests.” Enoch saw the Garden and wrote:

Every tree sweet-flowering, every fruit ripe, all manner of food perpetually bubbling with all pleasant smells, and four rivers flowing by with quiet course, and every [thing that] growth is good, bearing fruit for food, and the tree of life is at that place, at which God rests when he goes up into Paradise, and that tree is ineffable for the goodness of its sweet scent, and another olive tree alongside was always discharging the oil of its fruit. { 13 }

The phrase, “another olive tree alongside,” suggests that the tree of life was an olive tree. In the Revelation of John, he says “the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations” (Revelation 22:2). It is likely that Joseph Smith had that scripture in mind when he sent a copy of the revolution that is now section 88 of the Doctrine and Covenants to W. W. Phelps. Joseph wrote,

I send you the “olive leaf” which we have plucked from the tree of Paradise, the Lord’s message of peace to us. { 14 }

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
ENDNOTES

1} Stephen D. Ricks, “Olive Culture in the Second Temple Era and Early Rabbinic Period,” in Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch, eds., The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5 (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book and FARMS, 464-65.

2} The Secrets of Enoch, MSS B, 8:1-3, in R.H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1913), 2:434.

3} Geo Widengren, “King and Covenant,” in Journal of Semitic Studies, Vol. II, No. I, 1957.

4} Geo Widengren, The King and the Tree of Life in Ancient Near Eastern Religion (Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift, 1951), 10-59.

5} Geo Widengren, The King and the Tree of Life in Ancient Near Eastern Religion, Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift, 1951. 38-41.

6} Rachel Hachlili, The Menorah, the Ancient Seven-armed Candelabrum, Origin, Form and Significance (Leiden, Brill, 2001), 36-39. C. Wilfred Griggs, “The Book of Mormon as an Ancient Book,” in Noel B. Reynolds, ed., Book of Mormon Authorship (Provo, Utah, Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1982), 75-102. Also his “The Tree of Life in Ancient Cultures,” in Ensign, June 198, 26-31.

7} See, M. Wells Jakeman, Stela 5, Izapa, Chiapas, Mexico; a Major Archaeological Discovery of the New World (University Archaeological Society, Special Publication No. 2, Provo, 1958); V. Garth Norman, “Izapa Sculpture,” Part 2, Brigham Young University, New World Archaeological Foundation Papers, No. 30 (1976):165–235. Irene Briggs, “The Tree of Life in Ancient America: Its Representations and Significance,” Bulletin, University Archaeological Society, No. 4 (March 1953):1–18.

8} Leon Yarden, The Tree of Light, A Study of the Menorah, The Seven-branched Lampstand, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1971, 40.

9} Geo Widengren, The King and the Tree of Life in Ancient Near Eastern Religion, Uppsala Universitets Arsskrift, 1951, 38-41.

10} For discussions of the widespread use of the symbol of the tree of life see C. Wilfred Griggs, “The Tree of Life in Ancient Cultures,” in Ensign, June, 1988, 26-31; and Griggs’s, “The Book of Mormon as an Ancient Book,” in Noel B. Reynolds, ed., Book of Mormon Authorship (Provo, Utah, Religious Studies Center, BYU, 1982), 75-101.

11} Ad de Vries, Dictionary of Symbols and Imagery (London, North-Holland, 1974), 474.

Stephen D. Ricks, “Olive Culture in the Second Temple Era and Early Rabbinic Period,” in Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch, eds., The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5 (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book and FARMS, 1994), 464-66.

12} Stephen D. Ricks, “Olive Culture in the Second Temple Era and Early Rabbinic Period,” in Stephen D. Ricks and John W. Welch, eds., The Allegory of the Olive Tree: The Olive, the Bible, and Jacob 5 (Salt Lake City, Deseret Book and FARMS, 464-65.

13} The Secrets of Enoch, MSS B, 8:1-3, in R.H. Charles, The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1913), 2:434.

14} Joseph Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, selected and arranged by Joseph Fielding Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1976), 18.

Alma 41:7-15 – LeGrand Baker – “Eternal Punishment”

7 they are their own judges, whether to do good or do evil.
8 Now, the decrees of God are unalterable; therefore, the way is prepared that whosoever will may walk therein and be saved.
10 …Behold, I say unto you, wickedness never was happiness.
11 …they have gone contrary to the nature of God; therefore, they are in a state contrary to the nature of happiness.
15 For that which ye do send out shall return unto you again, and be restored; therefore, the word restoration more fully condemneth the sinner, and justifieth him not at all.

– – – – – – – – – – – –

It is my carefully considered opinion that in our Father in Heaven’s entire existence he has never punished anybody for anything. Now before you take that out of context let me explain. Our Heavenly Father is a tender, loving parent who will do, and who has done, everything possible for the salvation of his children. He is a God of absolute mercy. Now, we have our entire existence in linear time to determine whether we will accept all or only part of his merciful love. He is also a God of absolute justice, guaranteeing to each one of us all of the blessings we are WILLING to accept. He cannot force us to be happy as he is happy, just as he cannot force us to learn to be free from sin. So he blesses us, loves us and teaches us through the Holy Ghost how to listen and love him in return. If we are slow to listen, then he warns and even threatens us. But he does not punish us, he only tries to let us understand the consequences of our own bullheadedness.

I think that is what Alma is trying to explain that to his own wayward son, and that is also what the Lord explained to the Prophet Joseph and his friends.

5 Wherefore, I revoke not the judgments which I shall pass, but woes shall go forth, weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth, yea, to those who are found on my left hand.
6 Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment.
7 Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory.
8 Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery, for it is meet unto you to know even as mine apostles.
9 I speak unto you that are chosen in this thing, even as one, that you may enter into my rest.
10 For, behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore—
11 Eternal punishment is God’s punishment.
12 Endless punishment is God’s punishment.
13 Wherefore, I command you to repent, and keep the commandments which you have received by the hand of my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., in my name;

After I sent the above to our friends, I received the following from a very dear friend:

February 3, 2012
From Chauncey C. Riddle

Legrand: Just read your message of 11/27/11 about punishment. I completely agree with you that Father only blesses. Every so-called cursing is actually a blessing intended to help the recipient. God is love and his love extends to all. It is conditional, depending on the capacity of the recipient to receive. I find the pervasive comments about the importances of unconditional love to be very tiring because they reveal so little thought.

Best to you, CCRiddle

Alma 41:3, LeGrand Baker, Judged by works

3Alma 41:3
3 And it is requisite with the justice of God that men should be judged according to their works; and if their works were good in this life, and the desires of their hearts were good, that they should also, at the last day, be restored unto that which is good.

As we discussed last week, the sequence of events surrounding the resurrection are these: At the time of our resurrection we are judged according to the quality of our spirit and therefore receive a resurrected body that is perfectly compatible with the truth, light, love, and joy that our spirit has assimilated and that it radiates. That being so, the criteria upon which we are judged at the resurrection is whether we keep our covenants, including our relationships with ourselves, with God, and with other people.

Alma taught the sequence of events to his son when he said:

[1] there is a space between death and the resurrection of the body, and a state of the soul in happiness or in misery

[2] until the time which is appointed of God that the dead shall come forth, and be reunited, both soul and body,

[3] and be brought to stand before God,

[4] and be judged according to their works (Alma 40:21-2).

Alma repeated the same sequence again:

[1] and the atonement bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead;

[2] and the resurrection of the dead bringeth back men into the presence of God;

[3] and thus they are restored into his presence,

[4] to be judged according to their works, according to the law and justice (Alma 42:23).

One of the importance facts of these two sequences is that in # 4, the first reads, “according to their works”; and the second elaborates: “according to their works, according to the law and justice,” emphasizing the legal significance of the meaning of “works.”

After the resurrection we will all stand before the Savior and he will judge us “of your our works, whether they [the works] be good or whether they be evil”(3 Nephi 27:14-15, Mormon 3:20). Thereafter, the Savior “shall deliver up the kingdom, and present it unto the Father, spotless” (D&C 76:107-108).

That sequence asks interesting questions: If, by the resurrection, our eternal state of happiness is already established, then by what “works” will we be judged after that? And why?

The answer to the “why” question is self evident. In the Kingdom of God, everything must be done with legal and correct precision (zedek) because “mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion (D&C132:8).” Therefore it follows that the final judgment must be based on criteria that is exact, unquestionable, and legally sound.

Now we are left with only one question: What is the definition of “works”? The dictionaries don’t help much. The word, whether in Greek or Hebrew, or English, only means the things we do.

In the scriptures “works” is often tied very closely to “faith,”—- pistis. Pistis is a complex word that denotes all the facets of making and keeping covenants. Peter uses pistis to represent the entire early Christian temple experience (2 Peter 1:1-4). When the meaning of “works” is established by its relationship with pistis, then “works” also has a temple/covenant connotation. But it means what we do rather than only what we say.

An example is the famous passage in 2 Nephi:

10 But behold, when the time cometh that they shall dwindle in unbelief, after they have received so great blessings from the hand of the Lord—-having a knowledge of the creation of the earth, and all men, knowing the great and marvelous works [ordinances] of the Lord from the creation of the world; having power given them to do all things by faith [pistis, covenant]; having all the commandments from the beginning, and having been brought by his infinite goodness into this precious land of promise—-(2 Nephi 1:10).

We learn from Samuel the Lamanite that everyone will be redeemed [which he defines as being brought into the presence of Christ] because of the resurrection to be “ judged of their works.” However, only some will be able to remain there. Others are “cast out of his presence,” and must go somewhere else.

To the Book of Mormon prophets, there are only two degrees of glory. Either one is in the celestial kingdom in the presence of God or one is not in the presence of God.

32 And it came to pass that I said unto them that it was a representation of things both temporal and spiritual; for the day should come that they must be judged of their works, yea, even the works which were done by the temporal body in their days of probation [That is why priesthood ordinances must be performed for the dead by people who still live in this world] (1 Nephi 15:32).

That these “works” are the ordinances is made clear in D&C 128:7-8, where the Prophet Joseph used the words “works” and “ordinances” interchangeably.

You will discover in this quotation [Revelation 20:12] that the books were opened; and another book was opened, which was the book of life; but the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works; consequently, the books spoken of must be the books which contained the record of their works, …. Now, the nature of this ordinance consists in the power of the priesthood, by the revelation of Jesus Christ, wherein it is granted that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. …. for out of the books shall your dead be judged, according to their own works, whether they themselves have attended to the ordinances in their own propria persona, or by the means of their own agents, according to the ordinance which God has prepared for their salvation from before the foundation of the world, according to the records which they have kept concerning their dead (D&C 128:7-8).

Alma describes “works” in much the same way by uniting “works” with “righteousness.” That poses another interesting question: What constitutes a “righteous” ordinance? “Righteousness” is zedek, a Hebrew word that identifies the correctness of priesthood and temple ordinances. Zedek means something is done in the right place and at the right time, while doing the right things in the right way, and using the right words, dressed the right way, doing it all with the right authority. Alma says all that when he uses the phrase “works of righteousness.”

16 I say unto you, can you imagine to yourselves that ye hear the voice of the Lord, saying unto you, in that day: Come unto me ye blessed, for behold, your works have been the works of righteousness upon the face of the earth?
17 Or do ye imagine to yourselves that ye can lie unto the Lord in that day, and say—Lord, our works have been righteous works upon the face of the earth—and that he will save you? (Alma 5:16-17)

D&C 132 tells us that it requires more than just doing the ordinance correctly for them to be acceptable by the Lord. The revelation explains:

7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed [the Savior], both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed [the Prophet Joseph or one designated by him], whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power…. are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead (D&C 132:7).

So it is apparent that the last step in making the ordinances valid, is when they are sealed (ratified) by the Holy Spirit of promise. For most of us, we enter into those covenants during this life, and they remain in tact when we are dead, until we have throughly proved ourselves, then they are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise. As ordinance work for the dead is possible, so must ratification of our ordinances after death also be possible. That ultimate sealing may also be the final criterion on which we are “judged by our works.”

Alma 41:2, LeGrand Baker, “Restored to their proper order”

2 I say unto thee, my son, that the plan of restoration is requisite with the justice of God; for it is requisite that all things should be restored to their proper order. Behold, it is requisite and just, according to the power and resurrection of Christ, that the soul of man should be restored to its body, and that every part of the body should be restored to itself.

“Restored to their proper order”

“Order” is a multifaceted word. In this context it apparently means reuniting one’s body and spirit, but even that asks more questions than it answers. Verses 3-8 tell us that “order” also has to do with how the quality of one’s soul determines the quality of one’s resurrected body.

Today I have tried to explore that question, primarily by examining D&C 88, but also reading what some of the brethren have said about that. I think you will especially enjoy President Wilford Woodruff’s description of the clothing worn by resurrected persons.

In Alma 41, “soul” is clearly a reference to the premortal spirit that occupies the physical body. However, in D&C 88 the Lord uses that word differently, and clarifies the difference:

(Doctrine and Covenants 88:15-16)
5 And the spirit and the body are the soul of man.
16 And the resurrection from the dead is the redemption of the soul.

In the Book of Mormon redemption means to be brought into the presence of God. As Samuel the Lamanite explained:

17 But behold, the resurrection of Christ redeemeth mankind, yea, even all mankind, and bringeth them back into the presence of the Lord.
18 Yea, and it bringeth to pass the condition of repentance, that whosoever repenteth the same is not hewn down and cast into the fire; but whosoever repenteth not is hewn down and cast into the fire; and there cometh upon them again a spiritual death, yea, a second death, for they are cut off again as to things pertaining to righteousness (Helaman 14:17-18).

Alma and Mormon taught the same principle.

23 But God ceaseth not to be God, and mercy claimeth the penitent, and mercy cometh because of the atonement; and the atonement bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead; and the resurrection of the dead bringeth back men into the presence of God; and thus they are restored into his presence, to be judged according to their works, according to the law and justice (Alma 42:23).

6 And he bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead, whereby man must be raised to stand before his judgment-seat (Mormon 7:6).

Section 88 explains that the quality of one’s resurrected body determines which of the three degrees of glory one will inherit:

17 And the redemption of the soul is through him that quickeneth all things, in whose bosom it is decreed that the poor and the meek of the earth shall inherit it [the earth].
18 Therefore, it [the earth] must needs be sanctified from all unrighteousness, that it may be prepared for the celestial glory;
19 For after it hath filled the measure of its creation, it shall be crowned with glory, even with the presence of God the Father;
20 That bodies [resurrected persons whose bodies are celestial] who are of the celestial kingdom may possess it forever and ever; for, for this intent was it [the earth] made and created, and for this intent are they [persons with celestial bodies] sanctified.
21 And they who are not sanctified through the law which I have given unto you, even the law of Christ, must inherit another kingdom, even that of a terrestrial kingdom, or that of a telestial kingdom.
22 For he who is not able to abide the law of a celestial kingdom cannot abide a celestial glory [again a reference to the bodies ability to endure celestial power].
23 And he who cannot abide the law of a terrestrial kingdom cannot abide a terrestrial glory.
24 And he who cannot abide the law of a telestial kingdom cannot abide a telestial glory; therefore he is not meet for a kingdom of glory. Therefore he must abide a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory.
25 And again, verily I say unto you, the earth abideth the law of a celestial kingdom, for it filleth the measure of its creation, and transgresseth not the law [that may be the criteria for the judgement of all things including ourselves]—
26 Wherefore, it [the earth] shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it.
27 For notwithstanding they die, they also shall rise again, a spiritual [resurrected] body.
28 They who are [present tense] of a celestial spirit shall receive [future tense] the same body which was [past tense from the future which bring us back to the present] a natural body; even ye shall receive [future tense] your bodies, and your glory shall be [future tense] that glory by which your bodies are [present tense] quickened.
29 Ye who are [present tense] quickened by a portion the celestial glory shall then [future tense] receive of the same, even a fulness.

[“Portion” is the key word. We cannot be celestial persons until after the resurrection. However, we can be persons “quickened by a portion the celestial glory” while we are still in this world. Indeed, this says we must be or we cannot merit a celestial body in the resurrection.]

30 And they who are [present tense] quickened by a portion of the terrestrial glory shall then [future tense] receive of the same, even a fulness.
31 And also they who are quickened by a portion of the telestial glory shall then receive of the same, even a fulness.
32 And they who remain shall also be quickened; nevertheless, they shall return again to their own place, to enjoy that which they are willing to receive, because they were not willing to enjoy that which they might have received.
33 For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift.

There is a very interesting juxtaposition in D&C 76:64-65— “These are they who shall have part in the first resurrection. These are they who shall come forth in the resurrection of the just.” (See also D&C 76:50)

The phrase “first resurrection”is found in several places in the scriptures (Revelation 20:5-7; Mosiah 15:20-26; Mosiah 18:9; Alma 40:15-18; D&C 45:54, 63:17-18, 76:64), but phrase “second resurrection” is not found there at all. However, we do find “resurrection of endless damnation” (Mosiah 16:11), “resurrection of damnation” (3 Nephi 26:5), “resurrection of the unjust” and “last resurrection” (D&C 76:1, 85) .

Brigham Young explained:

You read about a first resurrection. If there is a first, there is a second. And if a second, may there not be a third, and a fourth, and so on? Yes; and happy are they who have a part in the first resurrection. Yes, more blessed are they than any others. But blessed also are they that will have part in the second resurrection, for they will be brought forth to enjoy a kingdom that is more glorious than the sectarian world ever dreamed of (Journal of Discourses, 7: 288).

As a relatively young man, Wilford Woodruff saw a vision of the resurrection. On at least three different occasions he described that vision, each time pointing out different details. Those three descriptions follow:

I saw the resurrection of the dead. In the first resurrection those that came forth from their graves seemed to be all dressed alike, but in the second resurrection they were as diverse in their dress as this congregation is before me to-day, and if I had been an artist I could have painted the whole scene as it was impressed upon my mind, more indelibly fixed than anything I had ever seen with the natural eye (Journal of Discourses, 22:330).

In another place Wilford Woodruff told the same story in different details.

Then he showed me the resurrection of the dead—what is termed the first and second resurrection. In the first resurrection I saw no graves nor anyone raised from the grave. I saw legions of celestial beings, men and women who had received the Gospel all clothed in white robes. In the form they were presented to me, they had already been raised from the grave. After this he showed me what is termed the second resurrection. Vast fields of graves were before me, and the Spirit of God rested upon the earth like a shower of gentle rain, and when that fell upon the graves they were opened, and an immense host of human beings came forth. They were just as diversified in their dress as we are here, or as they were laid down (Brian H. Stuy, ed., Collected Discourses, 5 vols. [Burbank, Calif., and Woodland Hills, Ut.: B.H.S. Publishing, 1987-1992], 5: .) [I got this quote and the following one from Gospel Link where no page number is given.]

In General Conference, on October 8th, 1881, President Woodruff added:

The room was filled with light. A messenger came to me. We had a long conversation. He laid before me as if in a panorama, the signs of the last days, and told me what was coming to pass. I saw the sun turned to darkness, the moon to blood, the stars fall from heaven. I saw the resurrection day. I saw armies of men in the first resurrection, clothed with the robes of the Holy Priesthood. I saw the second resurrection (Stuy, ed., Collected Discourses, vol. 1. no page number given.)

In his discussion of Mosiah 15: 21, Hugh Nibley summed it all up very nicely. He said:

Verse 21: “And there cometh a resurrection, even a first resurrection; yea, even a resurrection of those that have been, and who are, and who shall be, even until the resurrection of Christ.” Why does it make such a fuss about the first resurrection? We are going to be resurrected anyway. First, second-a little waiting around won’t do any harm, will it? What is the difference? Well, as it tells us here, the first resurrection isn’t a time-it’s a condition. You are resurrected in a different condition from what you are in the second resurrection—the condition of dwelling with God. The time isn’t the important thing if you can dwell with him. The second resurrections take place on another level too. There are others later. So to come forth in the first resurrection will be a great privilege-the condition of dwelling with God (Hugh Nibley, Teachings of the Book of Mormon–Semester 1: Transcripts of Lectures Presented to an Honors Book of Mormon Class at Brigham Young University, 1988–1990 [Provo: FARMS/ 89.)