The interesting linguistic and sociological problem is that in late modern times, where th~~ is not recognized and the distinction is not made, y~~ becomes the informal pronoun. Thou/thy/thine, because it’s “unfamiliar” and “old,” morphs into a formal pronoun (because we’ve dropped it out of favor). And since we do not have a modern linguistic precedent for th~~ pronouns (because well, th~~ pronouns have dropped out of favor), the linguistic standard can be hijacked. So this is the interesting phenomena…based on comments from General Authorities (like Russell M. Nelson’s Lessons from the Lord’s Prayers)…is that the church has reimagined or retooled thy/thou/thine from its historic roots (which, you’re completely right, are for familiarity) and into a new, mostly Mormon use (of “reverence” and temporal distancing.)

It also doesn’t help that we’ve got a lot of emphasis on the King James Version, so we get a LOT of that temporal distancing (with some people believing that it’s “better” that the Bible is in a more antiquated English, even though Early Modern English trips us up).

All I’m saying is that we shouldn’t tie a particular manner in which one person’s light shines to a belief that such a person was more righteous or obedient in the pre-existence. Based on your future clarifications, you probably don’t mean that, but your first statement could have been taken that way – and that’s why I addressed it. (“To all are not the same gifts given . . .”)

Again, thanks for the follow-up comments.

However, I think there is another way to think about the doctrines of pre-mortality. I’ll attempt to explain what I mean. To illustrate this point I’ll use a university setting. University students are identified as undergraduates and graduates. Students are classified by the academic standing: A, B,C,D,F. Some students graduate with honors: cum laude, magna cum laude, and summa cum laude. Most students are just happy to graduate.

The point is that individuals perform at different levels for a variety of reasons. Society accepts this and distinctions based on students performance are recognized as a useful way to reward various levels of diligence.

The Lord has revealed that prior to mortal life we lived in a pre-mortal setting. There as here, we performed at various levels similar to the university setting.
1 Nephi 17:35 teaches, “Behold, the Lord esteemeth all flesh in one; he that is righteous is favored of God.”

In other words, those who are obedient (the righteous) receive blessings and help in mortality that the disobedient (unrighteous) cannot receive.

In pre-mortality the same kind of reward for faithfulness was given for diligence:
Alma 13:3-4…being called and prepared from the foundation of the world according to the foreknowledge of God, on account of their exceeding faith and good works; in the first place being left to choose good or evil; therefore they having chosen good, and exercising exceedingly great faith, are called with a holy calling, yea, with that holy calling.. And thus they have been called to this holy calling on account of their faith, while others would reject the Spirit of God on account of the hardness of their hearts and blindness of their minds, while, if it had not been for this they might have had as great privilege as their brethren…

I’m trying to keep this short and leaving many thoughts out–members of the church are all equal in the eyes of the Lord. He doesn’t love one more than the other. The newest member of the church in a far away land has the same privilege as you or I, or as President Monson, to apply the first principle and ordinances of the gospel, and thereby begin the journey back to Father’s presence. Each of us has equal access to the path. We may not be at the same place on the path, but we’re promised the same blessings if we will be faithful and endure to the end.

All those on the path are valiant. Where much is given, much is required. Those who are on the path and been given much are required to appropriately help others. The Savior taught, “he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.” Would we have those who have been given unusual experiences hide their talents so others don’t get their feelings hurt? Should have Alma and the four sons of Mosiah kept their experience with the angel secret? The Book of Mormon teaches that they openly told their experience to many people, trying to repair the injuries they had done. As a result, they were smitten by some, but confirmed the faith of others(Mosiah 27:32-35). This is why I have shared some of my sacred experiences in the Bloggernacle.

Jared, it may be useful to consider that the poor in spirit may find your proposition damaging,and find themselves unable to defend themselves against such allegations.

From where I’m sitting I fail to see the usefulness of such a doctrine of despair.

I was talking basically about the idea of pre-mortal righteousness being applied generally to groups of people. Outside of the idea of some leaders being chosen as leaders based on extreme valiance in the pre-mortal existence (which is found in all the canonized works), there isn’t anything else – and when that core gets expanded into applications beyond that core we end up with “the Negro race was less valiant” – or anyone who doesn’t see visions was less valiant – or those who don’t commune directly with an audible voice from the Holy Ghost were less valiant – or any other permutation that can be imagined. We get a version of predestination, and, therefore, I just don’t think the idea of differing levels of pre-mortal righteousness / obedience should be taught.

Going to your focus on the “Doctrine of Christ”, I just don’t see how the concept of varying levels of pre-mortal righteousness is necessary to teach – whether it’s correct or not. In a very narrow application, perhaps it’s true, but we mortals can’t help extrapolating it to incorrect conclusions – so it’s better to leave it alone and deal with more core, universal beliefs. That’s my take, anyway.

I took this statement to mean that if a “doctrine” appears to be out of touch with the politics of the day then we should let politics trump doctrine. Maybe I misunderstood what you were conveying. That is very easy to do, particularly in blogging.

Now to a bigger point, Ray. But first, I want to make sure that you know that I am not accusing you of anything. You’ve brought up some interesting points in your post and comments. I am responding, not accusing.

Ray, I am doing everything in my power to understand the Doctrine of Christ. That said, I am ready to learn from anybody and everybody. You consistently bring up points that make me think. I like that. My focus is on the saving doctrines, I’m not too interesting in many other subjects. Sometimes I let that be known because I think its important to distinguish and prioritize what is important from that which is unimportant. In my opinion focusing too much attention on history and science puts that which matter most, at the mercy of that which matters least. Now some may not agree with this approach, that is just fine with me. However, we don’t need to be disagreeable when we don’t agree.

You brought up an interesting point that’s got me thinking. After reading what I said to Jen #19 you wrote:

“You said that receiving mercy comes because of extra righteousness, and that such extra righteousness was evident in the pre-mortal life.”

I want to think about this and write a reply because it is an important point relating to the Doctrine of Christ. I’m not focusing my attention on the issue with the priesthood.

Ray–thanks for making me think. Till then.

Wow Ray–shouldn’t we accept truth over what some see as being politically correct?

Where did that come from, Jared – and what in the world does it have to do with my comment? I’ve never been accused of being politically correct once and had it be accurate – just so you know.

You said that receiving mercy comes because of extra righteousness, and that such extra righteousness was evident in the pre-mortal life. Alma 13 talks about leaders, as does Abraham 3 and every other verse you can cite. NOT ONE of them talks about “mercy” in any way. What they say is a FAR cry from “people who obtain mercy here deserve it because they were better in the pre-existence” – and, yes, that was the EXACT justification that came to be used for the Priesthood ban – which justifications have been shot down by multiple Prophets over the past 50 years.

What I actually said is that I don’t like the possible permutations of teaching that mercy received on earth is a result of pre-mortal righteousness and obedience – and there is nothing of which I am aware in our canon that says it is. Leadership is one thing; “mercy” (especially in the context of answered prayers) is a TOTALLY different thing.

Five minutes ago I finished a post on my site titled “I Am No Respecter of Persons”. I think it relates to your comment. If you decide to read it I would like to know your thoughts on it. Click my name to go to my site.

It appears to me that the “righteousness” that allows them to receive mercy comes from pre-mortal righteousness/obedience.

and I respectfully believe that we should NOT be teaching that idea – right or wrong. It got shot down forcefully (finally) with respect to race after the lifting of the Priesthood ban; it is WAY too open to similar abuses minus skin color; and it reeks too much of predestination to me. Out core theology claims that ALL have an equal chance for celestial glory in the end, so I prefer to bury all notions of differing levels of pre-mortal righteousness and obedience. If there really are those differences, and if they do play a role somehow, fine; NOTHING is hurt by not teaching it. If that idea is not correct, however, there can be GREAT harm in teaching it – so I prefer to bury it deep and let it go.

In this case, leaving it in category of “unexplainable mysteries”, allowing grace to extend the same blessings to many outside of our ability to comprehend, and saying, “We don’t know” actually is my favorite response.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Your point is exactly what I was referring to when I mentioned that our level of righteousness or obedience AT THAT TIME may not correlate with our spiritual experiences at that time, but I believe it was there at some point as you mentioned above.

I have to run, but I appreciate you sharing your thoughts.

I am a witness to the fact the Savior will leave the ninety and nine and bring back lost sheep. Alma the older and younger, the four sons of Mosiah, the apostle Paul, Amulek, Zeezorm, and Aminadab with hundreds of wicked Lamanites are some of those who were at different levels of unrighteousness and yet were blessed with unusual manifestations of the Spirit. How can we account for this.

I don’t think we have all the answers to this question, but the Lord looks at the thoughts and the intents of our hearts and makes judgments based on what he sees there (1 Samuel 16:7).

Additionally, I’ve learned the Lord will send a spirit into a family or situation on a “mission”, where in some cases, they will learn the ways of the world because of the traditions of their fathers, but will respond to the Lord when He calls them. They are put in difficult circumstances for various purposes, but in the end they bless that lineage they agreed to come through. These spirits are called upon to make great sacrifices to complete their “mission”. It appears to me that the “righteousness” that allows them to receive mercy comes from pre-mortal righteousness/obedience.

I don’t know if I am correct about this, so I want to clarify to be sure, but have you mentioned in other posts that you received answers from the Lord that were undenibale even at the time when you were living in a more “worldly” manner? If I am wrong I apologize, but I see instances in the scriptures where those who did not necessarily “deserve” (and only the Lord can decide that) angelic visitations or major manifestations from the Lord (because they weren’t necessarily living an obedient life) but yet still received them. That is why I mentioned that answers or manifestations don’t always correlate with our level of righteousness or obedience at that time in our life. Does that make sense?

We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost. 4th Articles of Faith

The fourth principle of receiving the gift Holy Ghost seems to be the most difficult. This can be determined by asking ourselves if we are receiving the manifestation of this gift. Many of us struggle to answer this question without hesitation. Why is the case?

To add to what you have said, I think answers to prayers have a whole lot to do with the timing of the Lord and not necessarily how righteous we are, have been, or will be. What we think might be the right time (and we can feel adamant that it is the right time) just may not be in the Lord’s eyes. If we truly believe He is who He says He is then we can trust that our prayers are being heard and that the Lord is aware of our righteous desires. Maybe some answers don’t come right away because we aren’t prepared to hear them and we need more time. Whatever the reason, waiting upon the Lord is never easy and can test us to the core.

I think answers to prayers are evidence of God’s grace,not necessarily of our own righteousness.

That would be a wonderful foundation for a post, wayfarer – one that could have some terrific conversation. Let me know if you’d like to tackle it as a guest author.

I can’t tell you how much I appreciate this post. I have feel exactly the same way and often my wife is very concerned because she doesn’t find me sprawled out somewhere pleading my heart and soul out. i tend more toward the “have a prayer in my heart” side of things and I often ponder a lot especially because I travel a lot with my job. anyway, formal requires always give me pause simply to make sure I do things for the right reasons. I rather be the Publican in this case.

Anyone? Bueller…

The purpose of prayer is to obtain the Lord’s ear and then learn to tune our ear so we can discern His will. The Book of Mormon gives us examples of individuals who have drawn very near to the Lord so we can be like them. We are each invited to be like Nephi, Alma, Enos, Helaman and others. We can be born again, receiving a remission of our sins, and be recipients of the gifts of the Spirit if we will follow the teachings in the Book of Mormon. I know by my own experience this is true. We can start from wherever we are and move along a well defined path until we return to the Lord’s presence (2nd comforter). In my opinion, prayer is the key, and answers to our prayers are our evidence we’re progressing on the path.

The canon uses the phrase “aloud” 24 times, with 19 of those being in the Bible. Only one of those verses (Psalms 55:17) deals with prayer, and it says “will I pray, and cry aloud” – apparently distinguishing the two from each other.

“Kneel” (or “kneeling”) is found in our canon only 7 times – and each time that kneeling is part of a communal activity, not a personal, private prayer.

Understand, I am NOT saying that we shouldn’t kneel for formal, personal prayers. I’m just saying that perhaps it is more of a cultural expression of humility than an eternal law. Perhaps if the heart is right, exactly how the body is positioned is less relevant than we tend to assume. I still kneel whenever I pray “formally”, but it can be taken to an extreme – for example, by believing that a bed bound person or someone without legs or someone in a wheelchair somehow can’t have the same experience as someone who can kneel. Also, it could be argued that if kneeling shows humility, then it is even better to prostrate one’s self fully on the ground – since that position is even more humble than kneeling.

The take away from all of this for me is that, while I still like kneeling, and while I certainly AM NOT advocating not kneeling for those in our culture who can do so, I’m even more open to the idea that others can pray without kneeling and have every bit as strong an experience as someone else can on their knees.