This post is actually a virtual RS/PH lesson, #23:  “How Good and How Pleasant It Is . . . to Dwell Togehter in Unity.”  See how I snuck that in there?  Here are some interesting points from the lesson:

The first part of the lesson emphasizes how temple building brought the Saints together in a common purpose.  It is interesting that the focus is on the work to build the temple, and there is no specific implication that the temple itself would create unity among the Saints, a point made more eloquently by joe spencer here.)

How Action Unites Us

The efforts of the Kirtland Saints were typical of the unity, sacrifice, and devotion that would make it possible for the Lord’s purposes to be fulfilled in the years to come. This was one of many times when the Saints would pull together, heeding the admonition of the Prophet Joseph Smith: “A long pull, a strong pull, and a pull all together.” (JS quoted by BY in 1867)

Q:  Although we are no longer typically involved in the act of building temples, how does temple construction still bring church members together?  What other action-oriented events create unity of purpose?  Consider:  lay clergy, visiting/home teaching, humanitarian/service projects, etc.

Q:  How do church members sometimes pull in different directions vs. together?  What happens when church members pull in different directions rather than together?

Q:  Does a lack of action create disharmony (as the saying goes “idle hands are the devil’s playground”–or something like that)?

A Diverse Church

“We would wish the Saints to understand that, when they come here, they must not expect perfection, or that all will be harmony, peace, and love; if they indulge these ideas, they will undoubtedly be deceived, for here there are persons, not only from different states, but from different nations, who, although they feel a great attachment to the cause of truth, have their prejudices of education, and, consequently, it requires some time before these things can be overcome. “  (1841)

Q:  Do people still expect perfection of other church members?  How do these expectations create disunity in the church?

Q:  How do cultural divides cause disunity in the church?  How can we overcome that in a global church that includes members from all personalities, political persuasions, and socio-economic divides?

Q:  What “prejudices of education” still exist in the church today?  How do we overcome these prejudices?

A Social Church

“We, all of us, have our friends, our connections, our families and associations; and we find that the ties of friendship … and brotherhood have indissolubly united us together with a thousand endearing associations; we have embraced the one common faith.  A kindred sympathy runs through the whole body, even the body of Christ, which, according to Paul’s statement, is his church; and no one part of the body can be injured without the other parts feeling the pain, for says Paul, if one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; and if one member rejoice all the rest are honored with it.” (1842)

Q:  Who should be considered part of the Saints?  All who self-identify as Mormons or just those who practice their religion?  All who sympathize with Mormons?

Q:  How do our ties to others in the church increase the church’s strength despite the many flaws we and other members have?

Q:  How do we help those who may feel like a minority in the church feel fully welcome and valued as a part of the group?  How do we keep the majority from driving out the minority?

Discuss.

Sometimes we forget that the early restored church focused a lot on the millenium, which many of them believed was imminent.  As if they didn’t have enough stress!

This lesson is mostly a compilation of various prophecies about the second coming and the millenium.  Here are the ones specifically referenced in the manual:

• The Civil War, starting in South Carolina (some might say still going strong in South Carolina)
• Wars poured out upon all nations (two major world wars plus a host of others – the 20th century has often been called a century of warfare)
• Famine, plague, earthquakes, thunderbolt & lightning (the first three are standard CNN fare; the last two are part of the Queen song Bohemian Rhapsody)
• A seer raised up by God (although Mormons consider this to be Joseph Smith, the Bickertonites, another branch of Mormonism, are still looking for this seer)
• The moon will turn to blood (I always wonder whether this means it will be red which is a common scientific phenomenon or whether someone will be murdered on the moon, which might be a good premise for a sci-fi novel)
• The Son of Man will descend in the clouds of heaven (not to burst Charles Manson’s bubble, but I don’t think he qualifies based on this description alone)
• The wicked will be destroyed off the face of the earth (or does this mean that the play Wicked will finally end its Broadway run?  See how enigmatic prophesies can be!)
• Judah must return (Jews for Jesus?)
• Jerusalem be rebuilt (this would be a lot easier if it weren’t a war zone)
• A temple will be built in Jerusalem with water issuing from under the temple (a wellspring or someone left the water running in the bathroom?)
• The waters of the Dead Sea will be healed (I assume this means freshwater instead of brackish, but maybe it has something to do with overfishing–see today’s AM post for more discussion on this point)
• The sun will turn to darkness (hey, that happens every night!)
• Earthquakes in diverse places (pretty common nowadays)
• The seas will heave beyond their bounds (sounds like global warming)
• There will be “one grand sign” of the Son of Man in heaven that people will mistakenly say is a comet or planet
• Contrary to popular belief, all flesh will be subject to suffer from disease and famine, including the righteous  (sorry if this isn’t in your plans . . .)

After the Second Coming, here are the prophecies regarding the millenium:

• Christ will reign personally (this doesn’t sound like there will be an election since the majority of the planet is still not Christian; or maybe he will just be really persuasive.)
• The earth will be renewed (like a library book?) and receive its paradisaical glory (this is the only place you ever see that word paradisaical)
• The nations will dwell in peace for 1000 years (that would be a nice change)
• The earth will be as a sea of glass, one great Urim & Thummim, and when we look in it we will see as we are seen (So, if the internet is a Urim & Thummim, maybe this is like Facebook?)

The lesson talks about some of the good things about focusing on the Second Coming & Millenium:

1. It motivates us to live the commandments and be good people.
2. It provides a sense of urgency to fulfill the three missions of the church.
3. For those enduring trials, there is an end in sight.

But there are also some potential negative side effects of this focus:

1. Developing a complacent attitude that “this world” is temporary anyway and doesn’t matter; hardly an effective way to foster our stewardship of this earth (e.g. why recycle?).
2. An expectation of reward for good deeds (rather than doing things out of a love of God & our fellow human beings).  This is kind of like the Santa Claus effect on children–10 months out of the year they behave like troglodytes, but they are perfect angels once Christmas is around the corner.
3. A hyperbolic worldview in which danger lurks at every corner and there is a war for our souls at every turn; fear is not a good basis for Christian charity toward others or rational, balanced decision-making.

What are your thoughts as you think about the Second Coming and the Millenium?  Do you make an extra effort to be good when the moon turns red due to a solar eclipse when there are dust particles in the air?  Does thinking about the Second Coming motivate you to be a better person or is it too “out there” to contemplate?  Discuss.

The main difficulties with this lesson are:

1. Lack of context.  The letters (snippets) are presented without any context of the rocky relationship that existed between Joseph and Emma.  Although his polygamy was a sore topic with many ups and downs, none of that is mentioned to contextualize the relationship in the letters.  There were other points of discord between them that are also not mentioned.  It only references things like where they were and whether Emma was pregnant at the time or if a child had been sick.
2. No doctrine.  There is no doctrinal content whatsoever, just snippets of letters.
3. “Gag me with a spoon” factor.  Like all letters from this era, the language is flowery and exaggerated.  The style of writing is clichéd and designed to obfuscate meaning through emotionalism rather than to communicate directly and clearly.  What’s next?  A walk through “Cupid’s Grove” with Abigail and John Adams?  I know this kind of stuff is really appealing to some people; it’s just not my thing.  I’m sort of glad we quit signing letters “Your humble servant.”
4. Weak Application.  The letters are personal with no inherent universal application.  That, coupled with the ambiguous state of the Smith marriage (which is neatly avoided), and the nature of letters from this period (the sentimentality) greatly reduces their applicability.  Likening the scriptures unto ourselves is one thing; likening letters between Joseph and Emma to ourselves is much more difficult, especially with no meaningful context (although in this case, the context would probably make it even more meaningless to current lay members).

There are a few hints at the on-and-off strain in the relationship:

• “And as to yourself, if you want to know how much I want to see you, examine your feelings, how much you want to see me, and judge for yourself.”  (1839)
• “O Emma, … do not forsake me nor the truth, but remember me.”  (1838)

My favorite snippet, that seems much very folksy and personable.  He had a real fondness for that dog:

• “I want you to try to gain time and write to me a long letter and tell me all you can and even if old Major is alive yet and what those little prattlers say that cling around your neck.”  (1839)

Difficulties are naturally presented in highly emotional ways with a religious persecution spin.  There is a desire for the stories to be recast in a way that motivates further religious and familial devotion; for example:

• “Tell them I am in prison that their lives might be saved.”  (1839)

I’ve read a lot of things written in this time period, and I have to wonder.  The following frankly sounds like an oblique reference to a conjugal visit:

• “I take the liberty to tender you my sincere thanks for the two interesting and consoling visits that you have made me during my almost exiled situation. Tongue cannot express the gratitude of my heart, for the warm and true-hearted friendship you have manifested in these things towards me.”  (1842)

The questions provided in the lesson are not tremendously helpful either, but here is the direction I would take it to maximize personal applicability (sticking to the questions in bold).  The below is straight from the manual, except where indicated:

• Briefly review this chapter, noting Joseph Smith’s feelings toward Emma and their children.  What does his example teach about how we should speak and act in our families?  (Don’t write down anything negative?  Don’t express your true feelings in letters?  Accentuate the positive?) What can we learn from Joseph and Emma Smith’s efforts to write to one another and to see one another?  (Very little since there is no context and only one side to the conversation). What are some things you have done to show family members that you love them?
• The Prophet Joseph told Emma that he was “a true and faithful friend to [her] and the children forever,” and he thanked her for her “warm and true-hearted friendship” (pages 242, 246). What can husbands and wives do to nurture their friendship? (Well, if I’m right about the conjugal visit . . .  But seriously, folks.  I think this is a helpful question, and I would just let the sisters discuss.)
• In his letters, Joseph Smith showed trust in Emma, expressing confidence that she would make good decisions and do all she could to take care of the family (page 245). How might such expressions of trust influence the relationship between a husband and a wife?  (You could say he was expressing confidence in her ability to take care of the family in his absence, or you could say he was reminding her of her duties.  Given that he was largely absent, his instructions seem custodial to me and would probably tick me off.  Still, you could just throw out this question to the group about how you can build trust in a marriage, regardless of whether his letters are a good example of that.) How can we build trust in our marriages?
• Read the Prophet Joseph’s message to his children in the second paragraph on page 246. How might it have helped his children to receive this news?  (It made it clear to them that the thing that stood between them and their loving father was the mob.) During times of trial, what can parents do to show their children that they have faith in God?
• Review Joseph Smith’s expressions of trust in God found on pages 243–46. Identify several of these expressions that are particularly touching to you.  How can you apply these truths in your life? (Since this is not presenting “truth,” so much as faith, I would repurpose the question to “How can trials strengthen your faith in God?” which I realize is too broad and a lot like the last question.)

Since there is not a lot of meat here (which could be the upside of this lesson–it’s different from the other lessons), I will mention a few other lesson ideas I’ve seen bandied about (all of which sound pretty good to me at filling the allotted time):

• Have a man come in to read the letter snippets so people can hear them in a “Joseph” voice.  He could even tie his tie in a bow and put his shirt collars up in true 1830s fashion, if you are daring.
  
• Print the snippets out on old-style parchment paper with a seal and have sisters read them aloud.  A little crafty for my taste, but you could do it.
• Take time at the end of class to write a letter to loved one(s) sharing your faith, love, and trust.  Perhaps a little “precious,” but again, there’s time here to be filled.

That is the best I’ve got, gang.  Let me know your thoughts on what you think works best for this lesson.

The majority of the lesson centers on section 76 of the Doctrine & Covenants, which relates a vision received by Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon in the John Johnson home in Hiram, OH (where both were tarred & feathered by the mob, injuring Sidney Ridgon’s head in the process, which always made me wonder if he was quite right after that.  But I digress.)  The photo to the right is the actual room in which they received it.  Joseph Smith had been working on his translation of the Bible in 1832 (in the actual room in the picture).

“From sundry revelations which had been received,” the Prophet later said, “it was apparent that many important points touching the salvation of man had been taken from the Bible, or lost before it was compiled. It appeared self-evident from what truths were left, that if God rewarded every one according to the deeds done in the body, the term ‘Heaven,’ as intended for the Saints’ eternal home, must include more kingdoms than one.”  (1832)

Joseph had just read John 5:29:

And shall ^acome forth; they that have done good, unto the ^bresurrection of life; and they that have done ^cevil, unto the resurrection of ^ddamnation.

When he and Sidney were pondering what this meant, a vision opened to them in which they saw God the Father, Jesus on his right hand, the three degrees of glory, and Satan separated from the rest with those who follow him.  This is an interesting example of an effort to translate resulting in an entirely new revelation, similar to the Book of Moses and Matthew 24 in the POGP.

Here, then, is eternal life—to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn how to be gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you attain to the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory, as do those who sit enthroned in everlasting power.  [The righteous who have died] shall rise again to dwell in everlasting burnings in immortal glory, not to sorrow, suffer, or die any more, but they shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? To inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a god, and ascend the throne of eternal power, the same as those who have gone before.  (1844)

This manual is just chock full of King Follett discourse.  Just sayin’.

Q:  Is this idea intimidating or does the idea of progress make it easier to handle?

Q:  In our eternal progression, why do you think we need to improve “from one small degree to another”?  Is this how you learn and grow?  Why do some people stop progressing?

• they are they who received the testimony of Jesus, (received meaning accepted or just heard it?)
• and believed on his name (so, must be Christian, at least eventually)
• and were baptized after the manner of his burial, being buried in the water in his name, and this according to the commandment which he has given—that by keeping the commandments they might be washed and cleansed from all their sins, and receive the Holy Spirit by the laying on of the hands of him who is ordained and sealed unto this power;  (so, correct ordinances are necessary.  Because of the rite itself or because of making a commitment and promise that changes your demeanor?)
• and who overcome by faith,  (rather than by logic, brute force or personality)
• and are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, which the Father sheds forth upon all those who are just and true. (sealed in marriage or through being endowed?  does this mean communal salvation – e.g. being sealed to all the Saints?)
• They are they who are the church of the Firstborn.  (I always wonder if we’re talking about Jesus or Adam on this one).
• They are they into whose hands the Father has given all things— (given all things in this life or the hereafter?  things meaning “truths” or actual things?  This seems to contrast with the telestial people below who are getting tripped up by God; maybe this is just a byproduct of being free from the snares of our own bad behavior.)
• they are they who are priests and kings,  (but HUMBLE priests & kings, priestesses & queens)
• who have received of his fulness,  (what is ‘his fulness’?  shrank not to drink the bitter cup?  being aware of and accepting the fulness of truths?  something else?)
• and of his glory;  (so, to receive of his glory, we have to be sanctified enough not to be consumed by it)
• and are priests of the Most High, after the order of Melchizedek, which was after the order of Enoch, which was after the order of the Only Begotten Son.  (why does Melchizedek always get so much credit?  BOM usually just lists the order of the Son of God.  Where are the editors?)
• Wherefore, as it is written, they are gods, even the sons of God— (does “sons of God” qualify or soften the meaning here, making it clear we are not “equal” with God?)
• wherefore, all things are theirs, whether life or death, or things present, or things to come, all are theirs and they are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.  (much better version of community property.  It’s all about who’s pitching in, after all.)
• These shall dwell in the presence of God and his Christ forever and ever.
• These are they whose names are written in heaven, where God and Christ are the judge of all.  (This doesn’t refer to men as “judges in Israel,” so maybe those guys are less empowered subordinates with a multi-level hierarchical approval process for damning people; or maybe it’s like an interview process and God & Jesus are the ultimate decision makers).
• These are they who are just men made perfect through Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, who wrought out this perfect atonement through the shedding of his own blood.  (I love that phrase “just men made perfect.”  Not perfect men made judges.)
• These are they whose bodies are celestial, whose glory is that of the sun, even the glory of God, the highest of all, whose glory the sun of the firmament is written of as being typical.  (More on the bodies in a moment).

Terrestrial – Pepsi Glory (We’re #2, so we try harder!)

There’s a list of those who will receive Terrestrial glory in D&C 76:  81-85, 100-106, 110-112:

• “Behold, these are they who died without law; (so, like those guys in the Blue Lagoon? Does this mean they can’t inherit celestial under any circumstances?  That doesn’t sound quite right.)
• and also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh; who received not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, but afterwards received it.  (So, what if they never heard it in the first place or had really bad missionaries?)
• “These are they who are honorable men of the earth, who were blinded by the craftiness of men.  (Unwitting dupes?)
• These are they who receive of his glory, but not of his fulness.  (Interesting word choice.  So, what is “his fulness”?)
• These are they who receive of the presence of the Son, but not of the fulness of the Father.  (Christians who reject theosis?  ‘Cause that’s what it sounds like.)
• “Wherefore, they are bodies terrestrial, and not bodies celestial, and differ in glory as the moon differs from the sun.  (That makes me wonder – are our resurrected bodies better or worse based on degrees of glory – e.g. no cellulite in Celestial?  That’s motivating!)
• These are they who are not valiant in the testimony of Jesus; wherefore, they obtain not the crown over the kingdom of our God.”  (“not valiant” means what?  And “crown over the kingdom” implies we rule rather than being subjects.)

Q:  How can we avoid being “blinded by the craftiness of men”? What can we do to help others avoid being blinded?

Telestial – Back of the Bus!

Here’s the description of Telestial glory folks from D&C 76:

• These are they who are liars, (Are they all going to be confused when they start talking to each other and don’t know who is lying and who’s not?  Will it be like a cutthroat soap opera?)
• and sorcerers, (Like David Copperfield?  What about Houdini?)
• and adulterers,  (Wouldn’t it be weird if you’re all saving your DH’s seat in the CK, and he just doesn’t show, and then you find out this way?)
• and whoremongers,  (Pimps? Words like “whoremonger” make me think we could use a NIV of LDS scriptures)
• and whosoever loves and makes a lie.  (I always wonder if that means “loves a lie” or “lies about love”?)
• These are they who suffer the wrath of God on earth.  (So, God’s tripping them up on earth?  Is that because they lost the light of Christ and had to deal with the natural consequences of their bad choices?)
• These are they who suffer the vengeance of eternal fire.  (Although, as we’ll see below, this is more like “they feel horrid” than Hell = Guantanamo 2).
• These are they who are cast down to hell and suffer the wrath of Almighty God, until the fulness of times, when Christ shall have subdued all enemies under his feet, and shall have perfected his work.  (So, they just suffer until then.  There’s an end in sight apparently.)

Q:  Is this a better alternative to traditional notions of “Hell”?

The True Nature of Hell

“The great misery of departed spirits in the world of spirits, where they go after death, is to know that they come short of the glory that others enjoy and that they might have enjoyed themselves, and they are their own accusers.”  (1843)

“A man is his own tormentor and his own condemner. Hence the saying, They shall go into the lake that burns with fire and brimstone. The torment of disappointment in the mind of man is as exquisite as a lake burning with fire and brimstone. I say, so is the torment of man.  Some shall rise to the everlasting burnings of God, for God dwells in everlasting burnings, and some shall rise to the damnation of their own filthiness, which is as exquisite a torment as the lake of fire and brimstone.”  (1844)

Q:  How can a man be “his own tormentor and his own condemner”?   Does this make Hell seem more just?

To the teachers:  Please share any other thoughts or tips you have for fellow teachers out there.  Most of this lesson is just reading from D&C 76 about the different kingdoms; it might be fun to do a puzzle to get through the material (e.g. a “fill in the blanks” as you read through D&C together or a “sorting” puzzle to put the descriptions in the right kingdoms).

To the rest of you:  What are your thoughts about the 3 degrees of Glory and the insights from D&C 76?  Personally, this is one of my favorite aspects of our theology because everyone’s a winner (comparatively)!  Discuss.

• Virtual – you can participate whether or not you actually attended church
• Co-Ed – you can hear perspectives from both men & women
• Spiritual + Intellectual – some would like more intellectual content at church; others would like more spiritual content at MM.  It’s like chocolate & peanut butter.
• Non-LDS Perspective – we may hear non-LDS commenter viewpoints (welcome to all!)
• Advance Lesson Prep – those who are teaching RS/PH may find some insights for their lessons.

The materials are taken from the Teachings of the Presidents of the Church:  Joseph Smith manual and my own head (no link provided).  Today is Lesson 12:  Proclaim Glad Tidings to All the World.  In keeping with the spirit of the site, I will select passages and questions (and add stuff) that aim to be a little more thought-provoking.

Introduction:  Much has been said on this site by commenters about the effectiveness of the missionary program.  So, if you were the boss of us all, what would you do to increase the effectiveness of our missionaries and the missionary program?

Then & Now: How does contemporary missionary work contrast with NT and early LDS missionary work?

“By this we learn that it behoved Christ to suffer, and to be crucified, and rise again on the third day, for the express purpose that repentance and remission of sins should be preached to all nations.  Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call’ [Acts 2:38–39].

“By this we learn that the promise of the Holy Ghost is made unto as many as those to whom the doctrine of repentance was to be preached, which was unto all nations. … Therefore we believe in preaching the doctrine of repentance in all the world, both to old and young, rich and poor, bond and free.”  Joseph Smith, 1835.

Here are some of the features of missionary efforts described in NT & the early restored church with a contrast to our current program:

• No purse or scrip (NT & early LDS).  Today:  missionaries pay a monthly sum that is equal across all regions of the world.  Local members are asked to provide support in the form of meals vs. relying upon the kindness of strangers.
• No time limits, well until you get martyred anyway (NT, some early LDS – was very flexible in terms of length of time).  Today:  24 months for men, 18 months for women.
• All males must go (NT not specified, early LDS for a time), regardless of age, marital or economic status.  Today:  Single males strongly encouraged to go; single females optional.
• Teach by the spirit with little or no formal instruction or central leadership/no message control (NT initially – hey, they didn’t even have the NT!, and early LDS – although some missions were with the express purpose to refute anti-Mormon claims).  Today:  has recently been made much more flexible (down from 6 consecutive discussions, which was down from 52 consecutive weekly discussions).
• No language instruction (NT - some gift of tongues & early LDS - occasional gift of tongues; studied some languages in School of the Prophets).  Today:  crash course in language; localized MTCs in regions.
• Companionships (NT – mostly for training? & early LDS – often went out in companionships, but didn’t have to be together always).  Today:  you are never to be separate from your mission companion.  Or you burst into flames or one of you goes off after harlots or something.
• No dress code (NT & early LDS – dressed like everyday people).  Today:  1950s business dress for men (lava-lavas in Polynesian cultures); women in skirts.  Shoes universally worn to a nub, regardless of time period.
• Worthiness standards (NT not specified, early LDS pretty much sent everyone newly baptized male, with obviously mixed results).  Today:  recently raised the bar on worthiness/preparation standards.
• Conflicts (NT – Paul was chased out of Ephesus for preaching against the silversmiths’ livelihood, early LDS - Parley P. Pratt started his sermon to the Shakers by decrying celibacy and got kicked out).  Today – some issues due to tactlessness, lack of cultural awareness, and some due to success and competing preaching.

Can you think of other ways in which the missionary program of today contrasts and compares to the missionary efforts of previous eras in the NT, early restored church, or even BOM?

How are missionaries today tied to missionaries of the past?  Has the missionary program improved or deteriorated from these earlier efforts?

Joseph Smith quotes on missionary work:

“We don’t ask any people to throw away any good they have got; we only ask them to come and get more. What if all the world should embrace this Gospel? They would then see eye to eye, and the blessings of God would be poured out upon the people, which is the desire of my whole soul.” (1843)

Is this approach emphasized today?  How or how not?

“The servants of God will not have gone over the nations of the Gentiles, with a warning voice, until the destroying angel will commence to waste the inhabitants of the earth, and as the prophet hath said, ‘It shall be a vexation to hear the report.’ [See Isaiah 28:19.] I speak thus because I feel for my fellow men; I do it in the name of the Lord, being moved upon by the Holy Spirit. Oh, that I could snatch them from the vortex of misery, into which I behold them plunging themselves, by their sins; that I might be enabled by the warning voice, to be an instrument of bringing them to unfeigned repentance, that they might have faith to stand in the evil day!” (1835)

Early LDS missionaries focused on the imminent second coming.  If this approach has changed, how and why?  Are missionaries called to warn or to invite or both?  How should missionaries manage this seeming dichotomy?

“Prejudice, with its attendant train of evil, is giving way before the force of truth, whose benign rays are penetrating the nations afar off. … The time was, when we were looked upon as deceivers, and that ‘Mormonism’ would soon pass away, come to naught, and be forgotten. But the time has gone by when it is looked upon as a transient matter, or a bubble on the wave, and it is now taking a deep hold in the hearts and affections of all those who are noble-minded enough to lay aside the prejudice of education, and investigate the subject with candor and honesty.” (1841)

The above statement was made in 1841 when there were only a few thousand members.  Today there are millions.  Do people still feel the church will fade away into obscurity?  Why or why not?

What is meant by the “prejudice of education”?  Does reason prejudice us against God’s way of learning?  If so, how?  Does that mean reason must be abandoned in man’s search for God?  Why or why not?

“May God enable us to perform our vows and covenants with each other, in all fidelity and righteousness before Him, that our influence may be felt among the nations of the earth, in mighty power, even to rend the kingdoms of darkness asunder, and triumph over priestcraft and spiritual wickedness in high places, and break in pieces all kingdoms that are opposed to the kingdom of Christ, and spread the light and truth of the everlasting Gospel from the rivers to the ends of the earth.” (1836, from meeting of FP and 12)

How can the mission program be made more effective and have more influence for good in the world while fulfilling the goal of spreading the gospel to the world?  In what ways is it flawed today?  What reforms would improve its effectiveness?  Suggested improvements (heard on this very site):

• change the whole church (well, we have been called ”DAMU-friendly”)
• teach more history & culture to improve knowledge & respect
• put knowledgeable people in church sites (especially older couples), not just “testifying” missionaries

What are the benefits to the missionary program as it runs today?  What are the drawbacks?  What other ideas do you have to increase the effectiveness of the missionay program?