Classical Scattering and The Convergence of Science and Religion?

In the mid 1960s the theory of classical wave motion took a leap ahead with an incredibly simple idea. A formalism allowing a single family of equations to describe seemingly diverse phenomena like wave motion in plasmas and other conducting fluids, the propagation of light (electromagnetic waves) and sound in complex media, seismic waves, electric waves on transmission lines, even the movement of fish larvae in ocean currents.
Read more of this post

Brigham, Heber and Co. in New York, 1843.

One of the interesting things about the Manuscript History of the Church, is its blending of sources to create a narrative of events in early Mormonism. Sometimes this effect is submerged by the 1850’s historians decision to unify the text by writing in the first person, as though Joseph Smith himself had penned it. Not an acceptable practice today, it was a common technique among writers of annals and “autobiographies” at the time.
Read more of this post

The Problem of Pain

No offense to C. S. Lewis.

This morning, I had the pleasure of going down to a local dental practice and getting a little finishing work done on a recalcitrant tooth.[1] One of the assistants took some kind of *very* pointy scraper and started digging out old glue from below my gum line.

“Does that hurt?” Ha ha.
Read more of this post

In Church, Today. Conversion: Turning Around

In a Sunday Sacrament service there were two addresses on the notion of conversion. One speaker very feelingly quoted Luke 22:31-2 from the KJV:

31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

Read more of this post

D&C 107. Part 12. Epilogue. Further Light and Knowledge.

How appropriate. Twelve Parts. Part 11 is here.
D&C 107 was a long time in the making and it contains many separate revelations woven together into the whole (and it didn’t finish the story: consider D&C 112 and 124). Witness: The Nov 11 revelation, itself perhaps two separate revelations, the vision of the Seventy, the vision of Adam, the esoterica of bishops, the “book of Enoch” and others. Its story is one worth telling, not only to understand the process of revelation, but to understand the way Latter-day Saints speak and how that speech and its understanding were effected by the processes of history. I apologize for being short on annotation, but hey, that’s what comments are for! I hope you had some fun reading in “long form.” (grin)
Read more of this post

Neal Maxwell question- the D&C 107 series – the answer

So in the D&C 107 series, I asked the question: what was Neal Maxwell’s term for female “foreordination.” Nobody took the bait and tried to answer, so here it is: “foredesignation.” There was a prize. I guess I win it. The final post in the series is still coming.

D&C 107. Part 11. Ordination Practices.

[Part 10 is here.]
For the first 90 years or so of LDS church organization, priesthood ordination took place in more or less the following pattern:

By authority of the Holy Priesthood and by the laying on of hands, I ordain you an elder in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and confer upon you all the rights, powers keys and authority pertaining to this office and calling in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

Read more of this post

D&C 107. Part 10. Revisions of the November Revelation, continued

Continued from part 6. No just kidding. From part 9.
The second part of the November revelation/D&C 107 contains some interesting changes which also reflect otherwise unknown revelation(s).
Read more of this post

D&C 107. Part 9. Revisions of The November Revelation.

Continued, naturally, from part 8.
When LDS D&C 107 was printed (as D&C 3) in late summer 1835, it contained both the March 28 [April 28, 1835] revelation (see part 8 ) and the November 11, 1831 revelation conjoined. However, as we have seen the terminology and priesthood architecture of the two revelations were not the same. Moreover, the November 11, 1831 revelation was heavily modified in D&C 107 to reflect at least some of the organizational development in the bishopric and President of the High Priesthood offices. But the terminological inconsistencies were not made coherent.
Read more of this post

D&C 107. Part 8. The March 28, 1835 [April 28, 1835] Revelation.

Continues Part 7
Joseph Smith founded two new priesthood offices early in 1835, the Twelve Apostles and the Seventy. While the apostleship had been presaged before the formal organization of the church (D&C 18) the first formal ordinations took place in February 1835. The apostles felt the need for some formal direction regarding their standing and duty in the church and asked Joseph Smith for such direction. Heber C. Kimball noted the experience in his journal as follows:
Read more of this post

D&C 107. Part 7. Interregnum Continued.

Continued from part 6.
The revelation of November 11 was accepted in Zion (Missouri) as an addition to the law of the church on July 3, 1832 (see Far West Record) but remained unpublished to the body of the church. The office of president of the high priesthood stood vacant until a January 25, 1832 conference at Amherst, Ohio when it was voted that Joseph Smith fill the office. Sidney Rigdon “ordained” Joseph at the time. Between that time and March 8, 1832, Joseph Smith became acquainted with the idea of having counselors, forming a presidency of the high priesthood. A revelation received on March 5 reads in part,
Read more of this post

D&C 107. Part 6. Interregnum.

You’ll want to read parts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.
Between the ca 1831 texts of the November 11 revelation and the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants text (section 3) there were several developments. One was the important revelation of September 22, 23, 1832. (LDS D&C 84) In this revelation we see the beginnings of a taxonomy of priesthood, more nuanced than previous classifications but not yet mature.
Read more of this post

D&C 107. Part 5. KRB text continued.

Continuing part 4.
Here we give the “second” revelation of November 11, 1831 in comparison with the KRB text. The KRB text is in the hand of Frederick G. Williams and it suggests more strongly that indeed the November 11 revelation is two revelations. Observe that the text never uses the word “quorum.” My use of the word in reference to these texts is only to provide context. The word would not appear in Joseph’s revelations until the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants. Moreover, during his lifetime, it would be used in a much looser way than LDS use it now.
Read more of this post

D&C 107. Part 4. KRB Text.

After the revelation of November 11 was dictated by Joseph Smith (see parts 1, 2, and 3), it did circulate to some degree and was to be a part of the proposed Book of Commandments (but didn’t make it).
Read more of this post

The Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar

In case you are interested in the subject of the Kirtland Egyptian Papers, take a look at William Schryver’s recent paper/presentation on the subject. He both lays to rest something I proposed a long time ago, and confirms something else. It’s a remarkable bit of detective work and links up with some recent work of Sam Brown.[1] Have a look here.
[1] Samuel Brown, “The Translator and the Ghostwriter: Joseph Smith and William Phelps.” Journal of Mormon History, 34/1 (Winter 2008), 26 – 62.