Sunday, November 16, 2014

Rabbath Ammon: The City With the Greatest PR Campaign Ever

[Author's Note: When I originally started writing this I intended this to be a lighthearted post about I verse I recently read in the book of Deuteronomy. So if that is all you care about then just skip down to where it says "Original Post". But I just couldn't resist looking up some basic information about the people and places mentioned in that verse. That turned into an even more in depth look at some Biblical history that I was not very familiar with. That in turn lead to more searching and more reading and more ideas.

By the time I decided to stop I was turning a short lighthearted post about a single verse into a Russian Novel. I had 20+ tabs open in my browser and I was trying to figure out how to distill that much information into a single post. After a while I decided that I didn't have to, nor did I want to attempt that. I had unintentionally hit on a very rich subsection of Biblical history that very frequently gets misinterpreted. Some of the topics that I came across in researching that one verse have been used (almost) more than any other part of the Bible as the basis for some of the most fantastical, misguided, insipid, and just plain wrong Biblical exegesis.

My original short post was turning into a post on how a single word in the Bible can be used as the basis for an ever expanding repertoire of tall tales and theological speculation that leads into the truly bizarre. But rather than flesh it all out into a complete post I threw it all away and went back to my original idea of a short, humorous a long boring "Author's Note". I'll provide the links but if you want to go down the rabbit hole and take the blue pill then you will have to do your own research.

A few links to get you started:

One of those links will lead you down a path of pure history, another down a path of linguistics debates, another down a path of speculation and fantasy and the fourth down a path of a combination of all three. I leave it as an exercise to the interested reader to figure out which is which. Now back to my regularly scheduled post.]

----------Original Post----------

Every PR department dreams of coming up with the ultimate ad campaign. One that will work it's way into popular culture and be used cultural icon or even become a standard figure of speech. But of all the PR departments that have ever been there was one that out did them all because they managed to get their star tourist attraction mentioned in the Bible along with a seemingly prophetic endorsement from Moses himself to go see it.

In the book of Deuteronomy Moses (or his ghost writer(s)) is recounting their travels in the wilderness and the various wars fought and victories won, when he mentions one king they fought against and killed, Og king of Bashan. After listing the cities they captured on the far side of the Jordan River he then mentions Og again includes a little tidbit of tourist trivia.
"For only Og king of Bashan remained of the remnant of giants; behold, his bedstead was a bedstead of iron; is it not in Rabbath of the children of Ammon? nine cubits was the length thereof, and four cubits the breadth of it, after the cubit of a man." (Duet. 3:11)
In other words, "Hey look at this guy we killed. He was HUGE! Like HUGE! Like a GIANT! You don't believe he was a giant? Well Mr. Smartypants, you can still go see his bed. It's over in Rabbath Ammon. Just across the Jordan River. It's HUGE! His bed is, I mean. But seriously, you can still go see his bed! Just take a look and measure it out. Only a GIANT would have a bed that big. And we KILLED him! Go us!"

So the people in the city of Rabbath Ammon had something there that was a major tourist attraction that they called Og's bed. We don't know what it really was (some translations say sarcophagus rather than bed) but apparently by the time the parenthetical statement (almost all other translations put it in parentheses, but not the KJV) was inserted in the book of Deuteronomy it was a major tourist attraction. So the PR department of Rabbath Ammon outdid them all and got a shout out for their main tourist attraction put in the Bible with the apparent approval of Moses.


[Author's End Note: Yes, another boring one that deals with scholarly stuff and actual history. Before you think that Moses was out endorsing tourist attractions in Gentile cities, keep in mind that this was a parenthetical statement that was added much later. So even if Moses had written the book of Deuteronomy he most likely did not insert that little gem.

"Wait!" you say. "What do you mean 'even if Moses had written the book of Deuteronomy'. But Moses did write the book of Deuteronomy! Didn't he? That's why it is called one of the five books of Moses." Weeeeelllllll....There is an idea out there that has some credence to it that says that Moses did not actually write the book of Deuteronomy.

The theory goes something like this. King Josiah (b. 643) and his priests were in the middle of a major religious reform in Jerusalem. Along the way they found what they called "the Book of the Law" which was probably the core legal code laid down by Moses, as preserved by the scribes over the years. Over the next few years little bits of history and introductory material was added, including the parenthetical statement about king Og. This book became the basis of Josiah's religious reforms, but was not part of the original writings of Moses. If this was the case then the book of Deuteronomy may not have been part of the Brass Plates taken by Lehi into the wilderness. So originally there were only the four books of Moses, and not the five that we now have.

In any event, I doubt it that Moses was the one who mentioned Rabbath Ammon's main tourist attraction.]

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Expecting Perfection

I found this little nugget of wisdom in a journal kept by Joseph Smith (written by others) from December 1841 to December 1842. This entry is found on October 29th, 1842.
"[Joseph] said he was but a man and they must not expect him to be perfect; if they expected perfection from him, he should expect it from them, but if they would bear with his infirmities and the infirmities of the brethren, he would likewise bear with their infirmities." [Source]
How often do we demand perfection from our leaders, but we complain and protest when the same is done to us?

Sunday, October 26, 2014

What I Read: LDS Themed Blogs and Books

A while back I was having a conversation on gospel topics with a missionary serving in my ward and he asked me how I learned so much about gospel topics, mostly things that would never be discussed in Sunday School, Seminary or Institute. I think the answer I gave at the time was, "Well I read several books and I follow a few blogs. I also look at the footnotes to find more things to read."

For anyone, such as returned missionaries, who want to go on and learn more about the Church, Church history, the Gospel, and LDS themes in general I thought it would be helpful to provide a list of resources I use, blogs I follow, or books that I have read that I felt were important. If there are others that you have found useful feel free to suggest them in comments (if you have your own LDS themed blog that you want to promote, feel free to leave a link in the comments. I won't consider you narrowly for promoting your own blog long as it is not anti-Mormon, spam, or well, off topic.). There may be some that I have forgotten so I may update this list at some point. I list them now in no particular order.

Blogs I Read

Personal Blogs
  • Mormanity: A blog run by Jeff Lindsay, "an LDS guy in Shanghai. Formerly of Appleton, WI, Jeff writes about the Mormon experience, life in China, and the joys of the Gospel of Jesus Christ." If you read LDS themed stuff long enough you will sooner or later run across Jeff's stuff. I will mention his LDS FAQ later on. Some of his blog posts are personal, or spiritual, but occasionally he posts about LDS apologetics and I find his topics and links very helpful.
  • Studio et Quoque Fide: A blog by Neal Rappleye. He posts about LDS apologetics and keeps people updated on things that are currently being talked about in the field of LDS apologetics. His blog also has several good links, both on the side and in his posts with more material to read.
  • Angels in the Architecture: A blog by Gregory L. Smith. Posts occasionally with quotes and other LDS tidbits. I learned about him when I read a pair of articles he wrote a while back for Mormon Interpreter.
  • Keepapitchinin: A Mormon history blog by Ardis E. Parshall. She post multiple times a day with things from LDS history. She is perhaps one of the best amatuer non-academically trained historians I know of. My sister occasionally posts guest posts to Keepapitchinin. To be honest I don't read everything she posts (I probably only read like 10% of what she posts), but the stuff I read is interesting.
  • Forn Spǫll Fira: A blog by John Gee. He posts about LDS scholarly stuff and apologetics.
  • Warfare and the Book of Mormon: A blog by Morgan Deane. The name of the blog basically tells it all. Morgan is a military historian and offers interesting insights about the Book of Mormon that is not your standard SS/Seminary fare.
  • Speaking Silence: A blog on Patheos by James Faulconer. He teaches Philosophy at BYU, and now that I read his blog I regret never taking a class from him. [A note on Patheos, I hate their interface and it is very difficult to find the RSS feed for his blog. So if you want the RSS feed here is the feedburner link.]
  • Ether's Cave: A blog by Matthew Roper and John Gee. They post about Mormon research, apologetics and things like that. They have a list of what they call "howlers", things that anti-Mormons used to say disproved the Book of Mormon, but have since been shown to be correct.
Non-personal blogs
  • Fair Mormon Blog: This is the blog run by Fair Mormon. Fair Mormon used to be just FAIR (Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research), but they got so tired of explaining what Apologetics is (no that does not mean they are apologizing for the Church, Apologetics means offering a logical, rational, defense of your faith, beliefs or opinions.), so they changed the name from FAIR to just Fair Mormon.
  • Mormon Interpreter: If I had to tell someone who wanted to get into Mormon apologetics and research where was the one place they need to start I would say they need to start with the Mormon Interpreter. They are the intellectual continuation of the work that was started under the old FARMS Foundation. I have been reading the blog and the journal since it started back in 2012. They do good work and provide most of the sources for additional reading that I do. If everything you know about the Church and the scriptures you learned from Sunday School and Seminary then reading the Mormon Interpreter will be like being thrown into the middle of the ocean when all the swim lessons you ever had were in your bathtub when you were 5. For new readers most of the material will be over your head unless you have read extensively about LDS topics in other places.
  • Maxwell Institute Blog: This is the blog of the Maxwell Institute (formerly FARMS, the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies). When I began following the blog a few years ago they always had some very interesting stuff. But a few years back they decided to take the Institute in another direction and they have been doing boring stuff ever since. Still they are the repository of all of the old FARMS articles and data. And that is important.
General Resources

These are general resources and are not updated on a regular basis like a blog. I use them more as a reference and where to find additional reading material.
  • LDS FAQ: This is not to be confused with the official FAQ put out by the Church. The LDS FAQ is run by Jeff Lindsay (who writes on the Mormanity blog). This site contains an incredible amount of references, sources, explanations and at times humor dealing with anti-Mormon attacks on the Church. If anyone has specific questions about Church history, doctrine or practices that are causing them to question their faith this is a great resource for putting those issues into perspective.
  • Joseph Smith's Polygamy: This is a site run by Brian C. Hales. He wrote six books on Joseph Smith and polygamy and if you ever do any reading or research into that topic you will eventually come across his stuff. He is currently the de facto authority on that topic.
  • Fair Mormon: They do all things apologetic and also respond to just about every anti-Mormon attack out there. There is also an associated YouTube channel that contains many presentations by LDS scholars and authors that are very interesting.
    • Fair Mormon Wiki: A sub portion of Fair Mormon is their Wiki. It contains a good place to find interesting topics and also find good sources for questions that arise from anti-Mormon attacks. If I am researching a particular LDS themed topic and I need a place to start sometimes I start here.
  • FARMS Review: No longer being published but the old publications are available online and are very useful.
  • Journal of Book of Mormon Studies: Another FARMS/Maxwell Institute publication. I don't know if they are still publishing, but their archives contain good stuff.

Books that I recommend. There are many, this is just a short list.
People I know about but don't read on a regular basis
  • Daniel Peterson. He has a blog over on Patheos that I occasionally read, but I don't subscribe to it.
  • William Hamblin: He also has a blog over on Patheos but I don't subscribe to it. For both Peterson and Hamblin I do not object to their stuff (hey, I read Mormon Interpreter), it's just that they are the chocolate sundae of Mormon apologetics and I prefer mint cookies and cream. You may like their stuff, but I don't read it every day.
  • Scriptorium Blogorium: A blog by Michaela Stephens. She posts on average every other day with an insight about the scriptures. There are many good things on the internet but I don't always follow all of them. This is one of those things.
  • Ploni Almoni: Mr. So-and-So's Mormon Blog: A blog run by Stephen O. Smoot. It covers apologetics, current topics and other controversies.
Places I Avoid

I know this may seem weird but there are some places that focus on LDS topics, but I try to avoid them like the plague. I will not list them all, but in general I avoid places that have a large number of authors but little or no editorial oversight on content and comments. These blog communities are mentally and spiritually draining so generally I stay away from the "bloggernacle". Again, in no particular order.
  • By Common Consent. Whenever I go read it I come away feeling like the authors are trying to be "edgy" without being heretical. The posts have a tendency to make me upset or contentious or both. The comments even more so. In the end it is just spiritually draining.
  • Wheat and Tares: Same as for BCC above.
  • The Millennial Star: Same as for BCC and WaT above. [Edit: A few comments below state that M* is not all that bad. I may have changed over past few years, but back when I was reading it it fit in with the other blogs on this list. So M* may be different now.]
  • Feminist Mormon Housewives: Same as for BCC, WaT, and M* above.
  • The list goes on. I just tend to avoid those blogs. Some are good and not like BCC, WaT, M*, FMH, others are just more of the same.
  • Anything anti-Mormon (or "pro"-Mormon but with a decidedly faith discouraging bent, written by non-, former-, ex-, anti-, soon-to-be-former-, excommunicated-, should-be-honest-with-themselves-and-just-leave- Mormons...*cough*mormonthink*cough*).
This is not a comprehensive list of everything that is out there. Nor is it a comprehensive list of everything that I read (I have 100+ items in my Feedly reader list), but it is enough to get started for someone who wants to enter the world of LDS scholarship, apologetics, or topics. If you have anything else you want to add, just leave a comment.

As a final note. You can see a side-by-side comparison of Isaiah chapters and verses in the Book of Mormon with their corresponding Bible chapter and verses (using the KJV of the Bible) by checking out my other blog, Isaiah in the Book of Mormon.

Sunday, October 5, 2014

Stories from My Mission: "La paciencia es la ciencia de la paz."

When I was in the city of Eldorado in Misiones I met a wise old farmer who once shared with me a tidbit of wisdom that has stuck with me ever since.
"La paciencia es la ciencia de la paz."
Literally this means, "Patience is the science of peace." But it has a much better ring to it when you say it in Spanish.

Sunday, September 28, 2014

Follow the prophet, for he is in the Lord's Sôd.

I'll try to make this brief. Today in Sunday School our lesson was entitled "God Reveals His Secrets to His Prophets" which dealt with the role of prophets. This is a topic that I have been thinking about a lot recently partially due to the fact that someone whose blog I read regularly has decided to leave the Church and follow after someone he considers to be a prophet of God. Part of the discussion in our Sunday School lesson centered around what it meant to be a prophet and I decided to share something that I had learned over a year ago.

One of the central scriptures in the lesson was Amos 3:7 which reads:
"Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets."
The entire discussion focused on other parts of the scripture until I share something I had learned from an article in the Mormon Interpreter by William Hamblin. The Hebrew word for secret in that verse is sôd (סוד). As Hamblin explains in his article,
"In its broader sense the Hebrew term sôd (סוד) means a confidential discussion, a secret or plan, a circle of confidants, or council. Nearly all scholars now agree that sôd, when used in relationship to God, refers to the heavenly council/sôd of God, which humans may sometimes visit to learn divine mysteries or obtain a prophetic message to deliver to humankind. The celestial members of this council are variously called the “host of heaven” (1 Kings 22:19), “gods” or “sons of God” (Ps. 82:1, 6), or “Holy Ones.” Sôd can refer to either the divine council itself or to the deliberative secret results of that council—that is the secret plans of the council—which a prophet is sometimes permitted to learn or to reveal to humankind. Only those who are part of the divine sôd/council know the sôd/secret plan, and only those who are given explicit permission may reveal that sôd to humankind."
I mentioned this idea to the class (in a much abbreviated form) and said that what sets prophets apart from everyone else, especially from false prophets, is that true prophets are part of the council and counsel of the Lord. Only true prophets can stand in the sôd and know what the Lord has planned for mankind. The prophet Jeremiah mentions the sôd when he denounces the false prophets of Judah who prophesied that Jerusalem would not be destroyed.
"16 This is what the Lord Almighty says: “Do not listen to what the [false] prophets are prophesying to you; they fill you with false hopes. They speak visions from their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord. 17 They keep saying to those who despise me, ‘The Lord says: You will have peace.’ And to all who follow the stubbornness of their hearts they say, ‘No harm will come to you.’ 18 But which of them has stood in the council [sôd] of the Lord to see or to hear his word? Who has listened and heard his word?" (Jeremiah 23:16-18 NIV)
Jeremiah could say this because he had stood in the sôd of the Lord and had heard the Lord's sôd, and had been authorized to reveal the sôd to the people. When a prophet is called and allowed into the sôd he and only he is authorized to reveal the sôd to the people of God. There are some who are uncomfortable with the idea that a man will act as the intermediary between God and man, but that is the pattern that has been followed since Adam and will continue until the end of the earth. Not everyone in invited into the sôd of God, but everyone can receive a knowledge of the sôd.

Part of what brought this about and made me mention this in Sunday School (and now on my blog) was something written by the now former LDS blogger I mentioned at the beginning. He was convinced that there should be no intermediary between us and God when it comes to revelation, the priesthood, and our salvation. He felt that we should not be taught to "Follow the Prophet" since that placed a barrier between us and God and turned the prophet into a kind of idol that we were being commanded to worship.

His attitude and conclusions greatly saddened me because he was essentially turning away from the truth due to a misunderstanding. A misunderstanding that is not supported by anything the prophets themselves have said or done. It is like coming to the conclusion that Moses was not a prophet because the children of Israel were worshiping a golden calf. In the Church the counsel we receive from the prophets does not detract from our Christ centered lives, but rather it strengthens it and deepens it because the prophets have stood in the sôd of the Lord and know His sôd. In the Church when we say follow the prophet, we do not mean to follow a man and not follow Christ, but only to give heed to their counsel and teaching of the prophet because they have stood in the sôd of the Lord and can lead us in the way light and salvation.

Sunday, September 7, 2014

Chiasmus in Numbers Chapter 8

Today while I was reading in Numbers I noticed a rather interesting chiastic structure in Chapter 8. I noticed it because at the beginning and end of the chapter are four verses of material seemingly unrelated to the rest of the chapter. Even though the four verses at the beginning and the four verses at the end are unrelated to each other, the fact that both of them were there in the chapter, and about the same length made me think, "Well that's unusually symmetric!"

Which immediately made me think, "Wait. Symmetric. This wasn't an accident there's structure to this chapter." And by noticing that structure it prompted me to look for more structure and then uncover a rich chiasmus that I never knew about. I did a cursoury search and I haven't found anyone who lists Numbers 8 as a chiasmus so I hope Biblical scholars haven't missed this rather interesting example of a chiastic structure.

The first four and the last four verses function as bookends to the main structure found in verses 5-22, and tie it in with the rest of the material. This chapter contains several pronunciations by the Lord to Moses as the Lord spoke to Moses from the mercy seat beginning in the last verse of chapter 7. The structure of the chiasmus is used in an intelligent way to not only report what the Lord said, but also to teach the symbolism of it.

Below I give a breakdown of the chiasmus found in Numbers 8. I use letters in brackets to indicate the different chiastic levels. Parallel words or phrases are underlined and important terms are highlighted (if you are reading this in Feedly then you may need to click through and read it on my blog to see the highlights). At the end I will explain why I highlighted certain passages. Verse numbers are preserved.

[Left Bookend]
1 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
2 Speak unto Aaron, and say unto him, When thou lightest the lamps, the seven lamps shall give light over against the candlestick.
3 And Aaron did so; he lighted the lamps thereof over against the candlestick, as the Lord commanded Moses.
4 And this work of the candlestick was of beaten gold, unto the shaft thereof, unto the flowers thereof, was beaten work: according unto the pattern which the Lord had shewed Moses, so he made the candlestick.

[A] 5 ¶And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
[B] 6 Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and cleanse them.
[C] 7 And thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them:
[D] Sprinkle water of purifying upon them, and let them shave all their flesh, and let them wash their clothes, and so make themselves clean.
[D'] 8 Then let them take a young bullock with his meat offering, even fine flour mingled with oil, and another young bullock shalt thou take for a sin offering.
[E] 9 And thou shalt bring the Levites before the tabernacle of the congregation: and thou shalt gather the whole assembly of the children of Israel together:
[E'] 10 And thou shalt bring the Levites before the Lord: and the children of Israel shall put their hands upon the Levites:
[F] 11 And Aaron shall offer the Levites before the Lord for an offering of the children of Israel, that they may execute the service of the Lord. 12 And the Levites shall lay their hands upon the heads of the bullocks: and thou shalt offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering, unto the Lord, to make an atonement for the Levites. 13 And thou shalt set the Levites before Aaron, and before his sons, and offer them for an offering unto the Lord.
[G] 14 Thus shalt thou separate the Levites from among the children of Israel:
[H] and the Levites shall be mine.
[I] 15 And after that shall the Levites go in to do the service of the tabernacle of the congregation: and thou shalt cleanse them, and offer them for an offering. 16 For they are wholly given unto me from among the children of Israel;
[X] instead of such as open every womb, even instead of the firstborn of all the children of Israel,
[I] have I taken them unto me. 17 For all the firstborn of the children of Israel are mine, both man and beast: on the day that I smote every firstborn in the land of Egypt
[H] I sanctified them for myself.
[G] 18 And I have taken the Levites for all the firstborn of the children of Israel.
[F] 19 And I have given the Levites as a gift to Aaron and to his sons from among the children of Israel, to do the service of the children of Israel in the tabernacle of the congregation, and to make an atonement for the children of Israel: that there be no plague among the children of Israel, when the children of Israel come nigh unto the sanctuary.
[E] 20 And Moses, and Aaron, and all the congregation of the children of Israel, did to the Levites according unto all that the Lord commanded Moses concerning the Levites,
[E'] so did the children of Israel unto them.
[D] 21 And the Levites were purified, and they washed their clothes;
[D'] and Aaron offered them as an offering before the Lord; and Aaron made an atonement for them
[C] to cleanse them.
[B] 22 And after that went the Levites in to do their service in the tabernacle of the congregation before Aaron, and before his sons:
[A] as the Lord had commanded Moses concerning the Levites, so did they unto them.

[Right Bookend]
23 ¶And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,
24 This is it that belongeth unto the Levites: from twenty and five years old and upward they shall go in to wait upon the service of the tabernacle of the congregation:
25 And from the age of fifty years they shall cease waiting upon the service thereof, and shall serve no more:
26 But shall minister with their brethren in the tabernacle of the congregation, to keep the charge, and shall do no service. Thus shalt thou do unto the Levites touching their charge.

By laying it out in this way we see the structure and purpose of the ceremony and the symbolism involved. The Lord explains his reason for having the Levites offered as an offering to Him. They are in place of all the firstborn (i.e. those who would inherit the birthright) of all of Israel. This shows that even though the children of Israel were saved from Egypt they did not lose their birthright. But it took an offering in place of their firstborn to keep their birthright.

Also what is interesting is at the inflection point (marked by [X]) there is a subtle shift in the language. Before the inflection point things are offered, given and done by the people ("Take the Levites", "thus shalt thou do", "Aaron shall offer", "thou shalt set", "Thus shalt thou separate", and "they are wholly given unto me"), but afterwards it is the Lord that takes, gives and does ("have I taken them unto me", "I sanctified them for myself", "I have taken", and "I have given"). This shows the two part structure of covenants, and the covenant people. The Levites are offered, the children of Israel perform acts and offer sacrifices, the priests and high priest (Aaron) offer, set and separate. But in the end it is the Lord who does, sanctifies, cleanses, and gives.

There are many other lessons that can be gleaned from this symbol rich chapter, but I will leave it here for now. Is there any thing that you noticed that is particularly striking? Perhaps some time I will break down [F] and show the correlation between the different offerings and the corresponding verses later on.

Monday, September 1, 2014

Priesthood Authority and the Concept of Stewardship

I met a man once who said that before he did anything he would say "Si Dios quiere" [God willing]. He explained that if he said that and God did not want him to do it then he would instantly be struck down, because God didn't want him to do that. This included every mundane thing he would do such as leaving his house to walk down the street. In every aspect of his life he claimed that he would say "Si Dios quiere" in order to receive validation for all of his actions no matter how mundane they be. You can see the obvious problem with this because it essentially justifies everything he does, no matter how immoral it may be, because if God doesn't strike him down then "God wills it." It essentially turns God into a rubber stamp to validate whatever that man does, be it immoral or just normal mundane life decisions like what to have for breakfast.

The problem with that way of thinking is that it removes the possibility of free will. While there are some Christians who may argue that we do not have moral agency, or the ability to choose right from wrong, this is not true for Latter-day Saints. From an LDS perspective the ability for us to choose is fundamental to our identity. As the Lord told Enoch:
"Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency;" (Moses 7:32)

The idea that we are free to choose what we are to do is also reinforced in the Book of Mormon when Samuel the Lamanite stated,
"For behold, ye are free; ye are permitted to act for yourselves; for behold, God hath given unto you a knowledge and he hath made you free." (Helaman 14:30)
This statement is by no means the only one in the Book of Mormon that makes it clear that we can act for ourselves. In more modern revelation we are told,
"All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence. Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light." (D&C 93:30-31)
 In talking about the Constitution of the United States a revelation tells us that it was established,
"That every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment." (D&C 101:78)
Whenever members of the Church teach about the Plan of Salvation we mention that before the world was created, we, as spirit children of God, were given the choice to follow God and Jesus Christ or to follow Satan. The crux of Satan's plan, and the reason why we ultimately rejected it, was that it would take away our agency, or ability to choose. As explained in the Book of Moses,
Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down; And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice. (Moses 4:3-4)
Given the strong language surrounding our ability to act (i.e. "otherwise there is no existence") from an LDS perspective we cannot get around that fact that we have our agency and it cannot be taken away. Many if not all members of the Church would acknowledge our ability to choose and act for ourselves and we would never think about applying the unreasonable standard of Divine oversight into all of our decisions as presented by the man I mentioned at the beginning. We may say it is silly for that man to always say, "Si Dios quiere", before he does anything and then expect God to either validate his decision through inaction or express His Divine disagreement by killing him. But what we may not realize is that while we would be repulsed by the thought of applying this standard pf Divine oversight to ourselves, we regularly apply it to the prophet and apostles and sometimes to all the leaders of the Church. Basically we have a modified version of "Si Dios quiere" that only applies to prophets and apostles. We think that if the prophet were to take one step out of line then, "Zap!" he's dead.

This is commonly the image that is brought up whenever anyone quotes Wilford Woodruff when he said,
"I say to Israel, the Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as president of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the program. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty." (The Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, sel. G. Homer Durham [1946], 212–13.
It seems that whenever this quote is brought up people, both inside and outside the Church, use it as proof that God personally reviews and approves everything every prophet says and if they will say something that is a product of the prophet's culture and limited personal understanding (or something that is "false" as the critics would say), then "Zap!" the prophet dies. This is the idea that if Brigham Young, or Joseph Smith, or any other prophet says something then whatever they said must be taken as absolutely true. No exceptions. Because God reviews each and every single decision, statement and action of the prophets (and apostles), and if anything is found to be out of line then, "Zap!", we have a new prophet.

The problem with this is that it removes all possibility of free will on the part of the prophet or apostle. Unfortunately it is not just critics of the Church who hold this position but also faithful members of the Church who hold this position. We strenuously defend our personal agency but when it comes to Church leaders we sometimes fail to see that they have the same measure of agency and freedom that we do.

So how do we reconcile the fact that Church leaders have their free will and God does not use the "Zap!" method of Divine oversight with the fact that the same Church leaders can speak authoritatively for God and can determine the practices, policies, and administration of the Church? In order to understand how these things can be reconciled we need to understand how priesthood authority is related to the concept of stewardship.

As the Lord explains in one revelation,
"It is wisdom in me; therefore, a commandment I give unto you, that ye shall organize yourselves and appoint every man his stewardship; That every man may give an account unto me of the stewardship which is appointed unto him. For it is expedient that I, the Lord, should make every man accountable, as a steward over earthly blessings, which I have made and prepared for my creatures." (D&C 104:11-14)
In the wisdom of the Lord He does not micromanage all the affairs of His kingdom. He gives stewardships to His servants and they are given the charge and authority necessary to fulfill the task assigned to them. The Lord sets the bounds of His stewardships ("All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it") and expects His servants to make wise decisions regarding the things placed in their charge.

In the Book of Matthew we find the parable of the talents, which is applicable to our current discussion.
"For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods. And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.... After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.... For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath." (Matthew 25:14-30)
The lord of the servants did not personally oversee and approve each decision of his servants. As a matter of fact he left them alone and only afterwards did he demand an accounting of them. The Lord uses the same method to govern His Church today. Each Church leader is given his keys, authority and commission in an orderly and clearly defined way and is expected to act in such a way that the kingdom of God is made to increase and be firmly established. As the Lord explains in another modern revelation,
"I, the Lord, have appointed them, and ordained them to be stewards over the revelations and commandments which I have given unto them, and which I shall hereafter give unto them; And an account of this stewardship will I require of them in the day of judgment. Wherefore, I have appointed unto them, and this is their business in the church of God, to manage them and the concerns thereof, yea, the benefits thereof." (D&C 70:3-5)
The pattern that the Lord uses, and has used in all ages of man on the earth, is to give His word (or in same cases His Word) to man, and the revelations and commandments constitute a basic document which set the bounds of the stewardships given to His servants. I should emphasize that all decisions must be kept within the bounds that the Lord has set. We, including the Church leaders, do not choose the content of the revelations nor the conditions of the covenants we are under.

This gives both us and the Church leaders an incredible amount of freedom, and a corresponding amount of responsibility, in what we can do with the kingdom of God. The key to remember here is that the decisions regarding administration of the kingdom should be made by those who hold or are delegated the necessary keys, or power of the priesthood. If there are no specific instructions or prohibitions in the revelations then those who hold and exercise the priesthood keys are free to make decisions according to their wisdom and understanding.

These decisions may range from setting the minimum age at which young men can receive the priesthood, to giving advice about proper and modest attire, to determining how tithing money is to be used. In all these things those who are given these stewardships will be held accountable for their actions ("an account of this stewardship will I require of them in the day of judgment"), but their ability to make decisions, and even mistakes, will not be taken away from them.

Just as God was willing to send us to earth to learn by our own experience to know the good from the evil, and that freedom is not abridged for us, those who are call to be leaders in the Church are not somehow a class apart to which the laws of agency do not apply. They are also free in the sphere or stewardship in which they are placed.

Quite frequently the imagery of the Church as a bride and our Savior as the Bridegroom is used to explain the relation between Christ and His Church. In this sense we, as members of the Church, covenant to hearken to Christ and keep His commandments as He hearkens to the Father. This relationship is reflected in the structure of the priesthood. None of us access the things of God by ourselves, not even the commandments, covenants, ordinances or revelations, but are dependent on another, be it priesthood leader or angel we are all dependent on an intermediary. This method is not an accident because as Alma taught,
"These ordinances were given after this manner, that thereby the people might look forward on the Son of God, it being a type of his order, or it being his order, and this that they might look forward to him for a remission of their sins, that they might enter into the rest of the Lord." (Alma 13:16)
It is done in this way to show unto us our weaknesses that we may learn that we are dependent on Christ for our salvation.

Now there may be some who would feel uncomfortable knowing that their Church leaders do not actually operate under the "Zap!" system of Divine oversight, or that their Church leaders may say something that is not 100% historically correct, or is informed by the biases and prejudices of their day. But God does not choose perfect people to be His prophets, but He does choose those who will do what is asked of them. If we are concerned that the prophets and apostles may tell us to do things to our detriment, then we should realize that this is precisely why we need to have faith in God. There are ways to judge whether or not a prophet is a true prophet or not, and we should seek our own confirmation (God is not interested in having blind followers), but ultimately we must choose to follow God and His stewards.

Now God does not leave his servants entirely to themselves. He does offer counsel (His name is "Man of Counsel" after all, not "Man of 'I make mindless, free-will-deprived, automatons out of my prophets'") and provide direction but everything else is left up to the stewards to decide. This means that sometimes God will correct his servants, but He will decide when, how and what needs to be corrected.

So what is there for us to do? How are we to live our lives? What will all this look like with each member of the Church having dominion over their own stewardship? Well, it will look, function and work exactly like it does not, but without the perception that Church leaders somehow lose their free will when they become Church leaders. God does not operate under the "Zap!" system, but He does counsel His servants in all they do. And for everyone, whether or not we are a Church leader or "just a member" we are all given the same charge,
"Behold, this is your work, to keep my commandments, yea, with all your might, mind and strength." (D&C 11:20)
[End note: I am well enough aware that this will not answer every question someone may have in regards to priesthood authority, and I am sure that some will judge it to be woefully inadequet, but it will answer some questions. There are other things to consider, such as priesthood keys and how they work, charity, both for other Church members and for Church leaders, especially for Church leaders. I find that most of the problems that critics of the Church, both within and without, have with Church leaders stems from uncharitable feelings towards Church leaders or a failure to humbly consider that we are all in this together and that they too are called to make mistakes so that they can learn by their own experience. This does not mean that whatever they do is good and above reproach, but if there is to be reproof, it needs to be done charitably and with tenderness.]