What is the purpose of life? My thoughts as a new father. A Funeral Sermon-part III

I remember as a missionary talking about how we had the answer to the most important and sacred questions. Among them, "what is the purpose of life?" would be a common one for missionaries to prepare to answer. I was always geared up to give a discourse from 2 Nephi chapter 2 on this important topic. I thought for sure I had the complete and full answer. I have realized more and more that my understanding was pretty limited. 2 Nephi chapter 2 was not limited by any means. In fact, it is replete with details to this soul-searching question. I would always tell people that the purpose of life is to learn good from evil as Adam and Eve had through their own personal fall. I would then explain that we likewise, though not through the same avenue, chose to have a personal fall from the presence of God in order that we could return with glory and honor. We chose to come to earth and be tested. I would extract this from 2 Nephi 2:25-27. I basically had it memorized; however, what I failed to do was look at the entirety of the context:


First of all, Lehi is speaking to his child. This is an important detail. I think I should have allowed the sermon to speak for itself in its entirety. I think of particular importance is verse 23. Lehi states, "And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence having no joy, for they knew no misery..." The first part of that is key because the fact that children bring joy almost seems like a common-doctrine to them: one that did not need a lot of emphasis. He simply states "And they would have had no children" as if that phrase alone signaled to his children the importance of the fall.


Furthermore, they would have had the Adam and Eve story in its fullest. They would have known that God commanded Adam and Eve to have children. I knew that having children was important but I never realized that this was a central purpose to life. I would always say "the purpose of life is to choose good over evil in the midst of temptation so that we may be more righteous and qualify to become like God the Father."


I realize now that children are an integral part of the plan. I remember hearing our sealer make the same bold command to my wife and I that was given to Adam and Eve. Then later, while studying on my roles as a patriarch in my home I stumbled across President Kimball's first General Conference address as the Prophet of the Church. He read an excerpt from a First Presidency message given in 1942 (think about the time-period they were giving this in!). That message was simply titled "Parenthood" and reads, in part:


"Motherhood thus becomes a holy calling, a sacred dedication for carrying out the Lord's plans, a consecration of devotion to this uprearing and fostering, the nurturing in body, mind, and spirit, of those who kept their first estate and who come to this earth for their second estate ' to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them' (Abr 3:23.) To lead them to 'keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads forever and ever.'


"This divine service of motherhood can be rendered only mothers. It may not be passed to others. Nurses cannot do it; public nurseries cannot do it; hired help cannot do it--only mother, aided as much as may be by the loving hands of father, brothers, and sisters, can give the full needed measure of watchful care. 


"The mother who entrusts her child to the care of others, that she may do non-motherly work, whether for gold, for fame, or for civic service should remember that 'a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame (Prov. 29:15.) In our day the Lord has said that unless parents teach their children the doctrines of the Church 'the sin be upon the heads of the parents.' (D&C 68:25.)


Motherhood is near to Divinity. It is the highest, holiest service to be assumed by mankind. It places her who honors its holy calling and service next to the angels. To you mothers in Israel we say, God bless and protect you, and give you the strength and courage, the faith and knowledge, the holy love and consecration to duty, that shall enable you to fill to the fullest measure the sacred calling which is yours. To you mothers and mothers-to-be we say: Be chaste, keep pure, live righteously, that your posterity to the last generation may call you blessed." ("Message of the First Presidency" Deseret News Weekly Church Edition, October 1942, p. 5.)

Brigham Lloyd Brown--May 31st, 2012

Recently I became a father to my first. We thought we were having a little girl (hence why my blog intro said "soon-to-be father to a baby girl"). When the baby was born I had an overwhelming sense of love and devotion to him. It seemed like only minutes had passed and I already knew about him. It was odd to even ever think that we were expecting a girl. Even today when I mention it, I feel awkward saying it because it is literally impossible to imagine it any other way.


So, how come I relate this to the "funeral sermon" or the "King Follet Discourse"? Because when Joseph Smith states "Here, then, is eternal life--to know the only wise and true God; and you have got to learn to become gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you...they shall be 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. What did Jesus do? Why; I do the things I saw my Father do when worlds come rolling into existence. My Father worked out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom, I shall present it to my Father, so that He may obtain kingdom upon kingdom, and it will exalt him in glory."


In other words, our exaltation and inheritance come as a result of the success of our children. If no children brought their own kingdom to Christ's gospel, then it would not allow the Father to advance in his own glory. We will never be co-equal with God as some faiths allege; however, we can inherit that same glory that he has.


As a Father this makes much more sense. I cannot envision a Father who would not want his children to have absolute joy and success equal or more than he has. I want for Brigham (my new little boy) to have more opportunity and greater happiness than I have ever experienced. Note that I want him to have more! The Father, realizing that he has reached the maximum potential, wants for us to enjoy all that he now enjoys: maximum blessings. As a parent I have learned to a greater degree the nature of my Heavenly Father."


And this is how we "learn to become gods". It is through parenthood that we can have eternal increase (see D&C 131) and everlasting joy.


This is the end of "The Funeral Sermon" blogging; however, I would suggest that one would read it and become familiar with the doctrines contained therein.

Freedom, Agency, and Eternal Progress. A Funeral Sermon-part II

Right after writing part I of the "Funeral Sermon" post, I had a question come up to me about how to encourage someone to continue on the pathway to discipleship. He asked if I knew of any good talks that he could reference. I had just written the first part of this blog, and so I directed him towards this very talk. Then, if you look at Part 1 commentary another question came up relating to the nature of Deity. Both of these questions are related.


Looking at the historical context of this talk is really important to see the significance of it. Joseph Smith was taking part in a massive theological shift.


Joseph Smith's mother, Lucy Mack Smith, was a true child of the Revolution. 4 days previous to her 1st birthday the Declaration of Independence was signed. She was in New Hampshire at the time of the signing. Her husband was only 8 days away from his 5th birthday when it was signed. So what does that have to do with the King Follet sermon? Well, a lot!


The declaration for freedom was spurred in large part by a theological shift. I can remember first reading Jonathan Edwards' most notable sermon Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God. It was sermons like these that compelled people to demand their personal liberties. It was a time we know as The Great Awakening.


Less than 30 years prior to the First Vision Louis XVI was beheaded. This is significant because he was to be the embodiment of God's Kingdom on Earth. But the people were rejecting this notion. This thought out and intended act of rebellion was a symbol that the people were rejecting the idea that God had charge over their civic society, 


If a religious revolution was not the end result, then it was outright atheism. Freedom became the optimism that drove people. Religion had become dogmatic and oppressive in the minds of the people. Civic freedom was the only real way to progress.


To many it seemed that the gap between freedom and religion was growing ever more wide. Everyone in the middle found themselves torn because religion demanded one way whilst the fight for freedom demanded another.


Enter Joseph Smith. When Joseph comes on stage he teaches a theology that finds harmony in both organized religion and the drive for freedom. So what became the difference? Several things mark Mormonism as "different" but in this particular case, it was the freedom and the uncapped potential. The quintessential doctrine of Mormonism thus involved man's ability to choose, or act as agents, and man's ability to progress to eventual godhood.


No longer were people torn between attempting to attach a personality to God: did he want us to be free? Or did he want us to be saved? The answer: both. And not only saved, but exalted as he is exalted! That was is his "work and glory" (Moses 1:39).


So in answer to my friend's question concerning eternal progression, I would say that this talk is the pinnacle of Mormon thought. It was such a new course in the American Theosophical landscape (and yes, theosophical is a word). It went against all of the common orthopraxy of the day because it called men to a much higher sphere. There was no longer a cap to righteousness. It implies that God is progressing (not in knowledge but in glory) and that we should be progressing. It gives a purpose to our agency and a meaning to freedom. It compels us to be more dutiful disciples.


The talk was not given in so that young missionaries could sit and speculate on who God was prior. It was meant to comfort and soothe; it was also meant to excite the mind and push the faint soul who feels that he or she just cannot make it. If they endure and do the works of Abraham (and think of all he went through) they can have the blessings of Abraham: namely godhood.

A Funeral Sermon-part I

I remember the first time I was introduced to the King Follet Sermon. I was called to a mission and getting ready to leave. It was a time of personal doctrinal exploration. I was endowed around the same time so naturally I started asking questions about topics of the Temple. Naturally this sermon came up. It seems that most people are first brought to this discourse while on their mission or immediately prior. I say that because I have spoken to many girls who have never heard of it. I have spoken to many returned missionaries that were exposed to it on their mission while staying up late with other missionaries getting into the "deep" doctrine discussions. 

An example of a grove where the Prophet Joseph Smith instructed the saints. The King Follet Sermon would have been given in a grove such as this.

When I first heard the name of the sermon, I thought it was either given to a king or about a king or something to that nature. That is not the case. Well, at least not on the surface as I was thinking. In fact, quite the opposite. The title of the remarks were not the “official” title: it was simply a funeral talk. The talk was given at a General Conference of the Church but the aim of the talk served, at least in part, to comfort the family and friends of King Follet.* King Follet was a simpleton (not a King) who had died that week. I mention this as the history because there is something remarkable about the circumstances. We have similar talks in the Church today. The Bishops and Branch Presidents get up and talk about the Plan of Salvation at a church member’s memorial service. This is to offer comfort, hope, understanding, and perspective during a tough time. By happenstance King Follet's death occurred the week of a conference of the Church; however, the talk, by nature, should be very similar to talks we would give at a funeral.

 King Follet was not a king at all. But Joseph Smith was giving a discourse on how he could one day be a king. It is a landmark talk concerning the doctrine of the Church and I think the setting could not be any better. Joseph Smith was offering comfort to a family who had lost a loved one. And here Joseph Smith uses the opportunity to teach doctrine and comfort the family. I cannot think of a better place or circumstance to reveal such a doctrine.  

 The sermon taught numerous things about Deity that had previously been lost. These facts and principles are vital to our faith today. Most notable was the fact that Deity was more like us than we could originally conceive:

 “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form--like yourselves in all the person, image, and the very form as a man.”

 He further taught that "You have got to learn to become Gods yourselves, the same as all Gods before you have done."

 What makes this more fascinating is the fact that the discourse came out just months before his death. It seemed that Hell’s foundation shook at the thought that this would be revealed to the World. When we realize our divine potential we immediately recognize that God loves us more than we imagine. We have purpose in life. We have meaning attached to our existence. We feel both happy and hopeful. 

 What most people do not realize is that there was a talk given after this known as The Sermon in the Grove. This sermon was given less than 2 weeks before his death. It points out similar doctrines. It can be found in the History of the Church volume 6, pages 473-479, or in Joseph Fielding Smith’s compilation, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith pages 369-376. 

 This discourse is great because it is after Joseph Smith gains a bit more confidence in his understanding of the Hebrew language. Among other things he points out that things are not created out of nothing and he used Hebrew to do so. Around the same time a similar scientific discovery was made to validate Joseph Smith’s teaching: we call it the Law of Conservation of Energy.

 If this is truly the case then it reveals much about the character and being of God the Father and His role in creation. Albeit the mainstream Christian community scoffs at the sermons, one cannot help but notice that similar discoveries have been made. 

 More than a scientific approach what I call the paternal approach. For so long in history Deity was seen as unknown and unknowable and incomprehensible. Joseph Smith however invites us to learn how close the Heavens really are. In fact, Joseph Smith spent his life attempting to show others the nature of God. 

 Although Joseph had seen the Father and the Son 24 years earlier, it seems to only dawn on him later that in fact, Deity was made of a body as we have. It was a body like our body, but without the carnal blood running through the veins making them subject to the Fall. It is almost exactly 1 year before the King Follet sermon that we first hear Joseph Smith make a bold declaration as to the nature of the Godhead (see D&C 130:22-23). It seems that around that same time, Joseph Smith also learns of many deep and important things pertaining to the Plan of Salvation. 

 To actually put down all of my thoughts on this would take dozens upon dozens of pages (maybe even hundreds); and I know that I have only skimmed the surface. I think that those who want to learn more about what we may call “the essence” of our religion would do well to study D&C 76 (note the placement of the verses within the vision and the particular details of our natures in the resurrection), The King Follet sermon, The Sermon in the Grove, Romans 8, and D&C 130 (again, emphasizing the idea of resurrection, sociality, and the nature of the Godhead and why it is placed where it is in the Doctrine and Covenants).

 I will relate this to the Temple if it is not making quite a lot of sense yet. 

*I read a blog that argued "that this is a significant misinterpretation of Joseph Smith, but I also fail to see how that teaching would have been any comfort for a funeral sermon." I would however argue that the interpretation that God was once as we are is the most quintessential and comforting doctrine that Joseph Smith had to offer.