D&C 65 [RE] contains "laws which…are sufficient for both here and in the New Jerusalem.” So we can be sure that whatever we are told in that revelation will apply when the New Jerusalem is actually built or being built. In other words, these are not lower laws that bring condemnation and death. Among the many laws in that revelation, it says, "Thou shalt not take thy brother's garment, thou shalt pay for that which thou shalt receive of thy brother." While that particular commandment is perfectly consistent with everything else the Lord has commanded, something about it bothered me at first. Maybe I’m very different from other people but, in my mind, it was kind of out of place. The revelation already commanded the saints to not steal so it appeared redundant. And, for a revelation that talks a lot about consecration, that one part seemed a bit overly concerned with trade and economic gain. What’s the deal?
Directly before that commandment, it says, “Thou shalt stand in the place of thy stewardship.” When taken in context, this is a new thought so, unless this statement is supposed to stand completely alone and unrelated to the rest of the revelation (unlikely, in my opinion), our stewardship is somehow related to the idea of paying our brother for his garment. What is our stewardship? If you go a bit further back in the revelation, we find a clue. “I will consecrate the riches of the Gentiles unto my people which are of the House of Israel.” That is a fantastic description of the Gentile stewardship that is prophesied throughout the Book of Mormon and other books of scripture. This relates to the major Book of Mormon theme of the Gentiles delivering the Gospel to the Lamanites and assisting in gathering in the rest of Israel. We are rich while Israel is poor, pertaining to the knowledge of spiritual things. Thus the need to consecrate our riches unto them (or risk getting drunk off of our riches).
As Gentiles (of the tribe of Ephraim), we have a stewardship. It is to bring the Gospel to the Lamanites (of the tribe of Manasseh, who is Ephraim's brother). This land is already promised, by covenant, to the Lamanites since they are descendants of Lehi. We Gentiles are seeking a covenant upon this land. Those who hold title to this land (i.e. Lamanites) are still around, even if they are not currently exercising their rights upon the land. That means they will necessarily be involved if any of this covenant land gets promised to Gentiles. If, in scripture, a garment is related to a covenant status, whose garment do we seek to wear as a covenant people? If we want to be established upon this land of promise, are we not seeking the garment of our brethren, the Lamanites? Are we not aiming to be numbered among the seed of Lehi? So the big question is, are we seeking to take our brother's garment without paying for it? Of course, such an act would go against the laws pertaining to the New Jerusalem. What exactly would be the payment? What could we possibly offer to Lehi’s family that would be an acceptable payment for permanent residence on their land they have a promise to by covenant?
According to its title page, the Book of Mormon was “written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel…to come forth in due time by the way of Gentile; the interpretation thereof by the gift of God…which is to shew unto the remnant of the house of Israel what great things the LORD hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the LORD, that they are not cast off forever.” An acceptable payment to Lehi’s family, so that we may justly receive our “brother’s garment,” may be as simple as showing them the great things the Lord did for their fathers, teaching them the covenants of the Lord, and letting them know that they are not cast off forever. We have a stewardship. We have the Book of Mormon in our possession. We can indeed “pay for that which [we] shalt receive of [our] brother.” All of this can and should be done, “by the gift of God,” if we are not of little faith.
No comments:
Post a Comment