Yesterday, I read Richard Winkel’s article in Ensign (Nov. 2006), “The Temple Is About Families.”

Though this was his main emphasis, he did list some other auxiliary functions for LDS temples.

* “The house of the Lord is a refuge from the world.”

. . . “The celestial room in the temple is especially a place of peace, tranquility, and beauty. It is a quiet haven where one can reflect, ponder, pray, meditate, and feel the love of Heavenly Father and the Savior. As we ponder and meditate in the temple, our thoughts naturally focus on members of our family.”

* “The temple is a place of personal revelation that will bless us in our stewardships.”

“President Hinckley has told us that ‘just as our Redeemer gave His life as a vicarious sacrifice for all men, and in so doing became our Savior, even so we, in a small measure, when we engage in proxy work in the temple, become as saviors to those on the other side who have no means of advancing unless something is done in their behalf by those on earth.’ ”

* “The temple is a place to know the Father and the Son.”

“It is a place where we experience the divine presence.”

This is just a partial snapshot. Again, let me suggest that you read the article for yourself.

While I have been studying with exuberance “the house” in Ezekiel, the topic of “families,” as wonderful as they are, did not even remotely come on the radar screen in the biblical text. But there is one big idea that comes through large and lucid – an utterly unique and faithful God who must be set apart among His people.

Look what God says about Israel, “When I have brought them again from the people, and gathered them out of their enemies’ lands, and am sanctified in them in the sight of many nations; then they shall know that I am the LORD their God, which caused them to be led into captivity among the heathen: but I have gathered them unto their own land, and have left none of them any more there. Neither will I hide my face any more from them: for I have poured out my spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord GOD” (Eze. 39:27-29).

Following these words from heaven are the blueprints of the temple (Eze. 40-42), dimensions that have never yet been actualized. A very high mountain. A seven-step staircase. Approximately ten and half feet thick walls. Outer gate buildings (each having six guardrooms). Pillars towering into the air. Pavement. An eight-step staircase. Inner gate buildings. Ninety storage rooms, three-tiered high. The holy place. The most holy place. Palm trees. The Gizrah. Two-faced cherubim. The holy chambers. The holy garments.

When reading the chapters, did you notice the perfect symmetry? The controlled access . . . the ascending . . . the narrowing of doorways?

What is one of the purposes of the temple? God thunders to Ezekiel, “Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities” (Eze. 43:10). Ouch. Ezekiel’s vision of this future temple is not too politically correct for our day and age.

But thank God for that which is symbolized directly center in the very heart of this temple complex. You need to reverently walk 100 cubits from the outer gate to the inner gate. Then you must humbly approach the very middle of the 100 cubit square inner court. The requisite event before knowing the abiding presence of the Father sits there (Eze. 40:47). No temple is inclusive without this. Right? Check it out.

In this temple, God eclipses all earthly, familial relationships. Families, earthly pictures of heavenly things, are nice gifts to us from God. But God is paradise.

Shayne Bowen of the Seventy writes the following in his article, “The Atonement Can Clean, Reclaim, and Sanctify Our Lives” in Ensign (Nov. 2006):

“In Idaho Falls, Idaho, there is a beautiful airport. One of the largest in the region, this airport allows easy access to the Upper Snake River Valley. I remember as a young man returning from Chile to this very airport and greeting my family after two years of missionary service. Similar scenes have taken place thousands of times in this airport as the faithful Saints answer the call to serve. It is a very useful, integral part of the city and region.

“Near the airport is another very useful and beautiful part of the city—Freeman Park. The Snake River runs along this park for about two miles. There is a walking path that goes through the park and follows on around the river for miles.

“Freeman Park has acres and acres of green grass filled with baseball and softball diamonds, swing sets for children, picnic shelters for family reunions, beautiful lanes filled with trees and bushes for strolling sweethearts. Looking down the river from the park, one can see the majestic Idaho Falls temple, white and clean, standing on high ground. The sound of the rushing waters of the Snake River as it works its way through natural lava outcroppings makes this park very desirable. It is one of my favorite places to walk with my sweetheart, Lynette; relax; contemplate; and meditate. It is very peaceful and inspiring.

“Why do I talk about the regional airport and Freeman Park in Idaho Falls? Because they are both built on the same kind of ground; both of these beautiful, useful places used to be sanitary landfills.”

Shayne goes on to say in his article that just as he wouldn’t start digging up personal buried garbage, neither should LDS “choose to remain in sin” (please read the entire article.)

********

In responding to Shayne, the apostle Paul teaches us, “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness life” (Rom. 6:1-4).

If one remains in sin, how can that individual even be a Christian? I knew my situation was bad. I needed more than just personal sins buried (this is too mild), everything that I new about my life needed to come to an end. I am thankful for the powerful atonement of Christ—His work entirely slew and buried the old Todd Wood, my whole past way of life as a sinner. But don’t shrink back over what is dark and drastic about this description, because what follows death is complete resurrection. Now as I joyfully stroll along the greenbelt of the Snake River in Idaho Falls, I “walk in newness of life” because of His super engulfing grace. His efficacious grace, not my fear of God’s disapproval, makes it simply impossible for me to remain in the old sinful way of life.

The daily life of progressive sanctification is believing the gospel that already justified you. If you are “through [in] Jesus Christ,” then come to a verdict about your own death to sin (6:11). The “old man” (6:6) is gone (buried). A true Christian is alive, vibrating in tune with God.

When I walk along the greenbelt near the white LDS temple, I think of the temple work of Christ in Hebrews 9 that purged my “conscience from dead works to serve the living God.” As I meditate on these truths, I don’t just consider ambling down the path, I am ready to run the annual Scenic River Classic 10K on the Snake and break a new record!

I have in my possession, two LDS volumes: The Complete Joseph Smith Translation of the New Testament – A Side-By-Side Comparison With The King James Version (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2005), edited by Thomas A. Wayment and Verse By Verse – The Four Gospels (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2006) by D. Kelly Ogden and Andrew C. Skinner.

As I work my way through John’s Gospel in upcoming months, I will probably reference these two books from time to time.

Is it alright to abbreviate the first book as TCJSToNT? Perhaps there is something better that someone might suggest?

Secondly, are there other contemporary LDS works on John’s Gospel that I need for an accurate LDS perception of the theology in John?

Thinking of heart issues . . .

Because of my study on John 1, BYU prof. Frank Judd Jr.’s recent paper on the traditional authorship of the Gospels sparked my interest. I wanted to see how he reponded to heart issues that I face in placing D&C 93 side by side John 1.

First an introduction to those that might not know Frank . . . (more…)

I don’t have a script, a systematized study, or a research paper to share with the community, only a smile and a book. My heart is aflame over John’s Gospel because of its revelation of a Person. And in these weekly installments of neighborhood surveys, my purpose is to share the input received from neighbors as I explore various details of the fourth Gospel. In these articles, I welcome the clarifications, suggestions, questions, and even strong challenges (really) from those I have talked to and others just reading this entry. (more…)

I love living in Idaho Falls. Can there be any better place on God’s green earth? No way in my humble estimation. In fact, this past Sunday, I met a family in church who recently moved here from Florida. In talking with them, my wife said that through an online application and search, Idaho Falls became the number one place in America for this couple to raise their family. Vindication of my home town is sweet!

Well, this Monday night, I relished the time with my family. I have been married to my beautiful wife for almost fifteen years. How she ever saw fit to make me her husband, I don’t know. I didn’t deserve to be the spouse of this gorgeous, bright, cheerful, bi-pedal creature. Thirteen years ago, she graduated as a “top ten scholar of Boise State University.” Back then, I was introduced to the mayor of Boise as the “husband of Kristie”. Today, whenever I visit my wife, an R.N. working once a week at the Eastern Idaho Regional Medical Center, I am still known as just the husband of such a caring nurse. She’s a rare find. I thank God for His providential care in my life. The Lord knew I needed this gal.

We have four children: Elon Joshua (10), Hannah Marie (8), Mariah Noelle (7), and Micaiah Todd (5). Outside of my wife, these four, crafted by the Lord’s power, have become my greatest joy and stewardship.

For Monday evening, we went rollerblading, a bold spontaneous move for a crisp November night. We cruised the greenbelt along the moonlit Snake River, starting from the chiseled mountain man sculpture on Memorial Drive. Our family of six looked like a traveling circus in the evening dark, our shadows and voices bouncing all over between the trees. Crazily whizzing past the war memorial, the fluttering American and POW-MIA flags, and the granite block inscribed with the ten-commandments, we finally reached the gleaming-white LDS temple, stacked seven stories high, Moroni on top facing toward the east.

Having survived our evening at the river (with only one major crash by dad), back home at the kitchen table, we drank big mugs of hot chocolate, topped with piles of mini-marshmallows. And then we discussed Scripture, John 1 to be exact. The insights of little ones are always choice, winning in categories of humor and simplicity.

I love John’s Gospel. Of course, any biblical book that I find myself embroiled in study very soon becomes my all-time favorite book. As the Gospel of John not only provides brilliant stories, one after another, for my little ones, it stretches my mind to the point where I feel like I am drowning in the deepness of its ocean swell as I seek to trace the footsteps of God.

Thank the Lord for the freedoms we still have in America to enjoy such Family Home Evenings.

Which brings me in conclusion to share an exciting idea, I want to spark discussion about John’s Gospel in as many homes as I can in Ammon, Idaho. In fact, tomorrow, I will share my first weekly installment of “Neighborhood Survey over John’s Gospel” with many more yet to come, Lord willing. Here are the first two questions I have been asking the neighbors: 1. Is it “Bethabara” or “Bethany” in John 1:28? 2. In John 1:9, does “Lamb of God” mean Jesus as a lamb sacrificed as a substitute for the penalty of our sins or does the title speak more of His meek and gentle nature?

Thinking of heart issues for LDS . . .

Yes. I do.

There are some fine LDS politicians in southeastern Idaho.

Are Baptist pastors ever tempted to drown their frustration with drink?

Yes. I can empathize with Dave in his article, “Et tu, Montana?”

Since no one in the world of bloggernacle is defending the penal-substitutionary atonement of Christ, I thought I would pull out an old sheet given to me by a systematic theology professor in seminary.

This past month, Jacob, at the “New Cool Thang” listed a series of questions that every atonement theory needs to answer.

First, tell me what you think about these eight propositional truths:

1. God is angry with man because of sin.

Rom. 1:18, Psalm 5:5-6, Psalm 11:5, Jer. 12:8, Eph. 5:6

2. God took the initiative in providing salvation for man.

II Cor. 5:19

3. God provided an atonement because He loved mankind.

John 3:16, Rom. 5:8, I John 4:10

4. The atonement is a ransom.

Matt. 20:28

5. Christ delivered us from the power of Satan.

Heb. 2:14

6. Christ suffered vicariously.

II Cor. 5:21, Isa. 53

7. Christ’s work satisfied God’s justice completely.

Rom. 3:26

8. Christ’s active obedience (His life) is part of this atonement. (He kept the law for us.)

Phil. 2:8, Rom. 5:19, Rom. 8:3-4

Secondly, don’t you think these five English words are important for the discussion: 1. satisfaction, 2. atonement, 3. propitiation, 4. reconciliation, and 5. expiation. What do they mean as you wrestle with this all important doctrine?

Thirdly, maybe we should go even a little deeper . . . what inspired Hebrew and Greek words are important to define as you give definite answers for why you don’t like the penal-substitutionary atonement?

Before I begin delving into this topic, let me first clearly communicate that one of Scriptures’ greatest truths to me personally is “union with Christ” (see Ephesians). To strip away this truth is to bar me from my greatest treasure. Apart from Christ, I am nothing. Only as I am “in the Lord” does my life have any temporal meaning and then stretching into eternity, any real significance. In fact, I become invincible, relying upon Him. The Lord is my panoplia (full armor), rendering ineffective any methodeias

(wiles) of Satan.

But saying that, I will never be like Christ in the fullness that He is. Whereas, I need daily augmentation of His fullness, Christ never did and never will need the creaturely process. Of course, atheists mock the idea of a mysterious Triune God beyond the grasp of mankind’s intellect. Here is a textbook case, Richard Dawkins’ God Delusion (2006). He writes, “Rivers of medieval ink, not to mention blood, have been squandered over the ‘mystery’ of the Trinity, and in supressing deviation such as the Arian heresy. Arius of Alexandria, in the fourth century AD, denied that Jesus was consubstantial (i.e. of the same substance or essence) with God. What on earth could that possibly mean, you are probably asking? Substance? What ‘substance’? What exactly do you mean by ‘essence’? ‘Very little’ seems the only reasonable reply” (p. 33) . . . “Most of my readers will have been reared in one or another of today’s three ‘great’ monotheistic religions (four if you count Mormonism), all of which trace themselves back to the mythological patriarch Abraham . . . ” (p. 36). “Thomas Jefferson, as so often, got it right when he said, ‘Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them; and no man ever had a distinct idea of the trinity. It is mere Abracadabra of the mountebanks calling themselves the priests of Jesus’ ” (p. 34).

Surely, I can’t wrap my limited intellect around all the pregnant monosyllables bursting with meaning in John 1; but that doesn’t mean I can just simply erase them from the pages of Scripture. They stand yet for the marveling, intellectual gaze of all.

The first chapter of John contrasts in vivid, full color two people, the Christos (Jesus) and the forerunner (John) who came in the spirit of Elias. If we don’t understand this foundational distinction between the two in John 1, the rest of the book and quotes appearing in any other text will be altered in interpretation.

John 1:29 is a staggering job description for a man. Can John fulfill this? Absolutely not. He explains the difference between Jesus and him. “This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me” (John 1:30).

Wait a minute. Have we heard that before? Yes. Back in verse 27, and also a third time in verse 15. Did we catch this? When the Spirit of God has the author write something three times within the space of sixteen verses, we need to halt our rushed reading, camp out, and meditate. This is something big . . . one of those fundamental truths about God.

John was naturally born into this world, so was Jesus (six months later). But though the Logos has always existed, John hasn’t. And this is where the preference to Jesus is clear–Jesus, always being in contrast to John, becoming. The only time we see Jesus becoming, is when He became flesh. Don’t you see that contrast between those Greek verbs?

John, the greatest man ever born to a woman up to that point (Matthew 11:11) saw the huge chasm between himself and Jesus at the baptismal event, the Lord’s Messianic annointing (Isa. 61:1). And it is the heart attitude of any transformed creature in the process of becoming to be forever positioned just like the mighty forerunner, John the Baptist before the Christ, who is the eternal being. We are not even worthy to unloose the straps of His sandals. This truth is immutable.

I am well aware that Scripture does not contain any words like hypostases, persona, homoousios, or Trinitas. So I carry no passion for a discourse in Greek metaphysics. My heart’s desire is one of an onward, upward move for discussions in soteriology (the doctrine of salvation), but the truths of John 1:29 are inseparable connected with something even greater, the nature of Jesus and how John contrasts himself with the Christ. Friends, are we seeing, eye to eye, over what is written in John 1, the very first chapter, reminiscent of Genesis 1.

Your thoughts?

I remember almost 20 years ago when the LDS seminary would have a designated missionary week at Skyline High School in Idaho Falls, Idaho. My good buddies would always give me a marked up, color-coded Book of Mormon. Often, they would have personally penned letters in the front or back cover.

One of those particular days after school, a basketball teammate, a great friend, called me up in order to sincerely share his testimony. And then he began talking about the two sticks. Before I knew it, his big brother jumped on the phone, referencing me to an obscure passage that I really had no clue about in high school, Ezekiel 37:15-19.

If you were to ask me last year what I knew of Ezekiel, I still wouldn’t have much of a clue. I was a complete major-prophet-Ezekiel illiterate. But this all changed as I began this year to personally study Ezekiel, line upon line, precept upon precept, tracing particular Hebrew expressions in all their vivid context month after month. The unfolding story is one of the most riveting, wild, mind-boggling, gut-wrenching, and heart-rejoicing books that I have ever read, scrutinized, and prayed over. And the journey is still not over. I begin chapter 40 this Wednesday night. I would love for any of you to join me in the study. Are there any other words written 2500 years ago that are packed with such relevance for today? Have you checked out those prophecies yet to be fulfilled?

Dennis L. Largey recently wrote in the Sperry Symposium Classics: The New Testament (2006), “Ezekiel prophesied that the stick of Judah and the stick of Joseph are to become one (see Ezekiel 37:15-19). We have seen them become one under one cover in our editions of the scriptures. The challenge now is to use them as one” (p. 65).

My first reply is “Deja vu.” My second reply is more of a plethora of questions that tumble forth as I live alongside you all in the LDS corridor. 1. Is this the standard interpretation of the Church, today? The true, official, exegetical stance? 2. Does this reflect normal, literal, historical, grammatical hermeneutics? 3. Is Largey’s interpretation giving priority to the overall message of Ezekiel? 4. Aren’t there any objective, Scriptural data right within chapter 37 that provides a contrary interpretation to Largey on Ezekiel’s powerful prophecy enactment?

Thinking of heart issues . . .