It strikes me that one of the sobering dimensions of the gospel is the democracy of its demands as it seeks to build an aristocracy of saints. Certain standards and requirements are laid upon us all. They are uniform. We don’t have an indoor-outdoor set of ten commandments. We don’t have one set of commandments for bricklayers and another for college professors. There is a democracy about the demands of discipleship, which, interestingly enough, is aimed at producing an aristocracy of saints.
– Elder Neal A. Maxwell, Full talk available at the Interpreter
Came across the following passage today in my reading:
Nevertheless, Shiz did not cease to pursue Coriantumr; for he had sworn to avenge himself upon Coriantumr of the blood of his brother, who had been slain, and the word of the Lord which came to Ether that Coriantumr should not fall by the sword.
And thus we see that the Lord did visit them in the fulness of his wrath, and their wickedness and abominations had prepared a way for their everlasting destruction.
Several things struck me about this passage that hadn’t before:
- Firstly, perhaps the most obvious one (and crucial to what follows) was that Shiz was motivated to kill Coriantumr not simply because Coriantumr had killed his brother, but also specifically because of the prophecy Ether had given to Coriantumr. For whatever reason, it appears that Shiz wanted to falsify the prophecy in the most expedient and bloodiest way possible.
- If we keep this in mind, the “and thus we see” that follows takes on more specific meaning. It’s possible to simply connect the following statement (“and thus we see that the Lord did visit them in the fulness of his wrath”) to the preceding accounts of the war and the devastation it inflicted. But the Lord didn’t directly do that. But if we connect it to the immediate preceding statement about Shiz’s desire, then it begins to read a bit differently. Shiz sought to falsify prophecy by killing Coriantumr, and in doing so perpetuated the conflict that brought such devastation upon the Jaredites.
- Thinking about this, I thought about the prophecy itself, contained in Ether 13:20-21:
And in the second year the word of the Lord came to Ether, that he should go and prophesy unto Coriantumr that, if he would repent, and all his household, the Lord would give unto him his kingdom and spare the people—
Otherwise they should be destroyed, and all his household save it were himself. And he should only live to see the fulfilling of the prophecies which had been spoken concerning another people receiving the land for their inheritance; and Coriantumr should receive a burial by them; and every soul should be destroyed save it were Coriantumr.
The prophecy Shiz was apparently so animated by was not, in this case, a positive prophecy for Coriantumr. If he and his household would repent, the people would be spared. But they didn’t, and he didn’t (at least at this time). Thus the alternative, that instead the people would all be destroyed, except Coriantumr, who would be buried by another people. The prophecy is thus a warning of destruction. Shiz’s response, however, and the fact that his response helps cause that destruction, makes the prophecy not only a warning, but actually one of the things that provokes that destruction. The Lord’s warning to them also turns out to be an instrument in visiting his wrath upon them.
- This makes sense of the last part of Ether 14:25: “And thus we see that the Lord did visit them in the fulness of his wrath, and their wickedness and abominations had prepared a way for their everlasting destruction” (my emphasis). It is the violent response of Shiz and others to that prophecy that actually creates the conditions for its fulfilment. Had they not responded so, it would not have happened. Instead its Shiz’s very attempt to falsify the prophecy that helps bring it about.
An interesting article on Quillette about a topic I’ve touched briefly on before (well, one link here and some theological considerations here), namely transgenderism, in this case about the significant increase of adolescents being diagnosed with gender dysphoria. As the article makes clear, Western society’s increasing willingness to perform severe and irreversible medical interventions on said adolescents may have the consequence of sterilizing thousands of people who may feel very differently in adulthood. Critiquing this state of affairs, however, is becoming increasingly difficult as academic journals hew to a new orthodoxy on such issues. The article also had a number of interesting points on mental illness generally (including the interplay of biology and social factors):
Last week saw another attempt to silence debate and research whose findings diverge from an accepted orthodoxy. In the Advocate, transgender activist Brynn Tannehill decried a 2017 abstract that appeared in the Journal of Adolescent Health, stating that the research into rapid onset gender dysphoria or ROGD was “biased junk science.” The research that Tannehill so strongly objected to was undertaken by Lisa Littman, MD, MPH. Littman surveyed parents about their teen and young adult children who became gender dysphoric and transgender-identified in the context of belonging to a peer group where one, multiple, or even all the friends in a pre-existing peer group became transgender-identified in a similar time frame, an increase in social media use, or both. The findings of the research support the plausibility of social influences contributing to the development of gender dysphoria. The full research paper has not yet been published. Tannehill subsequently posted the article to the Facebook page of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). A discussion ensued in which some commentators asked WPATH leadership to request that the journal …
Source: Transgenderism and the Social Construction of Diagnosis – Quillette