by Autumn Dickson

There is a promise found in Section 84. And though it is specifically in relation to priesthood ordinations, I believe the promises we find there can apply to all of us. Here it is.

Doctrine and Covenants 84:33 For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies.

There’s a lot of good stuff here. Sanctification by the Spirit is a huge part of receiving and magnifying a calling. Some might even say it’s the entire purpose of receiving and magnifying a calling. However, the specific portion I want to speak about is the “renewing of their bodies.” I find this to be a very unique promise that coincides with something I’ve been thinking a lot about lately.

Namely, the widow of Zarephath found in 1 Kings in the Old Testament. It is one of my absolute favorite scripture stories of all time which is probably why I’ve spoken about it on more than one occasion. The gist of the story is this.

There is a great famine in the land, and the widow of Zarephath only has enough food for one more meal with her son before they starve. The prophet Elijah is led to her door, and he promises her that her food will never run out if she feeds him first and then feeds herself and her son.

I think about that widow a lot. She didn’t have much to lose since they were already facing starvation. I think about how she chose to give out of what she didn’t really have. I think about how she must have felt when she looked at her son and made the decision to feed Elijah.

I also think about what happened after she fed Elijah. What happened right after? What happened the next day? What did this miracle look like?

Did she wake up to a full barrel? Or in the days that followed, was her barrel always full? Would it get replenished the second she took from it?

Or perhaps the miracle looked different. Maybe she opened that barrel the next morning, and it was full. Perhaps she emptied that barrel all the way to the bottom over time and when she arose the morning after emptying it, she found that barrel filled again.

Or maybe it looked even different than that. Maybe there was always just enough for the next meal. I think this option would have felt the scariest. Did it feel scary to open the lid every day and find an almost-empty barrel? Did she still feel adrift and worried? Or did she see the miracle and recognize that whether the barrel was completely filled up or not, it would never be empty?

This is a story that teaches a great many things. One of the things that it teaches is renewal.

When it comes to priesthood ordination or any kind of service you choose to do in the name of the Lord, there will be enough in the barrel. Because of the atonement of Jesus Christ, there can enough energy, time, resources, and love when you are magnifying your calling in His name. You can be renewed to do what needs to be done, what the Lord wants you to do.That doesn’t mean He will enable you to do everything, but there will be enough in the barrel for what He needs you to do. He will renew you for what you need done.

Autumn Dickson was born and raised in a small town in Texas. She served a mission in the Indianapolis Indiana mission. She studied elementary education but has found a particular passion in teaching the gospel. Her desire for her content is to inspire people to feel confident, peaceful, and joyful about their relationship with Jesus Christ and to allow that relationship to touch every aspect of their lives. Autumn was the recipient of FAIR’s 2024 John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 84 – Part 2 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Ronald K. Esplin and Sharon E. Nielsen, “The Record of the Twelve, 1835: The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles’ Call and the 1835 Mission,” BYU Studies 51, no. 1 (2012): 4–52. This document, made available through the Joseph Smith Papers Project, is the earliest extant record of the activities of the modern Quorum of the Twelve.

Elder L. Aldin Porter, “A History of the Latter-day Seventy,” Ensign, August 2000, 15–20. Elder Porter reviews the organization and growth of the modern office of the Seventy.

“Race and the Priesthood,” Gospel Topics Essays. This scholarly article on the Church’s website explores the origins of the ban on ordaining men of African descent to the priesthood.

Edward L. Kimball, “Spencer W. Kimball and the Revelation on Priesthood,” BYU Studies 47, no. 2 (Spring 2008): 4–78. Edward L. Kimball discusses the chain of events that led his father, President Spencer W. Kimball, to seek revelation regarding changing the Church’s ban on ordaining black men to the priesthood. The article describes how President Kimball went about obtaining the revelation, how the revelation was spiritually confirmed to other leaders, and members’ reactions when the change was announced.

Lester E. Bush Jr., “Mormonism’s Negro Doctrine: An Historical Overview,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 8, no. 1 (Spring 1973): 11–68. This seminal article—which appeared before the 1978 revelation that reversed the Church’s ban on ordaining men of African descent to the priesthood—examines when the policy began and developed, and what scriptures were employed to explain it.

Elder Bruce R. McConkie, “All Are Alike unto God,” address in the Second Annual CES Symposium, 18 August 1978. Elder McConkie’s address came just two months after the 1978 revelation that extended the priesthood to men of African descent.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – D&C sections 84, 107; Official Declaration 2 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Max H. Parkin, “Joseph Smith and the United Firm: The Growth and Decline of the Church’s First Master Plan of Business and Finance, Ohio and Missouri, 1832–1834,” BYU Studies 46, no. 3 (2007): 5–66. Parkin sheds light on how the United Firm was organized and operated and the role it played in early Church history.

David J. Whittaker, “Substituted Names in the Published Revelations of Joseph Smith,” BYU Studies 23, no. 1 (Winter 1983): 103–12. Whittaker explains Joseph Smith’s use of code names when he published the revelations related to the United Firm.

D. Michael Quinn, “Jesse Gause: Joseph Smith’s Little-Known Counselor,” BYU Studies 23, no. 4 (Fall 1983): 487–93.

Joseph Smith’s 27 November 1832 letter to William W. Phelps, an extract of which was canonized in 1876 as section 85.

Bill Shepard, “‘To Set in Order the House of God’: The Search for the Elusive ‘One Mighty and Strong’,” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 39, no. 3 (Fall 2006): 18–45. Shepard traces the various interpretations of and claimants to the “one mighty and strong” mentioned in D&C 85:7.

First Presidency statement on the “One Mighty and Strong,” Improvement Era 10, no. 12 (October 1907): 929–43. This statement—written and signed by Presidents Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund—suggests two possible interpretations of D&C 85:7.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 78, 80–83, 85, 92, 104 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

President J. Reuben Clark Jr., “When Are the Writings and Sermons of Church Leaders Entitled to the Claim of Scripture?,” address to Seminary and Institute personnel at BYU, 7 July 1954.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 63–69 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

Digital photographs of Emma Smith’s 1835 hymnbook, available online at the Joseph Smith Papers website.

In early 1879, Emma was interviewed by her son, Joseph Smith III, who asked her questions about the Prophet Joseph, the translation of the Book of Mormon, and other events in the restoration of the gospel. Her responses were published as “Last Testimony of Sister Emma,” The Saints’ Herald 26, no. 19 (1 October 1879): 289–90. Although Emma denied that the Prophet Joseph ever practiced plural marriage (which he, in fact, did), her eyewitness testimony is otherwise invaluable and inspiring.

Background on Emma’s second husband, Lewis Bidamon, may be found in Valeen Tippetts Avery and Linda King Newell, “Lewis C. Bidamon, Stepchild of Mormondom,” BYU Studies 19, no. 3 (Spring 1979): 375–88.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 25, 27–28 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

by Autumn Dickson

Let’s talk about historical context again quickly so that we can have a reference for what we read this week. Chronologically, Section 21 came before Section 20. Section 21 came on the day the church was organized, and it talks a lot about how Joseph was called as a prophet and the importance of listening to the prophets. Section 20 came in between the day that the church was organized and its first conference held in June. Section 20 had a lot of administrative tasks explained as well as core doctrines that are found in The Book of Mormon. Section 22 came last as people were wondering whether they needed to get rebaptized.

There is actually quite a bit given to us on the subject of baptism this week. One section describes the mode and manner of baptism, and another section describes the need to be baptized with proper authority. Let’s talk about some of the things we can learn about baptism from the revelations we’re covering this week.

He follows us

The first detail I want to talk about comes as the Lord describes how we are to be baptized.

Doctrine and Covenants 20:72-74

72 Baptism is to be administered in the following manner unto all those who repent—

73 The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism, and shall say, calling him or her by name: Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

74 Then shall he immerse him or her in the water, and come forth again out of the water.

We know that baptism holds a lot of symbolism. We’re dressed in white. We go down into the water and come back out, symbolizing the death of our old life and becoming new again. It also symbolizes Christ dying and being resurrected. There was one piece of symbolism that I did not previously recognize that was pointed out quite clearly in the previous verses.

The person who is called of God and has authority from Jesus Christ to baptize, shall go down into the water with the person who has presented himself or herself for baptism…

In order to understand the symbolism, we have to understand the “characters” participating in the baptism. We are representing ourselves (or those who have passed on and cannot do the work themselves), but we are not the only one present in our baptism. There is also a priesthood holder that follows us in.

This priesthood holder is authorized by Jesus Christ to use His authority to bind us to the Savior so that the Savior can legally (in an eternal sense) bind us to Him in a manner that produces salvation. One might even argue that the priesthood holder is a representation of Christ, Himself.

Christ follows us into the water as we choose to make a covenant with Him, as we walk towards the death of our old life. If we were to picture the Savior, with the wounds of His sacrifice still on His resurrected body, walking into the water with us, how would our baptism feel different? It may be a priesthood holder actually standing in the water, but the only reason the priesthood holder is there is because he is holding Christ’s authority to baptize. It’s really Christ who is utilizing power to bind us to Him in a covenant that saves us. The priesthood holder is nothing more than a vessel.

There are a couple of ways this might change how we feel about our baptism.

The first one that comes to my mind is that He is teaching us what the rest of our lives are going to look like because we chose to enter into a covenant relationship with Him. Following us into the water and binding us to Him according to our willingness is a foreshadowing of what our lives can look like. If we keep our willingness to follow Him and allow Him near us, we don’t have to do anything alone anymore.

Christ’s approach to our growth and development is two-pronged. It is wise in the sense that He allows us to suffer, struggle, and figure it out. This is really difficult for many people to swallow, especially when you consider the depths of injustice and despair in the world. But that’s why the second prong of His approach is so important.

The Savior is not asking us to do anything that He has not done Himself. He was already perfect, and so He didn’t need these experiences to figure out how to live happily in an eternal setting. With His sacrifice, He chose to step into that water to feel it firsthand. And then He chooses to be with us as we struggle through those same experiences in our own life.

I am quite adamant in my parenting approach to let my kids struggle through things. I think it’s so critical to their growth. It’s absolutely essential to their becoming a well-adjusted adult. Sometimes this makes my kids feel unsupported and unloved, but that’s far from the case. I do it because I love them.

This is the same with the Savior. He sent us here because He loves us. Our struggle is evidence of His love, not the other way around. But He takes it beyond wisdom. His approach is not, “Go get in those baptismal waters and put yourself under and come back up.” His approach is, “I will follow you where you have to go to get where you need to be.” He follows us into the water and brings us closer to Him. He is willing to follow us the rest of our lives through every “water” we have to walk through.

We have to believe that He’s walking with us and mourning with us, or His sacrifice won’t have much effect. Even though He follows us, it won’t bring much comfort unless we believe it and allow that belief to fill us with the relief He is offering.

Dead works

The next detail about baptism that I want to talk about is found in Section 22. The Saints had not yet grasped the idea of proper authority and so the idea of getting rebaptized confused them. This is how the Lord explained it.

Doctrine and Covenants 22:2 Wherefore, although a man should be baptized an hundred times it availeth him nothing, for you cannot enter in at the strait gate by the law of Moses, neither by your dead works.

I understand the need for proper authority, but this verse originally confused me. In my mind, the Lord was telling His people to not trust in dead works. The Israelites used to believe that following the Law of Moses would save them. They didn’t realize that the Law of Moses was supposed to bring them closer to the Savior who would save them. This also makes sense to me.

The part that confused me was the fact that baptism can be considered one of our “works.” He commanded the Israelites to keep the Law of Moses, and He commanded us to be baptized by proper authority. The difference (and the detail I want to expound on) is that one work is “dead” and one work is not.

Performing the work of baptism is different from other commandments (not all commandments, but some of them). It is an essential ordinance. The Savior is the one who saves us, but it is baptism that pulls us into a covenant relationship with Him so that He can save us. This is also why the Lord commands us to perform vicarious ordinances for those who weren’t baptized. Everybody needs to have the work done.

We don’t go out and mow a neighbor’s lawn vicariously for someone else. We don’t follow the Word of Wisdom or pay tithing on behalf of those who didn’t do it in their own lives. There are commandments that are given to us to bring us closer to the Savior so He can save us. Going out and mowing a lawn can help us understand sacrifice and charity. Following the Word of Wisdom can help us have healthy bodies and keep our minds clear and free. Paying tithing allows us to learn how to trust in the Lord. All of these things help us get closer to Christ who will save us, but they are dead in and of themselves.

Baptism obviously brings us closer to the Lord and helps us understand Him, but baptism does more than that. It binds us to Him using His own power and authority. Regular men on earth do not have the power to seal in heaven. They can baptize you with their religious degree or their certifications from their churches, but power given from regular old human to regular old human is not sufficient to bind in heaven. Only the Savior can give that kind of power.

In this manner, when we die, that baptism has the ability to follow us into heaven where the Savior still holds power. It keeps us bound to Him on both sides of the veil because the Savior holds enough power to accomplish that, and He lends that power to us. It’s still His power.

Baptism (and other covenant-entering ordinances) are essential. They are literally binding us to the Savior. That’s why the Lord treats that commandment differently than other dead, Law-of-Moses type commandments.

This also enlightens us as to why we should never tear down baptisms that are done without proper authority. I once heard a missionary describe someone’s baptism into another church as an abomination. It went over well (*sarcasm*).

The Lord did describe these works as dead because they were done without proper authority. However, He also described the Law of Moses (the one that He specifically gave to His people) as dead. He’s not saying that it’s worthless. He gave the Law of Moses so that the Israelites could draw closer to Him and become ready to receive Him. Baptism into other Christian churches holds that same ability. They can (and often do) bring people closer to Christ and help them become ready to receive Him more fully. There’s no reason to ever tear down someone’s decision to try and draw closer to Christ.

I testify of a Heavenly Father who set up a perfect Plan of Salvation. I testify that His words are so consistent. I have often run into ideas, stories, and words that I did not originally understand. There have been times when I have found myself confused about details or things that didn’t seem congruent with what I understood of a loving Heavenly Father. I have also learned that as I choose to be patient, new understanding comes to my mind and clarifies what I didn’t yet know. The more I study the gospel, in all of its rich details, the more I understand the character of my Heavenly Father and Savior.

Autumn Dickson was born and raised in a small town in Texas. She served a mission in the Indianapolis Indiana mission. She studied elementary education but has found a particular passion in teaching the gospel. Her desire for her content is to inspire people to feel confident, peaceful, and joyful about their relationship with Jesus Christ and to allow that relationship to touch every aspect of their lives. Autumn was the recipient of FAIR’s 2024 John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 20–22 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

There has much scholarly debate on the date of the restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood. The traditional view is that it took place in late May or early June 1829, within a few weeks after the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood. A handful of scholars argue for a later date, however—some time in the summer of 1830.

For an examination of the historical evidence, see Brian Q. Cannon and BYU Studies Staff, “Priesthood Restoration Documents,” BYU Studies 35, no. 4 (1995): 166–73. 

Larry C. Porter argues for the earlier date in two articles: “Dating the Restoration of the Melchizedek Priesthood,” Ensign (June 1979): 5–10 and “The Restoration of the Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods,” Ensign (December 1996): 30–47.

In support of the later view, see Richard L. Bushman, Joseph Smith and the Beginnings of Mormonism (Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1984), 162–63. Ben Park sums up the argument for the later date in “Dating the Melchizedek Priesthood Restoration,” The Juvenile Instructor, 4 August 2008.

Michael Hubbard MacKay argues that the Melchizedek Priesthood was restored over a series of angelic and inspired events in “Event or Process? How ‘the Chamber of Old Father Whitmer’ Helps Us Understand Priesthood Restoration,” BYU Studies 60, no. 1 (2021): 71–101. John S. Thompson makes a similar argument in “Restoring Melchizedek Priesthood,” Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 62 (2024): 263–318.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 4, 11–12, 14–16, 18–19 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

by Autumn Dickson

This week, we learn about some of the men and women who supported Joseph in the early days of the restoration. He was supported through friendship as well as monetarily as he worked to complete the translation of The Book of Mormon. We also learn about the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood. John the Baptist came to Joseph and Oliver and conferred that authority upon them.

Plenty could be written about the restoration of the Aaronic Priesthood, but there was actually another part of this event that I wanted to speak about. Though I am far from qualified in historical perspectives and details (especially pertaining to ancient Israel), I do believe that there is insight that I can give.

Here is the one verse that describes the restoration of this preparatory priesthood.

Doctrine and Covenants 13:1 Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness.

The portion that I would like to try and give insight on is the last phrase, “until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness.” This verse, accompanied by many quotes in the Doctrine and Covenants institute manual, teach that there will be a literal animal sacrifice at some point in our dispensation. It will be performed when the sons of Levi can do so in righteousness. The sons of Levi were priesthood holders in ancient Israel, and so we can understand that this is talking about modern day priesthood holders. Will they be specifically from the tribe of Levi? Maybe. The manual simply states that they will be priesthood holders.

There will be some who cry that the Law of Moses was done away, and they are absolutely correct. It was done away. However, animal sacrifice existed before the Law of Moses and so there’s no reason to assume that it was permanently done away with the rest of the rights and rituals included in the Law of Moses. One quote from President Joseph Fielding Smith stated that this sacrifice would be done in the beginning of the Millennium when Christ is already on the earth.

Even when we take into consideration the logical arguments for the restoration of all things, this is simply not one of our friendlier doctrines. It’s not necessarily one of the things that we like to expound upon and focus on. It’s uncomfortable.

And therein lies my exact insight. Let’s explore.

Uncomfortable

As I was reading about this sacrifice from the sons of Levi, I remember trying to think of how I would explain something like that to a friend or even to my children. I don’t know how to describe the necessity of animal sacrifice when I’m not even sure why it’s totally necessary.

I tried picturing what that sacrifice might look like, and once again, all I could feel was extreme discomfort. Society has definitely evolved away from this kind of death. People used to raise their own meat and personally slaughter their dinners. If they didn’t personally raise the meat, they hunted wild game and still personally slaughtered their dinners.

We have begun to feel that we’re more sophisticated because we get to eat the meat without watching the animal die. It offends our more sensitive natures because we’re just not used to it anymore. I’m not saying this is necessarily a bad thing. I don’t think there is anything wrong with sensitivity towards death. However, I wonder what we have lost when we’re so far separated from the process that we don’t appreciate what occurred to put that meat on our table.

I promise this isn’t a discourse on being vegetarian, and I do have a point. This is an uncomfortable doctrine for us, in a different way than it was uncomfortable to ancient Israelites.

The point of animal sacrifice was to teach the Israelites about the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. But why does an innocent animal need to suffer so we can learn a lesson?

And then it hit me. How much more poignant could we get?

An innocent, perfect Man sacrificed Himself so that we could come to earth to learn the lessons we needed to learn in order to live an eternal life. We rejoice in this doctrine. We’re grateful for it. It is our central doctrine that the Savior offered Himself up so that we could be saved.

It’s easy to reflect on the gratitude; it’s much more difficult to grasp the sacrifice.

The ancient Israelites were probably not as sensitized to animal death as we are, and so the lessons probably felt a little different. They understood that meat on their table meant death. We’re far removed and so we don’t often think about it, but perhaps that just drives the lesson home even more.

Animal sacrifice feels uncomfortable, even wrong. Isn’t there some other way we can learn about the atonement of Jesus Christ? Now take these direct feelings and apply them to the sacrifice of the Savior. Expand this poignant lesson to exactly where it’s supposed to be: our Redeemer. I wonder what kind of emotions would be evoked if we could see a vision of the Garden of Gethsemane and the cross before our eyes. It would certainly be uncomfortable since most of our modern societies have moved away from brutal torture methods. I wonder if it would also evoke emotions such as, “This is wrong. He is good. Why are we letting this happen? Surely there is another way!”

It is not enough to logically understand the atonement of Jesus Christ. If we want to feel the depth of the love He holds for us, if we want to experience gratitude to the level it deserves, if we want His sacrifice to change us, we have to experience the atonement emotionally. I’m not saying we go out and sacrifice an animal to let the lesson hit home. I’m just going to leave those particulars to the Lord when He gets here.

But as much as we love the atonement of Jesus Christ and all that it brought us, do we also understand the depth of darkness that accompanied it? Do we feel gratitude because we understand on some kind of level, just what He had to innocently go through in order to save us and give us an opportunity to come here and learn? In some ways, you might argue that the atonement of Jesus Christ isn’t even one of our friendlier doctrines. There was so much love associated with it, and I believe it is absolutely right to celebrate that love and the victory. I believe it’s also important to recognize what that victory cost.

Abraham and Isaac

It makes me think of Abraham and Isaac. Abraham was commanded by the Lord to offer up Isaac, his only son, as a sacrifice. I always hated this story in the Old Testament. What kind of God would command His child to sacrifice their posterity? It seemed so jarring and so incongruous with who I believed God to be.

It wasn’t until I studied this story during Come Follow Me that I noted something I had never seen before. Abraham was commanded by the Lord to offer up his son as a sacrifice, but the Lord never intended on actually accepting the sacrifice. It was never part of the plan for Isaac to actually be sacrificed.

Some would argue that it was cruel of God to put Abraham through such an ordeal. I can’t imagine the agony. I think about one of my kids dying, and I can’t breathe. I don’t know if I would have had the strength to follow that commandment even if it did directly come from God (and that’s just plain honesty on my part). I would probably assume I had gone completely mental and checked myself into a hospital.

But once again, Isaac wasn’t ever actually going to be sacrificed. I wonder if Abraham just kept repeating to himself that Isaac would be resurrected one day, and they would be reunited. I wonder if that brought him any comfort because I don’t think it would have brought me any comfort. Though it was harrowing, absolutely excruciating to have experienced the trek up that mountain, understanding what was at the end of it, I wonder if anyone understands the atonement on the level that Abraham understands.

When the angel came and stopped Abraham from sacrificing Isaac, I picture Abraham falling over himself to hug Isaac, sobbing into his neck. I picture the tears of joy that his son was mercifully spared. And later, when things got quieter and Abraham had some time to ponder, I picture more tears as Abraham finally understood just what it meant that Heavenly Father had sent His innocent Son to be sacrificed for the sins of the world. I picture the depth of gratitude Abraham must have felt that while he didn’t have to sacrifice his own son, Heavenly Father had chosen to send Jesus for our sake.

Maybe Heavenly Father kept reminding Himself that Jesus would be resurrected and returned to Him. I wonder if that helped, or I wonder if the nature of a parental relationship denies the ability to skip the pain in favor of the ending. Heavenly Father didn’t turn away from the brutality that was necessary in order to save us. The least we can do is appreciate that on some level.

I testify that rejoicing and gratitude and worship are all wonderful things that the Lord encourages. I testify that our salvation was worth it to the Savior. I also testify of uncomfortable doctrines that were necessary. I testify that saving us required a sacrifice, a sacrifice that we are hard-pressed to comprehend because of the elevated and sanitized societies in which we now live. That’s not to knock the progress we’ve made as humanity away from public executions by crosses, but it is to help us understand that the atonement of Jesus Christ carries a depth of pain that matches the depth of joy that has been offered to us. Appreciating that on some level (because heaven knows we can’t yet fully understand and appreciate it) goes a long way in pushing us towards the Savior for what He did, and that is a worthwhile endeavor to find that appreciation.

Autumn Dickson was born and raised in a small town in Texas. She served a mission in the Indianapolis Indiana mission. She studied elementary education but has found a particular passion in teaching the gospel. Her desire for her content is to inspire people to feel confident, peaceful, and joyful about their relationship with Jesus Christ and to allow that relationship to touch every aspect of their lives. Autumn was the recipient of FAIR’s 2024 John Taylor Defender of the Faith Award.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Doctrine and Covenants 12–17; Joseph Smith—History 1:66–75 – Autumn Dickson appeared first on FAIR.

by Mike Parker

(Mike Parker is a long-time FAIR member who has graciously allowed us to use materials he originally prepared for the Hurricane Utah Adult Religion Class. The scripture passages covered in his lessons don’t conform exactly to the Come, Follow Me reading schedule, so they will be shared here where they fit best.)

Class Notes

Additional Reading

BYU professor Daniel C. Peterson examines the baptism of Alma₁ in these two articles:

“Priesthood in Mosiah,” in The Book of Mormon: Mosiah, Salvation Only Through Christ, eds. Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center at Brigham Young University, 1991), 187–210.

“Authority in the Book of Mosiah,” FARMS Review 18, no. 1 (2006): 149–85.

Mike Parker is a business and marketing analyst with over twenty years’ experience in the financial services and cellular telephone industries. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration with an emphasis in Management Information Systems from Dixie State University (now Utah Tech University) of St George, Utah. He also has eight years’ experience in corporate training and currently teaches an adult religion class in southern Utah. Mike and his wife, Denise, have three children.

The post Come, Follow Me with FAIR – Mosiah 18–24 – Mike Parker appeared first on FAIR.

On this episode, Brian Hales joins us to discuss the history and significance of the crowning ordinance of the temple.

Brian C. Hales is the author or co-author of several books dealing with Joseph Smith and plural marriage, and runs the website JosephSmithsPolygamy.org. He is also the author of several articles dealing with the origin of the Book of Mormon.

Jacob Crapo was born and now resides in Las Vegas, Nevada. He served his mission in Upstate New York and was an ordinance worker in the Las Vegas Temple. One of Jacob’s dreams is to help build a temple. He is an electrician by trade but his real passion is helping others access the powers of heaven.

The post Cornerstone: A FAIR Temple Preparation Podcast – Episode 6: Temple Sealings with Brian Hales appeared first on FAIR.