Rise and Rise Again Until Lambs Become Lions

 

Over the past few days the poetic phrase “Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions,” has been the fascination of my subconscious musings. The poetic phrase more specifically comes from the 2010 reboot of Robin Hood starring Russell l Crowe. While I will not get into the specifics of what the phrase is intended to mean in the context of the movie itself, it is instructive to the analysis and conclusions I have preliminarily come to while pondering the phrase. As I thought about the phrase, I could not help but assess the symbolic meanings underlying the phrase as a whole, including its theological, metaphorical, and literal implications. I am just going to list some of the thoughts and connections that I have made in regard to the words and the symbols underlying them. First, the concept of “rising” has obvious and literal physical meanings, like for example, physically rising after falling down, or rising from a chair, but its use in poetic form suggests a deeper meaning than a simple pragmatic rendition of the words. Rising, in the context of the theological and liturgical has deep meta-physical (spiritual) connotations. In both the Eastern and Western traditions, rising refers to the liturgical concept of “ascension,” or “rebirth.” The concept of rising, ascension, and rebirth permeate metaphysical thematic depictions in art, religion, and the existential. These concepts are generally understood on a qualitative level of understanding, that is, we tend to “feel” or “experience” the meanings on a personal and collective level. In the religious context, ascension is a fundamental tenant of the eastern mystery religions, represented in the notions of attaining an enlightened state whether classified as achieving a state of Nirvana, or Moksa. However, one should not automatically equate the notions of ascension based on the outward similarities of the concept as they do indeed vary accordingly. In the Western tradition generally speaking, ascension is a product of and based on the condescension of divinity to the individual and collective rather than a strictly relative notion that Eastern traditions generally devolve to. In the Western tradition ascension, rebirth, and rising, have specific referents in and to the life of the Divine Master who makes it possible that his disciples can follow the same path to enlightenment. In the context of the Western tradition there are two literal fulfillments of the idea of rising and ascension. In the scriptural narrative the Lord rose from death following his crucifixion, in the same way as the eastern traditions mythology tells of the phoenix rising from the ashes of its own death, of its own power and will. This particular instance of rising, for the believer has specific and general implications of the deepest magnitude, that is that power over death resides in and with the Lord, and that death is a necessary step in the process of ascension.  After delivering the most profound mysteries (the gnosis) to his disciples during his 40 day ministry we read that the Lord ascended to the right hand of the Father. One of my favorite chapters of scripture has always been John 6. In that chapter the Lord feeds the multitude and teaches by way of analogy to both reveal and conceal the secrets of eternal life. He does so by way of metaphor, and analogy, referring to the Old Covenant made to the Israelites, and tying those modern Israelites to the fulfillment of prophecy. Further, he ties himself to the cosmic narrative as the author of life itself.

John 6: 58: “This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.
⁵⁹ These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.
⁶⁰ Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
⁶¹ When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
⁶² What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
⁶³ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
⁶⁴ But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
⁶⁵ And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
⁶⁶ From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
⁶⁷ Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
⁶⁸ Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.”

 

Specifically, the Lord states that a time will come that he will ascend to his Father, and in fact he did, after completing the tasks of his earthly ministry. This same thematic narrative can be found in almost all forms of popular media. More recently, I have noticed this thematic symbolism in the movie, the Dark Knight Rises. It is particularly blatant as the concept of ascension is contained in the title itself. Looking at the narrative of the movie, it caused me to ask how in the context of the film is the Batman “rising.” For those who have ears to hear probably have already noticed that the Dark Knight Trilogy itself is an apocalyptic analogy ripped straight from the narrative of the Gospels. Bruce Wayne/Batman is ultimately the sacrificial savior of the people of Gotham city, and in effect “gives everything” to the people. The three major villains of the trilogy present themselves in the form of the biblical unholy trinity of Revelations, Daniel, and Ezekiel. Ras Al Ghul (the Demons Head) is representative of the head of the organization that is seeking to destroy the world (Gotham). He is the ultimate mastermind, the great manipulator and underlying cause of destruction in the fictional world of Batman. In the comics his symbol is that of the goat, which is the scriptural representative of Satan during the Day of Atonement ritual. The Joker represents the false prophet, more of a spiritual force of nature, rather than a physical threat. He is characterized as an unstoppable force, an agent of chaos, and the primary spiritual force that plays upon the soul and character of the city of Gotham. Bane and Talia Al Ghul from the Dark Knight Rises, round out the unholy trinity as the Beast and the Whore, the daughter of the Demons head, who rides upon (is supported by, foreshadowed by) the Beast. Bane comes to Gotham as a political and physical force, arising as it were from the depths of an abyss as the remnant of the league of shadows. He wreaks physical, and financial, havoc on the city of Gotham, and implements its overthrow and descent into chaos, lawlessness, and disorder, under the guise of egalitarianism. He represents a false system of governance, lawlessness, and brute physical force in implementing such a system, which is purportedly for the benefit of the people, but ultimately focused on their destruction. However, it isn’t until the end that it is revealed that Bane is not the mastermind behind the plot, but simply the hired muscle, indeed truly the beast. The true mastermind is Talia Al Ghul who represents the Whore of Babylon the true power behind the scenes whose ultimate goal is the destruction of the world in the name of her father. More tellingly, however are the forces that stand in opposition and with the savior/messianic character in Bruce Wayne. Alfred represents the Father, the moral force behind Bruce, his ultimate support and the voice that persuades him to “endure” the tragedies and hardships to save the city. Further, in the most perilous moment of the story, Alfred withdraws from Bruce and he is forced to fight the fight on his own. However, he is not ultimately alone as he has the help of Peter Foley, the police chief, who is brash and momentarily doubts until he sees the sign of the “savior” burning like a fire in the sky and leads the police force (believers) with courage until his death in the cause. Additionally, he has James Gordon, one of his most faithful partners engaged in the cause until the end, and one of the privileged few to witness the final sacrifice of Batman. Further, he has John Blake, arguably his most favorite and the most intuitive of his followers whose zeal for the cause of Batman leads him to abandon his work and stay behind and continue the work of the Batman. Also, he has in the end a faithful adversary turned follower in Selina Kyle (Catwoman) whom he trusts and gives a second chance despite her various sins and misdeeds, and who ultimately is blessed with direct and intimate knowledge of the rebirth of Bruce in the hereafter of the movie. Finally, last but certainly not least, is Lucius Fox, Bruce Wayne’s trusted CEO of Wayne Enterprises. He is charged with delivering and representing the message of Wayne Enterprises as a direct agent of Bruce Wayne and through his technological developments delivering the message of Batman. In the climax of the film, Bruce/Batman the son of Thomas Wayne the philanthropist and savior of Gotham before him, sacrifices himself to save the city. In the end we learn that Bruce is not dead, but alive, and through his sacrifice ascended to state of peace. This is what is meant by the Dark Knight Rising. It is a direct metaphor for the spiritual message of the sacrifice required to achieve immortality, ascension, and rebirth into a higher order.

Lambs

In art and metaphysical symbolism, animals are generally used as representations of their natural traits. These traits tell imply a deeper meaning concerning the subject of their application. In the Western tradition animals have been used as representatives as sacrificial instrumentalities, as clean or unclean, or as representative of positive or negative traits to emulate or discern.

Lambs are generally represented as being clean animals and as possessing the qualities of faithfulness, timidity, gentleness, compassion, and discipleship. Further they have been used to depict the characteristics of innocence, meekness, purity, patience, and humility. In a liturgical sense they are also indicative of sacrifice, obedience, and martyrdom. Moses referred to lambs and sheep as being clean animals (acceptable) is because they chewed their own cud and had cloven hooves. Cud chewing is symbolic of meditation on the words of Christ, continual study and pondering on the teachings of the prophets and man’s dependence on the divine will. Cloven hooves are symbolic of the concept that everything has its opposite and that there are always two paths, one leading to vice and one to virtue which require ethical distinction and proper actions. In a negative sense the symbolic representation of sheep is characterized as those who are unthinking, followers, blind, dumb, and simpleminded. While this distinction often might seem fitting it relies upon an unfounded assumption of rationalism, that is, that man without God can arrive at truth. This ignores the reality that man’s reasoning is limited by context, education, disobedience, false traditions, and his very own imperfections. Lambs therefore are more properly understood as those who are intellectually humble and look to the source of truth in all their endeavors.

Lions

In art and metaphysical symbolism, the Lion is depicted as the most noble of all the creatures almost certainly as a product of its natural divine and regal character. In history the Lion is the symbol of nobility and direct lineal descent of the divine birthright of kings. This no doubt stems from the birthright King of Kings who is the “the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David.” (Rev. 5:5).The biblical tribe of Judah is described from ancient times as possessing the “sceptre” of the “lawgiver.”(Gen. 49:9). This thematic notion permeates modern day symbolism as is evidenced in the movies The Lion King, The Chronicles of Narnia, and Robin Hood. In each of these movies Lions are recognized as rightful rulers with divine birthrights of kingship and power, indeed, “they shall walk after the Lord: he shall roar like a lion: when he shall roar, then the children shall tremble.” (Hosea 11:10). More specifically, lions anciently were symbolic of resurrection and conversion. This came from the observation of newborn lion pups. Newborn lion pups were once believed to be born dead, and only came alive when the father passed its breath upon the pup. This was symbolic as Christ breathing his essence (spirit) into his followers that awakened their spirits to the light of God. Further symbolic representations highlight the legend that a lion never closes its eyes when it sleeps, indicating intelligence, vigilance, and protection. Finally, lions are generally representative of strength, determination, courage, pride, and authority.

Eternal Progression

While I was thinking about the poem and pondering the symbolic representations of the concepts and traits inherent in the poem another poem came to mind. President Lorenzo Snow, in the spring of 1840, while listening to the explanation of a particular scripture by a friend had a revelation. He stated, “the Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon me – the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the sun at noonday, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man. I formed the following couplet which expresses the revelation, as it was shown me . . . As man now is, God once was; As God now is, man may be.” Herein, lies the meaning of the former poem, that man, as a lamb subjects himself to the will of the father and eternal principles, he may rise beyond his current status and become much more. In particular the trait that I feel that the poem represents is self-mastery and self-government. Lions are the sovereigns of the animal kingdom and are representative of a life of certain divine authority by natural birthright, that is the right and authority to self-government.

Self-Mastery and Self-Government

Leonardo Da Vinci once said: “You will never have a greater or lesser dominion than that over yourself . . . the height of a man’s success is gauged by his self-mastery; the depth of his failure by his self-abandonment . . . and this law is the expression of eternal justice. He who cannot establish dominion over himself will have no dominion over others.”  Da Vinci was speaking primarily about leadership and the necessary prerequisite to leadership is self-mastery. Self-mastery implies moral standards as well as the willpower, determination, and action in support of it. The lamb provides ample symbolic allusion to the type of traits one needs to have to achieve self-mastery, first recognition of moral standards that stand outside of any subjective notion. This requires absolute humility, discipline, and submission of the will to the ultimate lion. This refers to the straight and narrow path which requires self-restraint and self-denial. This recognition stems directly from a lack of self-fulfillment, self-seeking, and self-interest. There is recognition as a sheep that there are limitations that such a worldview entails, but it is also a recognition of the natural state of man in relation to God and others, that is that all men have certain rights and responsibilities.

Rise and Rise Again Until Lambs Become Lions

It is the recognition of these rights and responsibilities that lead to emancipation from falsehood, independence from slavery, and liberty by law. It is from the position of correct principles that man is able to govern himself as taught by Joseph Smith. Self-mastery and self-government therefore are inextricably tied together as natural rights wherein nature’s creator “expects every man to do his duty; and when he fails the law urges him; or should he do too much; the same master rebukes him.” (Joseph Smith). It is in this state of being, the recognition of universal God-given rights, properly understood, submitted to, and adhered to as the lamb submits to its master, that men achieve self-mastery. Self-mastery is no more nor less than proper proactive exercise of moral agency. Men become free as they adhere to universal laws and act on the basis of truth rather than being acted upon and reacting to externalities. In this state of being, man goes from grace to grace (rebirth) until he obtains the mind of Christ and is blessed with enlightenment (ascension) and the mysteries of the kingdom. It is in this exalted state that man, in relation to his fellow man truly become sovereign, independent, and equal, as lambs that have all become lions.

Certainty, Discernment, and Analysis: Assessing Symbolism and Semiotics. Part 1.

Certainty, Discernment, and Analysis: Assessing Symbolism and Semiotics. Part 1.

“Those who pursue the approach of eternalism, of course, are not the authors of this superior—the only—approach to human problems. The scriptures tell of the true Designer and his premortal competency—of Jesus Christ and of his preeminence (not only as to his goodness but as to his brilliance): “For he is more intelligent than they all!” Jesus is not only the very best, he is the very brightest, and those who follow him have abundant assurance about the Shepherd who is leading them. Those who follow him soon realize what Peter realized at the time of a major defection among the disciples. When Jesus inquired of those who remained, “Will ye also go away?” Peter’s reply reflected one of the realities of the universe: “… Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.” (John 6:68). - Elder Neal A. Maxwell, Eternalism v. Securalism.

Certainty

One of the major problems facing the modern day truth seeker is the ascertainment and justification of foundational assumptions, such that reliable, realistic, and relevant questions can be posed, discussed, and resolved. This problem, most simply, can be posed as the problem of “certainty” (i.e. how one can know anything at all). This area of inquiry has accumulated a vast amount of theory, research, and analysis over time and is arguably the question of the ages, and one that many feel is beyond human capability to grasp and answer in its entirety.

In our time this problem can be understood as man’s search for truth. Specifically, in the realm of philosophical theory, this area of inquiry is known as “epistemology.”  Epistemology is defined as the study of knowledge and understanding. As a field of study it is concerned with the nature of and scope of knowledge, it questions what knowledge is, how one acquires knowledge, and the extent to which anything can be known. Those who engage in epistemological inquiry attempt to determine the distinctions between truth and belief and the justifications or lack thereof for both.

“Usually secularism does not err deliberately, nor can there be a denial about the need for the expertise or concern that are often brought to bear by sincere secularists. But the caveat—“the wisdom of man is foolishness”—includes not just man’s faulty tactical logic, but his tendency to proceed from erroneous basic and strategic assumptions. Having erred tragically with regard to those assumptions, it should be no surprise that conceptual cul-de-sacs are encountered so frequently by the well-intentioned.” -  Elder Neal A. Maxwell, Eternalism v. Secularism 

A former professor of mine helped to clarify the conceptual problems that this type of analysis presents and perhaps why such an inquiry is/or should be a fundamental requirement for all serious seekers of truth. The problem is known as the Turtles All the Way Down Dilemma. The basic premise of the dilemma is found in the infinite nature of the question “How do I know that it’s true,” as applied to any proof provided to support a prior truth claim. That is, we may provide “proof” to support an assertion of truth, but I can always ask of the supposed “proof,” the question, “how do I know that it’s true?”  The fictional story of the infinite turtles shows this problem.

Turtles All the Way Down

A great philosopher was engaged in a conversation with a scientist. The two discussed the possibility of knowledge and the limitless possibilities that man’s technical prowess and scientific power could attain. The philosopher asked the scientist, “On what basis do you think you can achieve all these things?” The scientist responded that he knew that he could because of the natural order that his scientific observation had displayed to him. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy, and that based on these observable facts, he could extrapolate the process and apply to all other areas of inquiries and achieve certainty on the same basis.  The philosopher responded “what you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise.”  The scientist replied, “that is absurd, I know that is false.” The philosopher said in response, “how can you know that it is false, when you’re standing on it? Take a look for yourself and see.” The scientist walked to the edge of the world, and attempted to look underneath the world to see if a giant turtle was supporting it, but couldn’t get a good look from that position, so he stepped off the edge to get a better view. After taking a look, he responded with incredulity, “you are right! The world is supported by a giant turtle!” The philosopher smiling, replied, “how do you know? What are you standing to support your new position?” The scientist shocked and dismayed quickly looked down to see what he was standing on now that he had stepped off the surface of the earth to get a good look at its foundations. Starting to understand he replied, “I am standing on another turtle.” Before the philosopher could reply, the scientist said, “how do I know that it’s a turtle? Because it’s turtles all the way down!”

This problem presents a seeming paradox to the reasoning and understanding of man. Epistemologists have attempted to answer the problems presented by way of three options known as the Munchausen Trilemma. In attempting to ground oneself on a certain foundation, one has to either resort to circular argument, (i.e. we assume something to be true before offering proof and offer proof to prove what we’ve already assumed) regressive arguments, (i.e. each offer of proof requires further proof which we keep giving presumable forever) axiomatic argument (i.e. we accept universal precepts and proceed on the basis of their truth).

Most of us do not do enough critical analysis of the very foundational assumptions we make about the nature of reality, if any at all. Perhaps this is because we have accepted certain axioms as the basis for our particular beliefs, thought processes, and actions, so that we do not think we need to reassess our positions. Perhaps this is because we have become so immersed in a particular cultural, educational, religious, or social context in which certain ideas and concepts become accepted as “common sense.” The foregoing analysis however should provide a basis for at least a cursory analysis of the ideas that we have come to accept as “common sense.”  The foregoing analysis however, should suggest that even before we conduct that sort of overarching analysis, we should determine upon what foundation we are starting from, that is which turtle we are standing on. Additionally, the problems that this type of inquiry presents to the human mind should lead to an existential crisis, a questioning of all matters of a fundamental nature. Rene Descartes, the famous philosopher experienced a similar type of existential crisis that led him to doubt everything to find the proper basis for certainty. His journey of doubt and skepticism led him to declare, “Et Ergo Sum (i.e. I think therefore, I am).” Essentially, he attempted to find a basis for certain knowledge, and found his basis for certainty in the fact that he knew he was doubting (i.e. he was using his mind to reason and to think). I would assert that there lies an even more fundamental basis for certainty than man’s ability to reason, that there is another turtle underneath man’s ability to reason, that is, man’s ability to choose.

Human Moral Agency is the Basis for Obtaining Truth

I would assert that the most basic foundation for knowledge, understanding, and achieving certainty is found in the concept of human moral agency. Human agency is the notion that humans have free will, choices, or possibilities. Whatever humans do – however they think and behave – the notion of agency says that they could have acted or thought otherwise. 

The opposition to this worldview presents itself in the form of mechanistic materialism (i.e. that humans, their thoughts, and actions are the product of mechanistic forces, whether created by environmental or biological forces, the nature vs. nurture theory). In this sense human moral agency cannot truly be the basis for our thoughts, beliefs, and actions, as they are all subject to the conditions of the brain or other deterministic functions. If taken to an extreme position this assumption denies the actual possibility of true and meaningful human moral agency, the same sense that a boulder tumbling down the side of a hill has no choice in its present course but that which is determined by the laws of natural order. Humans do not experience their lives in this way, but as meaningful (or boring), satisfactory (or unsatisfactory), and purposeful (or unpurposeful) at various times and to various extents, but we all experience these feelings, states of being, and emotions universally.  The power to choose is the natural and eternal state of man and forms the basis for his ability to reason upon that which is presented to his mind, heart, body, that is, his very soul. In this sense that which man chooses to believe or disbelieve is a matter of choice.

“For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so . . . righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness, nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one . . . having . . . neither sense nor insensibility.” 2 Ne. 2:11.

Thus, man’s ability to reason in this life cannot be preeminently prior to his ability to choose because there would be nothing for man to reason about or between. However, these two seemingly contradictory concepts are co-eternal, but for the purposes of this analysis it makes sense to give preeminence to mans ability to choose because his reasoning must necessarily proceed from his basic assumptions (because of the veil) about the nature of reality.

The Two Narratives

“For the purpose of this brief discussion, eternalism is defined as that view of man and the universe which not only acknowledges, but exults in, the existence of a Heavenly Father, his Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, who have authored and implemented a redeeming plan for mankind. Secularism is herein defined as that view of man and the universe which is essentially irreligious with regard to the existence of God and cosmic purpose for man.” – Elder Neal A. Maxwell, Eternalism v. Securalism

There are two narratives that one may freely choose from and that demand our discernment in the same sense that a judge adjudicates between two opposing arguments. In civil litigation two parties are engaged in a dispute about an alleged act or acts that have violated a purported right of the other party. The plaintiff accuses the defendant of an unlawful act and requests relief based on the violation. The defendant sets forth his defenses to the accusations and requests that he be released from liability. Both parties are essentially asking the finder of fact (the judge or jury) to determine the "truth of the matter" and make a decision based on that which is determined to be "the truth of the matter"(granted this is also always an approximation based on a number of evidentiary, legal, or factual factors).  This is in essence the calling that we are called to in this life, to be judges, to make determinations based on that which is presented to us as foundational assumptions that necessarily guide our reasoning, our determinations of that which is “proof,” convincing, persuasive, or determinative.

 The first narrative presented is founded in holy scrip and consists of the testimony (admissible) of men specifically called to be teachers of truth. These men testify on the basis of the knowledge that they have received through revelation, both meta-physical and physical, concerning the reality of God. These men have without equivocation testified of the nature of reality, its foundation, its assurances, its blessings, and the process one needs to be able to receive the sure word of prophecy (i.e. certainty) with regard to their truth claims.            

“For whosever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?  . . . So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the world of God.” Rom. 10:13-14, 17.

“And now my sons, I speak unto you these things for your profit and learning; for there is a God, and he hath created all things, both the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are, both things to act and things to be acted upon.” 2 Ne. 2:14.

The second narrative presented is founded in the understanding and reasoning of man that assumes the impossibility of obtaining knowledge about the meta-physical and at its core in fact denies the existence of the meta-physical. These truth claims are often “proven” and celebrated on the basis of the very same reasoning that denies them in the first place, man’s imperfections and limited reasoning. This narrative assumes certain definitions about what constitutes proof and necessarily excludes any type of “proof” to the contrary.  If followed to its logical conclusion, certainty can only be a relativistic certainty; bounded by the individual differences of those holding these positions (i.e. what applies to you cannot apply to me because we are different).

“Where, the Lord God gave unto man that he should act for himself. Wherefore, man could not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed by the one of the other.” 2 Ne. 2:16

Faith or Disbelief

“Whatever sense we make of this world, whatever value we place upon our lives and relationships, whatever meaning we ultimately give to our joys and agonies, must necessarily be a gesture of faith. Whether we consider the whole a product of impersonal cosmic forces, a malevolent deity, or a benevolent god, depends not on the evidence, but on what we choose, deliberately and consciously, to conclude from that evidence.”  - The God Who Weeps, How Mormonism Makes Sense of Life, Givens,Terryl and Fiona.

The two opposites about which we are able to reason and choose is between exercising faith (or disbelief) in one of the two narratives.

“The call to faith is a summons to engage the heart, to attune it to resonate in sympathy with principles and values and ideals that we devoutly hope are true and which we have reasonable but not certain grounds for believing to be true. There must be grounds for doubt as well as belief, in order to render the choice more truly a choice, and therefore the more deliberate, and laden with personal vulnerability and investment. . . What we choose to embrace, to be responsive to, is the purest reflection of who we are and what we love. That is why faith, the choice to believe, is, in the final analysis, an action that is positively laden with moral significance." - The God Who Weeps, How Mormonism Makes Sense of Life, Givens,Terryl and Fiona.

Given the two divergent systems presented to us in more or less complete fashion, the fundamental issue then is the application of the requisite faith. In regard to the first system, faith, then is the substance of things hoped for more than it is the evidence of things seen or not seen.

“in nearly all the important transactions in life, indeed in all transactions whatever which have relation to the future, we have to take a leap in the dark, . . . to act upon very imperfect evidence . . . I believe it to be the same with religious belief . . . if we decide to leave the [questions] unanswered, that is a choice; if we waver in our answer that, too, is a choice; but whatever choice we make, we make it our own peril.” – James Stephen 

Without the requisite faith it is impossible for one to come unto God, as it is done on his terms and not our own. This type of faith is based on a foundational state of being, a foundational law, a willingness of belief, belief in the words of credible, sincere, and authorized witnesses.  When exercised according to this law, man is rewarded and receives a good report, and a more sure word, that is, certainty.

“And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.” 1 Cor. 2:4-5.

“Wherefore . . .  having all these witnesses we obtain a hope, and our faith becometh unshaken. . .”(Jacob 4:6), until we have “faith no longer,” because we know, “nothing doubting.” Ether 3:19. 

What then is Truth?

Only the first narrative attempts to totalize the whole of existence into a thoroughgoing belief system. The second narrative essentially denies that possibility. As such, the first narrative must necessarily provide definitions, explanations, and rationales for its position. The first narrative asserts that truth is, “knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come.” D&C 93:24.  This is a statement of objective truth, that there is real versions of history, that things in and of themselves have meaning that require discernment, and that the future can be determined. However, truth is inextricably tied to man’s ability to choose and why it is prior (or rather co-eternal) to man’s reasoning, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light,” (D&C 93:13) because of “disobedience . . . and because of the tradition of their fathers.” D&C 93:39.  Here then are the two narratives represented categorically as light, and that which is based on the traditions of men.

Truth is therefore defined as that which is “light.” While there are easy symbolic representations inherent in this description, I would like to attempt to ground the idea of light as truth in a more fundamental way. Whether this “proves” the point is solely up to the reader and what he or she chooses to believe, but hopefully provides a sound basis for exploration of the idea of certainty.

Light as Truth

 Light as a quasi-physical entity has been defined by Wolfgang Pauli as “an excellent symbol for the source of energy of the collective unconscious.” Atom and Archetype, p. 14. Pauli goes on to say, that “The psyche . . . as a medium participates in both Spirit and Matter. I am convinced that it (the psyche) is partly of a material nature. The archetypes, for example, are Ideas ( in the Platonic sense) on the one hand, and yet are directly connected with physiological processes on the other; and in cases of synchronicity they are arrangers of physical circumstances, so that they can also be regarded as a characteristic of Matter (as the feature which imbues it with meaning).” Atom and Archetype, pp. 100-01. Essentially, Pauli is saying that physical atomic particles actually have an effect upon the mind, body, and soul (consciousness) of humans individually and collectively. Modern physics researchers are attempting to and seem certain that they are on the verge of finding the “God Particle.” Light is now technologically able to transmit and encode data and is the precise way in which we receive the information that encodes our minds, hearts and souls. Further, this idea is infused in the mystic religions of antiquity, especially the Bible, that reality is infused with divine energy and power, which functions as the essence, and meaning of things and which can be perceived. Regardless of the implications that physics researches attach to such a finding, it is interesting that sub-atomic particles are regarded by the LDS as the basis, substance, and essence of truth. It is even more compelling in that light is a measurable substance in all of its states, physical, figurative, hypothetical, and spiritual. (see also http://jaysanalysis.com/2012/12/04/light-and-the-feel-of-numbers/).

“The radioactive nucleus is an excellent symbol for the source of energy of the collective unconscious. It indicates that consciousness does not grow out of any activity that is inherent to it; rather, it is constantly being produced by an energy that comes from the depths of the unconscious and thus has been depicted in the forms of rays from time immemorial” Atom and Archetype, p. 14.

Assuming the basis of truth and certainty lies in the first narrative is solely an act of faith, faith upon the words of those who testify and witness of its certainty. That message is symbolically represented as light both in a metaphorical and literal sense. The message is therefore given “unto you . . . that you may understand and know how to worship, and know what you worship. D&C 93:19.  Who is that the LDS worship in this regard? Light? Yes.

“Wherefore, I now send upon you another Comforter, even upon you my friends, that it may abide in your hearts, even the Holy Spirit of promise; which other Comforter is the same that I promised unto my disciples, as is recorded in the testimony of John. This Comforter is the promise which I give unto you of eternal life, even the glory of the celestial kingdom; Which glory is that of the church of the Firstborn, even of God, the holiest of all, through Jesus Christ his son – He that ascended up on high, as also he descended below all things, in that he comprehended all things, that he might be in all and through all things, the light of truth; Which truth shineth. This is the light of Christ. As also he is in the sun, and the light of the sun, and the power thereof by which it was made.” D&C 88:3-7.

“And the light which shineth, which giveth you light, is through him who enlighteneth your eyes, which is the same light that quickeneth your understandings; Which light proceedeth forth from the presence of God to fill the immensity of space – The light which is in all things, which giveth life to all things, which is the law by which all things are governed, even the power of god who sitteth upon his throne, who is in the bosom of eternity, who is in the midst of all things.” D&C 88:11-3.

The message and faith of the ancients is nothing more or less than the witness and testimony of Jesus Christ. The message which they communicate is the identification of the source of certainty, understanding, knowledge and intelligence. Additionally the message they convey is about telling us how we are to worship.

“ . . . that which is governed by law is also preserved by law . . . That which breaketh a law, and abideth not by law, but seeketh to become a law unto itself . . .cannot be sanctified by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment.” D&C 88:35.“All beings who abide not in those conditions are not justified.” D&C 88:39

“He that keepeth his commandments receiveth truth and light, until he is glorified in truth and knoweth all things.” D&C 93:28

We are to worship according the law given, are not justified on any other basis, and if we do, we will know the truth of all things. This is done “according to the scriptures . . . the only sure foundation,” (Jacob 4:16) which foundation “is Christ, the Son of God.” Hel. 5:12.

In the first narrative then, certainty can only be attained based upon man’s choice to exercise faith in the testimony of witnesses, act upon the testimony as required by law, and certainty is achieved. Depending on the assumptions one makes about the nature of reality will therefore lead into differing systems of inquiry and analysis. The first requires an honest assessment of what can be known, what the basis for one’s current understanding is, and an assessment of the two narratives in light of what one purports to already know. The first narrative is therefore an experiment that can be tested but requires complete intellectual humility. The second narrative would require certainty first and a degree intellectual dishonesty (how can humans purport to know what they know as demonstrated by the turtle story) and is therefore categorically different and distinct. Discernment between the two systems of thought should therefore be relatively easy once we conduct the experiment.

According to the first narrative then, discernment is required, and the basis for that according to the law given will be the subject of the next blog entry, followed by several tools necessary for conducting analysis and discernment in all aspects of life.

 

GI Joe: Retaliation - Revelations of Geopolitical Reality? Coming soon . . .

“The American motion picture is the greatest unconscious carrier of propaganda in the world today. It is a great distributor for ideas and opinions. The motion picture can standardize the ideas and habits of a nation. Because pictures are made to meet market demands, they reflect, emphasize and even exaggerate broad popular tendencies, rather than stimulate new ideas and opinions. The motion picture avails itself only of ideas and facts which are in vogue. As the newspaper seeks to purvey news, it seeks to purvey entertainment.” – Edward Bernays, Propaganda

Tonight, I had the opportunity to see the new movie, GI Joe: Retaliation,  with my younger brother Jordan. We had a big, explosive, popcorn movie blast, from beginning to end. One of the reasons I love spending time with my siblings is that we share a lot of the same common interests and enjoy delving into the finer details and symbology in popular media. As soon as the credits rolled, immediately we began discussing some of the more obvious plot points and their correlations to the past, current, and developing geopolitical landscape. I don't have the time right at the moment to do a full analysis on each of the following plot points, but hopefully, this will give a little taste and preview for the full analysis I'll do at a later time.

1. The re-emerging, or rather, the dormant Cold War.
Several geopolitical analysts ,experts, and insider whistle blowers on cold war era politics, have shown very convincingly that detente was nothing more than feigned capitulation by the Communist powers in recognition of the fact that outright hostilities would never result in the ultimate victory sought. Anatoliy Golitsyn, the author of New Lies for Old, explicated this theory in great detail, showing that Perestroika was nothing but a political calculation by Communist Russia to regain their former strength, both economically, and militarily, specifically, as it relates to nuclear armament. The United States essentially bailed out the Russian government with the lend-lease agreements and allowed the basic corpus of the communist powers to stay in control from behind the scenes. In GI Joe: Retaliation, the re-merging issue of cold war power posturing is front and center, and revolves around the endgame scenario of the nuclear arms era. Anyone who has been watching the news lately, can see this posturing in the form of North Korea. Few are aware that North Korea's nuclear rods were provided by none other than . . . us!

“Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, sat on the board of a company which three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea – a country he now regards as part of the “axis of evil” and which has been targeted for regime change by Washington because of its efforts to build nuclear weapons.
Mr Rumsfeld was a non-executive director of ABB, a European engineering giant based in Zurich, when it won a $200m (£125m) contract to provide the design and key components for the reactors. The current defence secretary sat on the board from 1990 to 2001, earning $190,000 a year. He left to join the Bush administration.  The reactor deal was part of President Bill Clinton’s policy of persuading the North Korean regime to positively engage with the west.” - The Two Faces of Rumsfeld, The Guardian. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/may/09/nuclear.northkorea

"During the early Clinton years, hard-liners and so-called conservative hawks advocated a pre-emptive strike to halt North Korea’s nuclear weapons development before it could field an atomic bomb. Instead of taking the hard-line, President Clinton elected to rely on former President Jimmy Carter and decided to appease the Marxist-Stalinist dictatorship.Carter met with North Korean leader Kim Jong-il in Pyongyang and returned to America waving a piece of paper and declaring peace in our time. Kim, according to Carter, had agreed to stop his nuclear weapons development.
The Clinton appeasement program for North Korea included hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, food, oil and even a nuclear reactor. However, the agreement was flawed and lacked even the most informal means of verification.
In return, Kim elected to starve his people while using the American aid to build uranium bombs. The lowest estimate is that Kim starved to death over 1 million of his own people, even with the U.S. aid program.” - North Korea Nukes Clinton Legacy, Newsmax.com. http://web.archive.org/web/20060221023706/http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/1/7/164846.shtml

 

2. Universal Nuclear Disarmament
One of the main plot points in GI Joe is the geopolitical machinations of Cobra (the veritable secret combination) to lead the other geopolitical nations into a new era of peace in the guise of universal nuclear disarmament. The analysts mentioned above, have shown again very persuasively, that the same machinations have been forefront in the minds and political actions of our modern day leaders. The same nations embroiled in nuclear posturing are all represented in GI Joe's version of the story. The Perestroika deception as planned by Russia (and more importantly Russia's financiers) is arguably to lead the other nations into talks and negotiations for universal nuclear disarmament, all the while stockpiling hidden weapons for its use at the right time. This is the feint of the evil international criminal terrorist group known as Cobra.

3. Historical Archetypal Symbolism
Some of the more prominent symbols denoting good and evil are present in abundance. The Cobra, the symbol of the snake, is front and center as the representation of the terrorist criminal organization. This organization infiltrates the power structure of the U.S. government and turns its powers against the people, mentioning explicitly that its agents want to burn the Constitution and all that it stands for. From an LDS perspective one of the purposes of secret combinations is to gain power (Helaman 2:8; Ether 8:23, 11:15) by usurping power and authority over the people (Helaman 7:4). They seek to gain sole power over the government and, in the Book of Mormon, were successful in doing so (Helaman 6:39). Avraham Gileadi in his book, Isaiah Decoded: Ascending the Ladder to Heaven, makes a very persuasive argument about the parallels between the Egypt of his time and modern day America, as the respective geopolitical powers of their time, toppled by internal political discord and espionage.

The snake has a very old archetypal personality, as a creature of deception, guile, false flattery, and destruction. Cobra Commander is GI Joe's embodiment of this archetypal personality and uses deception, guile, and flattery to destroy the Joe's and set the world on a course of total destruction. Most specifically, his agents infiltrate the government, usurp the power of the Presidency, present a plan of universal peace, that is cover for his ultimate plan of destruction.

“Satan has control now. No matter where you look, he is in control, even in our own land. He is guiding the governments as far as the Lord will permit him. That is why there is so much strife, turmoil, confusion all over the earth. One master mind is governing the nations. It is not the President of the United States…it is not the king or government of England or any other land; it is Satan himself.” (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, Vol. 3, pp. 314-315)

Zeus, the preeminent god of the Greek pantheon is here, representing the weapon of mass destruction used by Cobra to destroy the world. This is interesting for reasons I can't yet articulate and will have to wait until my full analysis, as well as the Bald Eagle of the Joes.

General Colton's gift of General Patton's Pistol to Roadblock (the Rock)
General Patton was known for his desire to liberate all of Europe by removing the Communist powers of Russia. He felt that their ideology presented an inevitable clash with western democracy and foretold of a time when their power would exceed ours. Whatever his particular views, it is interesting that the movie used the symbolism of his weapon in the climax of the film, given the rather obvious cold war-esque themes running throughout the movie.

4. Black Ops
The average person, doesn't delve into the history of black operations, espionage, and covert organizations. This is arguably because not much has been written or recorded about these secretive issues, but enough has come to light over time that only the naive would disregard the profound effect that black operations have had and do arguably have on everyday geopolitical machinations. Particularly, the revelations about modern day black sites, extraordinary rendition, water boarding, Blackgate, and the Osama Bin Laden raid,  have shown a sliver of the nature and reality of black operations. In this sense, GI Joe, is a revelation of sorts of the nature of black operations, which are real and increasing as suggested by Wired magazine.

“These secrets are different. Their names are obscured by code words, or simply listed as “classified programs.” But with a little digging, we can get a (limited) sense of how much money is being spent on the U.S. government’s most secret military projects. In fact, you can take a look for yourself. We’ve put together this spreadsheet with the latest information. Feel free to add, subtract and edit it — kind of like a classified cash wiki.
This year, the military’s black budget appears to be a little over $51 billion, down from the $56 billion which held steady for the last two years, not including inflation. The reductions are also not really a surprise considering the cuts happening nearly everywhere else.” - See for Yourself: The Pentagon’s $51 Billion ‘Black’ Budget, Wired. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/02/pentagons-black-budget/

5. Ripped out of the News Headlines Geopolitics
North Korea's nuclear ambitions
Pakistan's tenuous relationship with India and its emerging nuclear capability.
The Nuclear Age representatives, the U.S.A, Russia, China, U.K., Israel, France, North Korea and Iran, who is interestingly absent.

6. Melding of the Eastern New Age Mysticism Religions and the Emerging Western Technocracy.
Ninjas, ninjas, and more ninjas!

A full analysis containing eschatological prophetic analysis will be forthcoming plus more in-depth analysis on each of the points above, and hopefully on other symbols and themes that I recall in the interim.

Eternal Verities, Semiotics, and Semantics

A few weeks ago I determined that I would begin blogging, primarily for the purpose of gathering, synthesizing, and coalescing my thoughts, interests, and impressions in one place. Like many others, I am sure, I have moments where certain thought processes lead to particular conclusions about the nature of reality in general and particular. There have been many times in that process that upon further reflection and futile attempts to recall the sum and substance of those thoughts that I catch myself wishing I had taken a moment to record. This blog represents my attempt at doing so. As for the title of this particular blog, it represents my attempt at creating profundity (likely where there is none). Regardless, one thing that I can say about myself, whether good or bad, is that I often attempt to find profundity in the minutiae of life, and am quick to point out that which I see. A couple of weeks ago I was speaking with my parents about life, its complexities, its certainties, uncertainties, and the experiences and moments we find ourselves in within the spectrum it creates. My parents, ever the "goodly parents" listened intently, with unfeigned concern, and empathy as I broke down the layers of analysis that underlies my personality, choices, and conclusions. While going through that process, as if to self-fufill my own prophecy, I caught myself engaging in meta-analysis about my analysis. I relayed that sentiment to my parents with an attempt at explanation. My explanation was that as a perpetually single guy, I am used to conducting a lot of self-introspection on the existential that might not otherwise occur. Additionally, I suggested that it is also product of my predisposition towards philosophical inquiry, which has only been stoked further by my chosen educational endeavors, namely, lawyering, philosophy, religious, political and psychological theory. This brings me back to the title of this particular blog entry and the general title of my blog.

Eternal Verities
One thing that all my educational training and analysis has taught me is that no matter how much one man or groups of men may purport to know and understand, there will always be a limit, a space where uncertainty will exist, an inability to totalize, harmonize, and organize the flux, chaos, and change in existence. However, like all general rules of applicability, there is always an exception. The exception would be stated thusly, "there is no way to totalize the flux, unless and until one first accepts the necessity that there must be eternal verities." Assumptions form the basis for all human reasoning and provide the foundation for further exploration. Much, if not all, of the "truths" we cling to depend on the assumptions that underlie and necessarily lead to corresponding and causal implications. In this sense, there are two narratives, one in which eternal verities exist prior to all human reasoning, and one in which there can be no eternal verities but relativistic happenstance. What one assumes, or more accurately, takes on the basis of faith leads in one direction or the other. Many thinkers my superior have also arrived at these same types of conclusions, echoing the sentiment that "he who knows he knows nothing, knows everything." I would argue that he who knows he knows nothing, knows that under everything must be an eternal verity.

Semiotics
Semiotics is by definition the study of signs, symbolism, likeness, parallels, analogy, metaphor, and typology. For those that are new to this area of study and inquiry, simply put, it is the analysis, recognition, significance, communicative message, and meaning in symbols, whether literary (poetry), literal (the cross), metaphorical (the sacrament), or across time and space (the gathering of the ten tribes). This type of analysis can be done in any form of communication that is laden with symbols, including popular media (movies, music, clothing), rituals (the superbowl, easter, etc.) or architecture (temple symbolism). The main purpose of this type of inquiry is related to the concept of eternal verities in that all things communicate a universal message whether good or bad demand our discernment. Depending on what one assumes about eternal verities, one will either see a web of causally connected themes, images, and ideas that point directly to the ultimate eternal verity, or a series of unconnected, and most likely, unfortunate events. In doing this type of analysis, the reality of eternal verities becomes apparent, and self-evident, such that the truth of things cannot remain hidden.

Semantics
Often in discussions on various topics, individuals, run into problems created by misunderstandings, miscommunication, and mistake of intent with each other. It may be said that all conflicts whether interpersonal or intrapersonal derive from the most basic problems inherent in the fallibility of human nature and reasoning represented by imperfect language. Language, arguably, is the basis for any human thought, BEFORE, communication of thoughts. It has been suggested and I would assert that language is the basis for human thought and thought is therefore subject to the imperfections we find in the definitions we use. Language itself is subject to changes in time and thought, but yet, generally retains enough substance to allow communication that fosters true understanding. However, to the extent that it does not, semantics, or what a word means, matters almost exclusively. Semantics matter because language is the only way we can convey what we mean, and should not be shrugged off as "just semantics." Regardless, returning to eternal verities, words often do not form the basis for true understanding, as they represent the meaning and intent and designs of the bearer. We have all experienced this type of communication, we all are semioticians in this regard, as we have all had "heart to hearts" with others in which the meanings and designs of the bearer are felt, rather than heard through sensory perception. However, to the extent that our semantics more accurately reflect the designs of our hearts and intents, the more convincing, powerful, and meaningful our communications will be.

I felt it fitting to talk about these three themes that tend to dominate my thinking, life, and concerns, and hereafter my blog entries. I am especially excited to take myself and those who are kind enough to follow through these types of exercises as it relates to religious theology, political science (historical and modern), psychological theory, legal theory, popular media (including comics, movies, music, etc.) and of course Superman! I hope that those who follow will be able to experience each of these three themes in a way never before, and if nothing more than to see how Mateo Johnson thinks . . . like a lawyer.