Approaching Zion - Selected Quotes

[iWriteStuff]

We have gotten off track somewhat, me included, into family counseling. But I think that the above problem, I suppose, definitely will arise in the actual attempt to establish Zion. Actually it is world wide problematic. Hugh Nibley gave a different meaning than what is most commonly accepted, that the "idol" rich owner, shall not eat the bread of his poor laborers. Now while I agree with that assessment also, I also think beings these quotes are in the D&C that they apply mostly in the common thought of way.

I hear what you're saying and I don't disagree that the poor should be willing to work in whatever capacity they can. Such is the case for everyone, poor or rich. I think the statement by Br. Nibley pertains to the class of people who, rich or poor, do not. Here's his background, courtesy of Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life:

scottishroots.jpg (79.53 KiB) Viewed 3414 times

Clearly, the starving Scottish miner heritage where the entire family had to work from childhood up in the most deprived circumstances had an impact on him. Was it right for them to have to endanger the lives of their children and spouses just to be able to put food on the table? Were the mine owners justified in their treatment of the poor while they lived in luxury, not so much as lifting a finger to help them? My own grandparents were so poor that they chewed tree bark for food and walked the train tracks as children in hopes of finding some fallen coal to heat their tiny shanty of a house during the Depression. I can tell you from my own family history that that leaves a mark on generations to come.

Have you ever been that poor? Most people have at some point in their life. As long as you aren't a complete dependent on the government, most poor people are working night and day to provide for their sustenance. Even some people on government assistance are working as hard as they can, and some of them getting nowhere. Is it right for them to work 2 or 3 jobs just to keep from starving while there are millionaires and billionaires who do no work at all, yet demand that others work for them? Is that what Zion is about?

Forgive me for straying off of Approaching Zion, but the quote below from Brother Brigham Challenges the Saints (another Nibley classic) comes to mind:

Carnal mindedness embraces those four things which both Nephis declare will destroy any society, namely seeking for power, gain, popularity, and the lusts of the flesh (1 Nephi 22:23; 3 Nephi 6:15). For particulars see your local TV guide. In the third place is their attitude to nature, which is their livelihood, beautifully summed up in Doctrine and Covenants 49: "For behold, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and that which cometh of the earth, is ordained for the use of man for food and for raiment, and that he might have in abundance. But it is not given that one man should possess that which is above another, wherefore the world lieth in sin. And wo unto man that sheddeth blood or that wasteth flesh and hath no need" (D&C 49:19—21). This is the creed of the Hopi which so shocks us. If you live on a soaring rock 200 yards long and 50 yards wide with a hundred other families, you will find little room to accumulate the things of this world.

What we are speaking of is that ideal society described in the Book of Mormon as being established by the Lord in person, to succeed and fulfill the Law of Moses, that society which we should both emulate. Quoting from 4 Nephi, "And there were no contentions and disputations among them [the Hopi, as we all know, are the peaceable people and do everything to avoid violence—are we that way?], and every man did deal justly one with another [no money, no law courts]. And they had all things [in] common among them ["if one has corn we all have corn"]; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift. . . . And the Lord did prosper them exceedingly in the land; Yea, insomuch that they did build cities" (4 Nephi 1:2—3, 7). But it wasn't easy—they had to work at it exactly as the Hopis do, meticulously carrying out all the prescribed functions.

I think that's the Zion I'd like to see. But it requires everyone work, and not just their "working capital". The Doctrine and Covenants is the blueprint to do it, and the Spirit is the guide. It only requires us to be willing.

[simpleton]

Forgive me for straying off of Approaching Zion, but the quote below from Brother Brigham Challenges the Saints (another Nibley classic) comes to mind:

Carnal mindedness embraces those four things which both Nephis declare will destroy any society, namely seeking for power, gain, popularity, and the lusts of the flesh (1 Nephi 22:23; 3 Nephi 6:15). For particulars see your local TV guide. In the third place is their attitude to nature, which is their livelihood, beautifully summed up in Doctrine and Covenants 49: "For behold, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and that which cometh of the earth, is ordained for the use of man for food and for raiment, and that he might have in abundance. But it is not given that one man should possess that which is above another, wherefore the world lieth in sin. And wo unto man that sheddeth blood or that wasteth flesh and hath no need" (D&C 49:19—21). This is the creed of the Hopi which so shocks us. If you live on a soaring rock 200 yards long and 50 yards wide with a hundred other families, you will find little room to accumulate the things of this world.

What we are speaking of is that ideal society described in the Book of Mormon as being established by the Lord in person, to succeed and fulfill the Law of Moses, that society which we should both emulate. Quoting from 4 Nephi, "And there were no contentions and disputations among them [the Hopi, as we all know, are the peaceable people and do everything to avoid violence—are we that way?], and every man did deal justly one with another [no money, no law courts]. And they had all things [in] common among them ["if one has corn we all have corn"]; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift. . . . And the Lord did prosper them exceedingly in the land; Yea, insomuch that they did build cities" (4 Nephi 1:2—3, 7). But it wasn't easy—they had to work at it exactly as the Hopis do, meticulously carrying out all the prescribed functions.

I think that's the Zion I'd like to see. But it requires everyone work, and not just their "working capital". The Doctrine and Covenants is the blueprint to do it, and the Spirit is the guide. It only requires us to be willing.
[/quote]

That is not straying off the topic one little iota. That above from Brigham is spot on. Just the small little quote saying: "but it is not givin ( and what is the "it" that the quote is specifically talking? "It" is the things of this world, food, clothing, shelter, raiment, goods of all kinds, gold, silver, and all the material gifts from God etc etc.) that one man should possess that which is above another....
The possessing of "material things" above another is the biggest cause of "PRIDE" and being lifted up in pride...
The plain and precious parts or truths that the Book of Mormon restored that was mostly ommited from the bible ( imo) is what is encompassed in that above quote. Well, after reading "Approaching Zion" you realize that the whole history book of Mormon are the Nephites on a rollercoaster ride of living that law of consecration/ United Order then getting lifted up in pride, getting spanked, living it again, lifted up in pride, spanked, humility, a few more years, pride, spanked, humility, repeated over and over and over again... then after the last 200 plus years of constantly living that law, after receiving that Great light, then they fall away, cease to have all things in common, get lifted up it pride again, then ultimately the Nephite nation is destroyed.
So now if we compare ourselves to them right now, where do we stand? I shudder to even think about it. But let's face the facts. Do we have all things in common? No.. Do we esteem our brother as ourselves? No.. Are we living in Zion or Babylon ? Easy answer. Are there rich and poor? To an extreme that is embarrassing. Do the rich grind upon the faces of the poor? Also we are very guilty. Are we lifted up in pride to the wearing of costly apparel? Very guilty, to the point of being lifted up in pride above all the people in the whole earth according to prophecy.
Our whole business and living system is absolutely saturated with the spirit of Babylon. I'll just name one of the curses of the many Babylonian businesses that has saturated Mormonism or rather our "Zion" of today and that is " insurance". ( and I'll catch hell for that)
IMO insurance was invented by the devil himself. But we even own an insurance company, can't even go on a mission without it.
So much for "the just shall live by faith". But I am rambling so I'll stop. But I look forward to the day when: Jeremiah 31:

31Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: 32Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: 33But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. 34And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more....

And that law that God writes in our hearts I believe is the law of consecration, united order, being one.....
Actually read all of that chapter its very beautiful...

[gardener4life]

We have gotten off track somewhat, me included, into family counseling. But I think that the above problem, I suppose, definitely will arise in the actual attempt to establish Zion. Actually it is world wide problematic. Hugh Nibley gave a different meaning than what is most commonly accepted, that the "idol" rich owner, shall not eat the bread of his poor laborers. Now while I agree with that assessment also, I also think beings these quotes are in the D&C that they apply mostly in the common thought of way.

I hear what you're saying and I don't disagree that the poor should be willing to work in whatever capacity they can. Such is the case for everyone, poor or rich. I think the statement by Br. Nibley pertains to the class of people who, rich or poor, do not. Here's his background, courtesy of Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life:

scottishroots.jpg

Clearly, the starving Scottish miner heritage where the entire family had to work from childhood up in the most deprived circumstances had an impact on him. Was it right for them to have to endanger the lives of their children and spouses just to be able to put food on the table? Were the mine owners justified in their treatment of the poor while they lived in luxury, not so much as lifting a finger to help them? My own grandparents were so poor that they chewed tree bark for food and walked the train tracks as children in hopes of finding some fallen coal to heat their tiny shanty of a house during the Depression. I can tell you from my own family history that that leaves a mark on generations to come.

Have you ever been that poor? Most people have at some point in their life. As long as you aren't a complete dependent on the government, most poor people are working night and day to provide for their sustenance. Even some people on government assistance are working as hard as they can, and some of them getting nowhere. Is it right for them to work 2 or 3 jobs just to keep from starving while there are millionaires and billionaires who do no work at all, yet demand that others work for them? Is that what Zion is about?

Forgive me for straying off of Approaching Zion, but the quote below from Brother Brigham Challenges the Saints (another Nibley classic) comes to mind:

Carnal mindedness embraces those four things which both Nephis declare will destroy any society, namely seeking for power, gain, popularity, and the lusts of the flesh (1 Nephi 22:23; 3 Nephi 6:15). For particulars see your local TV guide. In the third place is their attitude to nature, which is their livelihood, beautifully summed up in Doctrine and Covenants 49: "For behold, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and that which cometh of the earth, is ordained for the use of man for food and for raiment, and that he might have in abundance. But it is not given that one man should possess that which is above another, wherefore the world lieth in sin. And wo unto man that sheddeth blood or that wasteth flesh and hath no need" (D&C 49:19—21). This is the creed of the Hopi which so shocks us. If you live on a soaring rock 200 yards long and 50 yards wide with a hundred other families, you will find little room to accumulate the things of this world.

What we are speaking of is that ideal society described in the Book of Mormon as being established by the Lord in person, to succeed and fulfill the Law of Moses, that society which we should both emulate. Quoting from 4 Nephi, "And there were no contentions and disputations among them [the Hopi, as we all know, are the peaceable people and do everything to avoid violence—are we that way?], and every man did deal justly one with another [no money, no law courts]. And they had all things [in] common among them ["if one has corn we all have corn"]; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift. . . . And the Lord did prosper them exceedingly in the land; Yea, insomuch that they did build cities" (4 Nephi 1:2—3, 7). But it wasn't easy—they had to work at it exactly as the Hopis do, meticulously carrying out all the prescribed functions.

I think that's the Zion I'd like to see. But it requires everyone work, and not just their "working capital". The Doctrine and Covenants is the blueprint to do it, and the Spirit is the guide. It only requires us to be willing.

This is an interesting view and Brother Nibley is right. Also there are other scriptures that agree with this. Have you read the scripture that says that during the Millenium one shall not build and another inherit?

Israel shall be gathered into lands of inheritance, 1 Ne. 22:12
if those coming out of Jerusalem keep commandments, none shall take away land of inheritance, 2 Ne. 1:9
poor and meek of earth will inherit it, D&C 88:17
D&C 101:101 They shall build, and another shall not inherit it; they shall plant vineyards, and they shall eat the fruit thereof. Even so. Amen.

[gardener4life]

Zion is pure in heart, and that includes the poor.

I agree! Rich or poor, all must have the same motivation and the same heart.

Speaking of the poor,

"Modern revelation has some interesting things to say about idlers: "Let every man be diligent in all things. And the idler shall not have place in the church" (D&C 75:29). We are all to work in the kingdom and for the kingdom. "And the inhabitants of Zion also shall remember their labors, inasmuch as they are appointed to labor, . . . for the idler shall be had in remembrance before the Lord" (D&C 68:30). Note that it is not the withholding of lunch but the observant eye of the Lord that admonishes the idler. This refers to all of us as laborers in Zion, and "the laborer in Zion shall labor for Zion; for if they labor for money they shall perish" (2 Nephi 26:31). That is the theme here: "Now, I, the Lord, am not well pleased with the inhabitants of Zion, for there are idlers among them; . . . they also seek not earnestly the riches of eternity, but their eyes are full of greediness" (D&C 68:31).

"An idler in the Lord's book is one who is not working for the building up of the kingdom of God on earth and the establishment of Zion, no matter how hard he may be working to satisfy his own greed. Latter-day Saints prefer to ignore that distinction as they repeat a favorite maxim of their own invention, that the idler shall not eat the bread or wear the clothing of the laborer. And what an ingenious argument they make of it! The director of a Latter-day Saint Institute was recently astounded when this writer pointed out to him that the ancient teaching that the idler shall not eat the bread of the laborer has always meant that the idle rich shall not eat the bread of the laboring poor, as they always have. "To serve the classes that are living on them," Brigham Young reports from England, "the poor, the laboring men and women are toiling, working their lives out to earn that which will keep a little life in them [lunch is what they get out of it, and no more]. Is this equality? No! What is going to be done? The Latter-day Saints will never accomplish their mission until this inequality shall cease on the earth." But the institute director was amazed, because he had always been taught that the idle poor should not eat the bread of the laboring rich, because it is perfectly obvious that a poor man has not worked as hard as a rich man. With the same lucid logic my Latter-day Saint students tell me that there were no poor in the Zion of Enoch because only the well-to-do were admitted to the city."

I think we see some of that today in our wards where some people won't accept or do callings.

Wow this is so cool. You pointed out how being idle can have a meaning of not fulfilling your callings and not building up the kingdom of God. This is a true interpretation. Thank you for your wonderful comment.

I also should point out, don't we all see a lot of older high priests and sisters also that even though they can't do a lot of work anymore because of health they have will always do their calling and visit the people in their stewardship. It's amazing really.

[iWriteStuff]

This is an interesting view and Brother Nibley is right. Also there are other scriptures that agree with this. Have you read the scripture that says that during the Millenium one shall not build and another inherit?

Israel shall be gathered into lands of inheritance, 1 Ne. 22:12
if those coming out of Jerusalem keep commandments, none shall take away land of inheritance, 2 Ne. 1:9
poor and meek of earth will inherit it, D&C 88:17
D&C 101:101 They shall build, and another shall not inherit it; they shall plant vineyards, and they shall eat the fruit thereof. Even so. Amen.

Yes! In fact I was just reading some very similar verses like that in the book of Isaiah yesterday. The prophecies are there. It will be our future.

Side note: strangely enough, the allotment of property was originally tried in the Salt Lake Valley as well:

In Israel every man received a plot of ground, assigned by lot, as his inalienable "inheritance"—it was his lunch and could never be taken from him, even because of debt. It was only as much land as he could "quicken" by his personal labor and loving attention, and no more. The same rule was observed in the settling of the Salt Lake Valley, where no man was allowed to buy and sell land or take more than he could cultivate.

Sadly, it would appear that this principle didn't last long in practice. However, we have the assurance that some day we will have it again - each of us allotted an inheritance which can never be taken away, which will be enough for our subsistence. It's hard to imagine how that will happen in our modern day society without either a generous benefactor, a pooling of resources bound under covenant, or (sadly) through a complete collapse of society that makes survival dependent on pulling together.

My pessimism leads me to believe it will have to be the latter, similar to the Nephites of 3 Ne. 8-10.

[iWriteStuff]

The below is borrowing from Brother Brigham Challenges the Saints again (still highly recommended), but I wanted to use it as it has a description of what I think Zion should look and feel like:

A year after the arrival in the valley, Brigham Young copied down in his journal a letter which Parley P. Pratt had written to his brother back east describing the new society: "All is quiet—stillness. No elections, no police reports, no murders, no war nor little war. . . . No policeman has been on duty to guard us from external or internal dangers. . . . Here we can cultivate the mind, renew the spirit, invigorate the body, cheer the heart and ennoble the soul of man. Here we can cultivate every science and art calculated to enlarge the mind, accommodate the body, or polish and adorn our race; and here we can receive and extend that pure intelligence which is unmingled with the jargon of mystic Babylon." Wonderful to relate, for the ever practical Brigham and the struggling pioneers the improvement of the mind always came first. Brigham laid it on the line: "All who do not want to sustain co-operation and fall into the ranks of improvement, and endeavor to improve themselves by every good book" were invited to leave the community. The challenge of nature was not the real issue—"the greatest and most important labour we have to perform is to cultivate ourselves."

Are we still capable of that kind of community?

[iWriteStuff]

The Orderville Experiment:

From Wikipedia:

Distribution of goods and services
Orderville was established at the direction of LDS Church president Brigham Young in 1875 specifically to live United Order, a voluntary form of communalism defined by Joseph Smith. Orderville was settled primarily by destitute refugees from failed settlements on the Muddy River in Nevada. When it was settled, Orderville included 335 acres of land, and contained 18 houses, 19 oxen, 103 cows, 43 horses, 500 sheep, 30 hogs, 400 chickens, and 30,000 feet of lumber. The settlement began completely debt free.

Homes were one- or two-room apartment units arranged around the town square. Community dining halls and public buildings were constructed. The dining hall began operation for the town on July 24, 1875 and prepared meals for more than 80 families. Men ate first, followed by women and children. Meal times were scheduled at 7 am, 12 pm, and 6 pm.

Under the United Order, no person in Orderville could have private property, as it was all considered to be God's land. Each person was made a steward over some personal effects, and every family a steward over a home. During the first two years, the settlers worked without receiving income. They were allowed to use supplies and take food as needed. The bishop of Orderville oversaw the distribution of goods. Credit were recorded for all work done by men, women, and children and used to obtain needed materials and keep track of the labor done in the settlement. In 1877, the Order began a price system to replace the credit system, and monetary values were assigned to all labor and goods. At the beginning of each year, debts were forgiven, and those who had earned a surplus voluntarily gave it back to the Order.

The settlers there grew their own crops in Orderville and had some small farms surrounding the settlement. They also used local materials to make their own soap, brooms, buckets, furniture, etc. Orderville settlers produced silk thread and wove it into articles of clothing. They later opened up their own tannery. Orderville had blacksmiths, clerks, artists, musicians, and other professions. Priddy Meeks came to Orderville to serve as the settlement's doctor in 1876. Ten percent of the net increase of Orderville was paid to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to follow the law of tithing.

Management
The group was managed by an annually-elected Board of Management consisting of nine men who bought and sold goods on behalf of the entire settlement. They also directed labor performed by the settlers. The president was the bishop, and the vice presidents were usually his counselors. Thus, there was a very close connection between spiritual and secular. Orderville was divided into 33 departments, and each year members of the Board met with the department directors to determine what the needs were and how many workers would be proportioned to the department.

In order for new members to join, the entire community had to vote. the new member was welcomed into Orderville only if the admission vote was a two-thirds majority. All newcomers were interviewed to determine their motives for wanting to join the society. They were also asked a number of questions regarding their moral and spiritual habits. New members had to agree to follow the strict standards and conditions of the settlement, including no swearing and giving up tobacco, tea, and coffee. Brigham Young cautioned against "allowing those whom might become parasites on the body from becoming members." When members wanted to leave, they were given back the capital they had initially invested along with their surplus credits for that year. If the members leaving had debts, they were usually forgiven.

Success
Although the United Order was practiced in many Utah communities during the late 1870s, Orderville was unique in both the level of success it experienced under the communal living style, and in the duration of the experiment. In the course of a few years, Orderville grew into a thriving, self-sufficient community. The success and relative wealth of the community attracted more settlers and Orderville grew to about 700 people. Orderville not only provided for the needs of its population, but produced a significant surplus for sale to other communities, which was used to purchase additional land and equipment. The extreme poverty of these settlers likely contributed significantly to their devotion to the principles of the United Order.

End of the Order
The Order continued in Orderville for approximately 10 years. During the early 1870s, the economic environment improved in southern Utah. The discovery of silver nearby also led to railroad facilities and an influx of people to the area. Local farmers were able to find a market for their goods and gained more profit. The neighboring towns that had once bought the goods from Orderville, now found themselves able to import materials from other regions. Orderville goods became "old fashioned." The youth of Orderville envied the youth in other communities, creating a friction within the community. Due to this friction, the communal dining system was abandoned in 1880. Three years later the value system assigned to labor was adjusted, introducing a level of inequality that had not existed before. Families were also given their own spending money. These changes led to tension and much internal disruption of the Order. While these internal conflicts and changes eventually would have led to the end of the practice of the United Order in Orderville, national legislation ensured it. In 1885, the enforcement of the Edmunds Anti-Polygamy Act of 1882 effectively ended the Order by jailing many of the Order's leaders and driving many of the others underground. Members of the community held an auction using their credits as payment. Orderville continued its tannery, wool factory, and sheep enterprise, which were overseen by the Board of Management until 1889.

Some good lessons to be had in this brief summary:

1) All things in common, all affairs managed by the Priesthood in committees.
2) All debts forgiven every year.
3) Everyone worked. "Parasites" were not allowed in the membership of the Order.
4) Everyone voted on who to allow into the Order. They had to be willing and able to live the covenants, with perfect determination. 2/3 majority was required for admission into the Order.
5) You could leave, debt free, whenever you wanted.

This model of living was successful and stable. Until....

1) They monetized everything. For some reason, money is a particular kind of poison to consecration. Some thoughts on this later, perhaps from Sir Thomas More.
2) Envy among the youth created tension and conflict. When there is competition and hostility between members, the covenant is in danger of failure.
3) Inequality surfaced involving the distribution of labor. If participants are not equal in all things, including work, the imbalance will destabilize an otherwise balanced economic system.
4) Contact with wealthier communities played a part as well - when you compare and contrast with the wealth of Babylon, "all things in common" somehow loses its appeal. It has to be all or nothing - all Zion, or all Babylon. That's a hard choice to make and stick with, given the luxuries implicit in Babylon vs the values and integrity of an "equality" based system.

I need to read more on the subject. Anyone have any good books to recommend on Orderville? The settlement on the Muddy River? Anything?

[simpleton]

The Orderville Experiment:

From Wikipedia:

Distribution of goods and services
Orderville was established at the direction of LDS Church president Brigham Young in 1875 specifically to live United Order, a voluntary form of communalism defined by Joseph Smith. Orderville was settled primarily by destitute refugees from failed settlements on the Muddy River in Nevada. When it was settled, Orderville included 335 acres of land, and contained 18 houses, 19 oxen, 103 cows, 43 horses, 500 sheep, 30 hogs, 400 chickens, and 30,000 feet of lumber. The settlement began completely debt free.

Homes were one- or two-room apartment units arranged around the town square. Community dining halls and public buildings were constructed. The dining hall began operation for the town on July 24, 1875 and prepared meals for more than 80 families. Men ate first, followed by women and children. Meal times were scheduled at 7 am, 12 pm, and 6 pm.

Under the United Order, no person in Orderville could have private property, as it was all considered to be God's land. Each person was made a steward over some personal effects, and every family a steward over a home. During the first two years, the settlers worked without receiving income. They were allowed to use supplies and take food as needed. The bishop of Orderville oversaw the distribution of goods. Credit were recorded for all work done by men, women, and children and used to obtain needed materials and keep track of the labor done in the settlement. In 1877, the Order began a price system to replace the credit system, and monetary values were assigned to all labor and goods. At the beginning of each year, debts were forgiven, and those who had earned a surplus voluntarily gave it back to the Order.

The settlers there grew their own crops in Orderville and had some small farms surrounding the settlement. They also used local materials to make their own soap, brooms, buckets, furniture, etc. Orderville settlers produced silk thread and wove it into articles of clothing. They later opened up their own tannery. Orderville had blacksmiths, clerks, artists, musicians, and other professions. Priddy Meeks came to Orderville to serve as the settlement's doctor in 1876. Ten percent of the net increase of Orderville was paid to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to follow the law of tithing.

Management
The group was managed by an annually-elected Board of Management consisting of nine men who bought and sold goods on behalf of the entire settlement. They also directed labor performed by the settlers. The president was the bishop, and the vice presidents were usually his counselors. Thus, there was a very close connection between spiritual and secular. Orderville was divided into 33 departments, and each year members of the Board met with the department directors to determine what the needs were and how many workers would be proportioned to the department.

In order for new members to join, the entire community had to vote. the new member was welcomed into Orderville only if the admission vote was a two-thirds majority. All newcomers were interviewed to determine their motives for wanting to join the society. They were also asked a number of questions regarding their moral and spiritual habits. New members had to agree to follow the strict standards and conditions of the settlement, including no swearing and giving up tobacco, tea, and coffee. Brigham Young cautioned against "allowing those whom might become parasites on the body from becoming members." When members wanted to leave, they were given back the capital they had initially invested along with their surplus credits for that year. If the members leaving had debts, they were usually forgiven.

Success
Although the United Order was practiced in many Utah communities during the late 1870s, Orderville was unique in both the level of success it experienced under the communal living style, and in the duration of the experiment. In the course of a few years, Orderville grew into a thriving, self-sufficient community. The success and relative wealth of the community attracted more settlers and Orderville grew to about 700 people. Orderville not only provided for the needs of its population, but produced a significant surplus for sale to other communities, which was used to purchase additional land and equipment. The extreme poverty of these settlers likely contributed significantly to their devotion to the principles of the United Order.

End of the Order
The Order continued in Orderville for approximately 10 years. During the early 1870s, the economic environment improved in southern Utah. The discovery of silver nearby also led to railroad facilities and an influx of people to the area. Local farmers were able to find a market for their goods and gained more profit. The neighboring towns that had once bought the goods from Orderville, now found themselves able to import materials from other regions. Orderville goods became "old fashioned." The youth of Orderville envied the youth in other communities, creating a friction within the community. Due to this friction, the communal dining system was abandoned in 1880. Three years later the value system assigned to labor was adjusted, introducing a level of inequality that had not existed before. Families were also given their own spending money. These changes led to tension and much internal disruption of the Order. While these internal conflicts and changes eventually would have led to the end of the practice of the United Order in Orderville, national legislation ensured it. In 1885, the enforcement of the Edmunds Anti-Polygamy Act of 1882 effectively ended the Order by jailing many of the Order's leaders and driving many of the others underground. Members of the community held an auction using their credits as payment. Orderville continued its tannery, wool factory, and sheep enterprise, which were overseen by the Board of Management until 1889.

Some good lessons to be had in this brief summary:

1) All things in common, all affairs managed by the Priesthood in committees.
2) All debts forgiven every year.
3) Everyone worked. "Parasites" were not allowed in the membership of the Order.
4) Everyone voted on who to allow into the Order. They had to be willing and able to live the covenants, with perfect determination. 2/3 majority was required for admission into the Order.
5) You could leave, debt free, whenever you wanted.

This model of living was successful and stable. Until....

1) They monetized everything. For some reason, money is a particular kind of poison to consecration. Some thoughts on this later, perhaps from Sir Thomas More.
2) Envy among the youth created tension and conflict. When there is competition and hostility between members, the covenant is in danger of failure.
3) Inequality surfaced involving the distribution of labor. If participants are not equal in all things, including work, the imbalance will destabilize an otherwise balanced economic system.
4) Contact with wealthier communities played a part as well - when you compare and contrast with the wealth of Babylon, "all things in common" somehow loses its appeal. It has to be all or nothing - all Zion, or all Babylon. That's a hard choice to make and stick with, given the luxuries implicit in Babylon vs the values and integrity of an "equality" based system.

I need to read more on the subject. Anyone have any good books to recommend on Orderville? The settlement on the Muddy River? Anything?

I have read a couple of books about Orderville and also the Muddy. It has been some years ago, but I was left with a feeling that they came the closest (in our modern times)to a Zion type of community, and not so much because of their financial progression, ( as they started out very dirt poor ) but because it seemed that they learned to truly love one another and esteem each other as themselves. Yes they had problems, but, if you are not having problems you are cannot grow. As far as the #3 above in regards to the "inequality surfacing" it did not surface until they were advised by leaders outside their order to start paying or crediting the men and women different scaled pricing for their labor and that is when some "inequality" started to surface. But still towards the end they were also advised to breakup their order by 2 apostles as they were told basicly there was no purpose in it, and most of the men were (or at least the leading " polygamous" men) arrested under the ungodly edmunds tucker act and sent to prison.
Another very financial successful " United order" was Brigham City and that was under the direction of Lorenzo Snow. But it was also discontinued along similar lines...

Anyways here is something you can read online about Orderville in more detail that Wiki: https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/ ... erville-Ut

[iWriteStuff]

I have read a couple of books about Orderville and also the Muddy. It has been some years ago, but I was left with a feeling that they came the closest (in our modern times)to a Zion type of community, and not so much because of their financial progression, ( as they started out very dirt poor ) but because it seemed that they learned to truly love one another and esteem each other as themselves. Yes they had problems, but, if you are not having problems you are cannot grow. As far as the #3 above in regards to the "inequality surfacing" it did not surface until they were advised by leaders outside their order to start paying or crediting the men and women different scaled pricing for their labor and that is when some "inequality" started to surface. But still towards the end they were also advised to breakup their order by 2 apostles as they were told basicly there was no purpose in it, and most of the men were (or at least the leading " polygamous" men) arrested under the ungodly edmunds tucker act and sent to prison.
Another very financial successful " United order" was Brigham City and that was under the direction of Lorenzo Snow. But it was also discontinued along similar lines...

Anyways here is something you can read online about Orderville in more detail that Wiki: https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/ ... erville-Ut

Thanks for the link! Downloaded and will read it completely. I've seen plenty of references to Orderville in talks by General Authorities but I was hoping for something more specific, like an actual history. This is the closest I've come yet.

I'm curious about the context for two apostles to tell them to shut down the Order. If it was because of the Edmunds Tucker act and the lack of people to administer the Order then that would make sense. But to say "there is no purpose" in trying to live a celestial law.... that doesn't jive well. I know Brigham tried several times, starting at Council Bluffs, to reinstitute consecration and was rebuffed by the other leaders. That's somewhat depressing.

Why the reluctance to live eternal principles? Why the rejection of celestial law? I would think we of all people would want to live it, especially given the opportunities that settling the Salt Lake Valley provided. Here at last they had a bit of isolation from "the world" and could set things up any way they wanted to. I think it's a rather sad commentary that it took them so long to get back to consecration, only to abandon it again so quickly.

[Michelle]

The Orderville Experiment:

From Wikipedia:

Distribution of goods and services
Orderville was established at the direction of LDS Church president Brigham Young in 1875 specifically to live United Order, a voluntary form of communalism defined by Joseph Smith. Orderville was settled primarily by destitute refugees from failed settlements on the Muddy River in Nevada. When it was settled, Orderville included 335 acres of land, and contained 18 houses, 19 oxen, 103 cows, 43 horses, 500 sheep, 30 hogs, 400 chickens, and 30,000 feet of lumber. The settlement began completely debt free.

Homes were one- or two-room apartment units arranged around the town square. Community dining halls and public buildings were constructed. The dining hall began operation for the town on July 24, 1875 and prepared meals for more than 80 families. Men ate first, followed by women and children. Meal times were scheduled at 7 am, 12 pm, and 6 pm.

Under the United Order, no person in Orderville could have private property, as it was all considered to be God's land. Each person was made a steward over some personal effects, and every family a steward over a home. During the first two years, the settlers worked without receiving income. They were allowed to use supplies and take food as needed. The bishop of Orderville oversaw the distribution of goods. Credit were recorded for all work done by men, women, and children and used to obtain needed materials and keep track of the labor done in the settlement. In 1877, the Order began a price system to replace the credit system, and monetary values were assigned to all labor and goods. At the beginning of each year, debts were forgiven, and those who had earned a surplus voluntarily gave it back to the Order.

The settlers there grew their own crops in Orderville and had some small farms surrounding the settlement. They also used local materials to make their own soap, brooms, buckets, furniture, etc. Orderville settlers produced silk thread and wove it into articles of clothing. They later opened up their own tannery. Orderville had blacksmiths, clerks, artists, musicians, and other professions. Priddy Meeks came to Orderville to serve as the settlement's doctor in 1876. Ten percent of the net increase of Orderville was paid to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to follow the law of tithing.

Management
The group was managed by an annually-elected Board of Management consisting of nine men who bought and sold goods on behalf of the entire settlement. They also directed labor performed by the settlers. The president was the bishop, and the vice presidents were usually his counselors. Thus, there was a very close connection between spiritual and secular. Orderville was divided into 33 departments, and each year members of the Board met with the department directors to determine what the needs were and how many workers would be proportioned to the department.

In order for new members to join, the entire community had to vote. the new member was welcomed into Orderville only if the admission vote was a two-thirds majority. All newcomers were interviewed to determine their motives for wanting to join the society. They were also asked a number of questions regarding their moral and spiritual habits. New members had to agree to follow the strict standards and conditions of the settlement, including no swearing and giving up tobacco, tea, and coffee. Brigham Young cautioned against "allowing those whom might become parasites on the body from becoming members." When members wanted to leave, they were given back the capital they had initially invested along with their surplus credits for that year. If the members leaving had debts, they were usually forgiven.

Success
Although the United Order was practiced in many Utah communities during the late 1870s, Orderville was unique in both the level of success it experienced under the communal living style, and in the duration of the experiment. In the course of a few years, Orderville grew into a thriving, self-sufficient community. The success and relative wealth of the community attracted more settlers and Orderville grew to about 700 people. Orderville not only provided for the needs of its population, but produced a significant surplus for sale to other communities, which was used to purchase additional land and equipment. The extreme poverty of these settlers likely contributed significantly to their devotion to the principles of the United Order.

End of the Order
The Order continued in Orderville for approximately 10 years. During the early 1870s, the economic environment improved in southern Utah. The discovery of silver nearby also led to railroad facilities and an influx of people to the area. Local farmers were able to find a market for their goods and gained more profit. The neighboring towns that had once bought the goods from Orderville, now found themselves able to import materials from other regions. Orderville goods became "old fashioned." The youth of Orderville envied the youth in other communities, creating a friction within the community. Due to this friction, the communal dining system was abandoned in 1880. Three years later the value system assigned to labor was adjusted, introducing a level of inequality that had not existed before. Families were also given their own spending money. These changes led to tension and much internal disruption of the Order. While these internal conflicts and changes eventually would have led to the end of the practice of the United Order in Orderville, national legislation ensured it. In 1885, the enforcement of the Edmunds Anti-Polygamy Act of 1882 effectively ended the Order by jailing many of the Order's leaders and driving many of the others underground. Members of the community held an auction using their credits as payment. Orderville continued its tannery, wool factory, and sheep enterprise, which were overseen by the Board of Management until 1889.

Some good lessons to be had in this brief summary:

1) All things in common, all affairs managed by the Priesthood in committees.
2) All debts forgiven every year.
3) Everyone worked. "Parasites" were not allowed in the membership of the Order.
4) Everyone voted on who to allow into the Order. They had to be willing and able to live the covenants, with perfect determination. 2/3 majority was required for admission into the Order.
5) You could leave, debt free, whenever you wanted.

This model of living was successful and stable. Until....

1) They monetized everything. For some reason, money is a particular kind of poison to consecration. Some thoughts on this later, perhaps from Sir Thomas More.
2) Envy among the youth created tension and conflict. When there is competition and hostility between members, the covenant is in danger of failure.
3) Inequality surfaced involving the distribution of labor. If participants are not equal in all things, including work, the imbalance will destabilize an otherwise balanced economic system.
4) Contact with wealthier communities played a part as well - when you compare and contrast with the wealth of Babylon, "all things in common" somehow loses its appeal. It has to be all or nothing - all Zion, or all Babylon. That's a hard choice to make and stick with, given the luxuries implicit in Babylon vs the values and integrity of an "equality" based system.

I need to read more on the subject. Anyone have any good books to recommend on Orderville? The settlement on the Muddy River? Anything?

Excellent. After reading The History of Plimoth Plantation, I concluded similarly that any approach at Zion would have to be debt free with limited to no contact with Babylon, and surely no business with them. It seemed the first great downfall. The second was as they grew rich they wanted to spread out and take more land which separated and ended their community.

Thanks for posting this. We just recently learned that one of my husbands ancestors helped start Orderville.

Edit: I forgot to mention that the pilgrims were forced by their investors to accept wicked men to live with them. Parasites as some might call them.

[simpleton]

I have read a couple of books about Orderville and also the Muddy. It has been some years ago, but I was left with a feeling that they came the closest (in our modern times)to a Zion type of community, and not so much because of their financial progression, ( as they started out very dirt poor ) but because it seemed that they learned to truly love one another and esteem each other as themselves. Yes they had problems, but, if you are not having problems you are cannot grow. As far as the #3 above in regards to the "inequality surfacing" it did not surface until they were advised by leaders outside their order to start paying or crediting the men and women different scaled pricing for their labor and that is when some "inequality" started to surface. But still towards the end they were also advised to breakup their order by 2 apostles as they were told basicly there was no purpose in it, and most of the men were (or at least the leading " polygamous" men) arrested under the ungodly edmunds tucker act and sent to prison.
Another very financial successful " United order" was Brigham City and that was under the direction of Lorenzo Snow. But it was also discontinued along similar lines...

Anyways here is something you can read online about Orderville in more detail that Wiki: https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/ ... erville-Ut

Thanks for the link! Downloaded and will read it completely. I've seen plenty of references to Orderville in talks by General Authorities but I was hoping for something more specific, like an actual history. This is the closest I've come yet.

I'm curious about the context for two apostles to tell them to shut down the Order. If it was because of the Edmunds Tucker act and the lack of people to administer the Order then that would make sense. But to say "there is no purpose" in trying to live a celestial law.... that doesn't jive well. I know Brigham tried several times, starting at Council Bluffs, to reinstitute consecration and was rebuffed by the other leaders. That's somewhat depressing.

Why the reluctance to live eternal principles? Why the rejection of celestial law? I would think we of all people would want to live it, especially given the opportunities that settling the Salt Lake Valley provided. Here at last they had a bit of isolation from "the world" and could set things up any way they wanted to. I think it's a rather sad commentary that it took them so long to get back to consecration, only to abandon it again so quickly.

My opinion on the breaking up of Orderville, was that there you had a successful Order that was increasing in wealth and in unity and if they would have been left alone they would probably have succeeded in bringing down Zion from above. ( Just a little exaggeration probably) But the church as a whole was in a fight for its financial life, the Feds completely broke it up or rather seized most all of the church property, jailed many leading men, so the apostles figured the feds prevailed against the church so what was the point of have a couple of successful orders when the majority of the church including the apostles give up on that law... " The horn made war with the saints and prevailed". Nevertheless that law will be reinstituted again at some near time in the future I believe. And that " is" the law that Christ said if we would live it He would fight our battles. " The laborer in Zion who labors for money shall perish" I think the vast majority of us fall under that condemnation and until we repent ( if we ever do) we will stay under bondage.

[iWriteStuff]

The laborer in Zion who labors for money shall perish" I think the vast majority of us fall under that condemnation and until we repent ( if we ever do) we will stay under bondage.

Thanks for the great thoughts, simpleton (name not deserved, btw!). You bring up the usage of money in Zion, which reminds me I promised a bit more on that topic. Nibley quotes Sir Thomas More's Utopia in Approaching Zion. Following that lead, I naturally ended up reading Utopia as well last year. Here's some of the portions Nibley quotes, and a few sections I found in the book that also apply:

"I must freely own that as long as there is any property, and while money is the standard of all other things, I cannot think that a nation can be governed either justly or happily: not justly, because the best things will fall to the share of the worst men; nor happily, because all things will be divided among a few (and even these are not in all respects happy), the rest being left to be absolutely miserable."
- Sir Thomas More, Utopia, as quoted in Approaching Zion

Money seems to lead to inequality. When anything can be had with money, the only criteria necessary to accumulate power is to accumulate money. This leads to covetousness, envy, greed, theft, robbery, and all other sorts of crimes. Here are some more of More's thoughts on money:

"Therefore I must say that, as I hope for mercy, I can have no other notion of all the other governments that I see or know, than that they are a conspiracy of the rich, who, on pretence of managing the public, only pursue their private ends, and devise all the ways and arts they can find out; first, that they may, without danger, preserve all that they have so ill-acquired, and then, that they may engage the poor to toil and labour for them at as low rates as possible, and oppress them as much as they please; and if they can but prevail to get these contrivances established by the show of public authority, which is considered as the representative of the whole people, then they are accounted laws.

"Yet these wicked men, after they have, by a most insatiable covetousness, divided that among themselves with which all the rest might have been
well supplied, are far from that happiness that is enjoyed among the Utopians; for the use as well as the desire of money being extinguished,
much anxiety and great occasions of mischief is cut off with it, and who does not see that the frauds, thefts, robberies, quarrels, tumults,
contentions, seditions, murders, treacheries, and witchcrafts, which are, indeed, rather punished than restrained by the severities of law, would
all fall off, if money were not any more valued by the world? Men's fears, solicitudes, cares, labours, and watchings would all perish in the
same moment with the value of money; even poverty itself, for the relief of which money seems most necessary, would fall."

Where has it ever been written in scripture that Zion needs money? Where does money even enter into a Zion economy? From what I can tell, money is a creation of Babylon and not even a useful commodity in Zion, where all things are had in common. The only purpose for money, then, must be for interactions with Babylon, a place where money is the only essential commodity for survival.

Is that too radical?

[simpleton]

""""""Where has it ever been written in scripture that Zion needs money? Where does money even enter into a Zion economy? From what I can tell, money is a creation of Babylon and not even a useful commodity in Zion, where all things are had in common. The only purpose for money, then, must be for interactions with Babylon, a place where money is the only essential commodity for survival.

Is that too radical?"""""""

Not radical at all, not even in the slightest. But we are so saturated in the Babylonian spirit that we cant even think otherwise. God give us this world to live on with everything literally for free. All he asked us to do is share it freely... But then along comes the usurper, Satan, and puts everything up for sale. ( That also comes from Nibley)..
Again back to the quote " the laborer in Zion that labors for money shall perish"
There is though throughout scriptures and revelations wherein God in dealing with his children respects the laws of unbelievers on the purchasing of lands and material things, or even of believers also. But whether money is completely eliminated or not in this future city of Zion, I do not know, but I kind of think so...

[iWriteStuff]

Do We "Make Merchandise" of Others' Necessity?

"To make merchandise of another's necessity is an offense to human dignity (though it is the basic principle of present-day employment practice).

"Particularly reprehensible in Israel was the withholding of lunch from the helpless, the best-known rule of all being that "thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn"—that is, to keep him from eating any (Deuteronomy 25:4). We are told that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah put nets over their trees to deny the birds their lunch, and "Abraham, seeing it, cursed them in the name of his God." The Ammonites and Moabites were under a special curse for having refused the Israelites, their enemies, bread and water while marching through their lands (Deuteronomy 23:4)—"aid and comfort to the enemy," indeed! The Iron Law of Wages may never be invoked in Moses' world: "Thou shalt not oppress an hired servant that is poor and needy," that is, by offering him the right to work on your terms (Deuteronomy 24:14). Some of Moses' laws would be quickly repealed by our present legislatures."

I'm still trying to figure this passage out. It seems like a harder requirement than the people of this day and age are willing to endure. The Israelites under the Law of Moses were not allowed to withhold basic human kindness under any circumstances whatsoever, even to enemies. All children of God were to be shown respect, even criminals and outcasts.

Do we still follow that principle?

[simpleton]

Do We "Make Merchandise" of Others' Necessity?

"To make merchandise of another's necessity is an offense to human dignity (though it is the basic principle of present-day employment practice).

"Particularly reprehensible in Israel was the withholding of lunch from the helpless, the best-known rule of all being that "thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn"—that is, to keep him from eating any (Deuteronomy 25:4). We are told that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah put nets over their trees to deny the birds their lunch, and "Abraham, seeing it, cursed them in the name of his God." The Ammonites and Moabites were under a special curse for having refused the Israelites, their enemies, bread and water while marching through their lands (Deuteronomy 23:4)—"aid and comfort to the enemy," indeed! The Iron Law of Wages may never be invoked in Moses' world: "Thou shalt not oppress an hired servant that is poor and needy," that is, by offering him the right to work on your terms (Deuteronomy 24:14). Some of Moses' laws would be quickly repealed by our present legislatures."

I'm still trying to figure this passage out. It seems like a harder requirement than the people of this day and age are willing to endure. The Israelites under the Law of Moses were not allowed to withhold basic human kindness under any circumstances whatsoever, even to enemies. All children of God were to be shown respect, even criminals and outcasts.

Do we still follow that principle?

Look at it this way we are so saturated with the spirit of Babylon that the above ideas, or rather eternal principles, are foreign to our minds. Everything is up for sale, Everything, even water mind you the most abundant temporal gift God has given us is being bottled and put up for sale. And in quite a few places even more expensive than gasoline.

[iWriteStuff]

Do We "Make Merchandise" of Others' Necessity?

"To make merchandise of another's necessity is an offense to human dignity (though it is the basic principle of present-day employment practice).

"Particularly reprehensible in Israel was the withholding of lunch from the helpless, the best-known rule of all being that "thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn"—that is, to keep him from eating any (Deuteronomy 25:4). We are told that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah put nets over their trees to deny the birds their lunch, and "Abraham, seeing it, cursed them in the name of his God." The Ammonites and Moabites were under a special curse for having refused the Israelites, their enemies, bread and water while marching through their lands (Deuteronomy 23:4)—"aid and comfort to the enemy," indeed! The Iron Law of Wages may never be invoked in Moses' world: "Thou shalt not oppress an hired servant that is poor and needy," that is, by offering him the right to work on your terms (Deuteronomy 24:14). Some of Moses' laws would be quickly repealed by our present legislatures."

I'm still trying to figure this passage out. It seems like a harder requirement than the people of this day and age are willing to endure. The Israelites under the Law of Moses were not allowed to withhold basic human kindness under any circumstances whatsoever, even to enemies. All children of God were to be shown respect, even criminals and outcasts.

Do we still follow that principle?

Look at it this way we are so saturated with the spirit of Babylon that the above ideas, or rather eternal principles, are foreign to our minds. Everything is up for sale, Everything, even water mind you the most abundant temporal gift God has given us is being bottled and put up for sale. And in quite a few places even more expensive than gasoline.

Good points - or look at how states have outlawed the collection of water in rain barrels that falls on your own property. Really? The government can claim everything that falls from the sky?

The ultimate sign of Babylon's reign is the monetization of everything. You can have anything in this world for money.

"Naturally if you don't want to spend your life in shallows and in miseries, the thing to do is to get into the upper brackets—no matter how, just so you get there. Ivan Boesky visited various college campuses preaching to the youth on the merits of what he called cultivating a "healthy greed." But it is before all else the terrifying assurance implicit in the smug free-lunch maxim that without money you are dead, while with it you can have anything in this world, that has turned everyone en masse almost overnight from whatever ideals and goals may have lingered from previous generations to one thing only."

[iWriteStuff]

Why Are We Here?

Playing a piano and making a piano are related, but in your short time on earth you can't do both. That's just the way it is. I'm not saying that temporal things are not important—they are indispensable. We must have them at the outset free of charge. Our welfare is a very important matter to God. And God has recognized that and has taken care of it. He picks up the tab and expects us not to concern ourselves with it, certainly not as constantly and exclusively as we do, or even give it priority. He supplies us with bodies free of charge and with their upkeep, also free of charge.

"Well, isn't this idealistic immaterialism quite unrealistic?" Indeed it is, for non-Latter-day Saints; it is simply laughable in the present world. Remember, what we regard as real and what the rest of the world regards as real are by no means the same thing. For us the great reality is the visitation of heavenly beings to the world. Nothing could be further from reality or distract one's mind further from cold, factual workaday realities of life than an angel with gold plates or a gold book. The Latter-day Saints will tell you a story that to them is perfectly real, whatever the world may think about it.

[simpleton]

IWriteStuff, you have been slacking upon this subject...☺ it has been a few days..


"In every dispensation of the gospel, the Lord has insisted on segregating his covenant people from the rest of the world: if they were not ready to "come out of her, [O] my people" (Revelation 18:4 - And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues) willingly, he saw to it that the world was more than willing to persecute and expel them. Two ways were placed before Adam, to see which one he would follow. Cain followed the one; Abel, and after him, Seth, the other. But soon Seth's posterity drifted over to the camp of Cain. Things being very bad, Enoch, the super-missionary, was sent out and was able "in [the] process of time" (Moses 7:21) to draw many after him into his city of Zion, which was then totally segregated from the rest of the world, pending the world's destruction. After the Flood, things went bad again, so that the call to Abraham was lech lecha - get out of here! And he kept moving all his days, forming his own society as he went, initiating all his followers into a special covenant with God. The law of Moses insists before all else that the Chosen People preserve their aloofness from the world by constant purification and instruction: the people must be qadosh, "sanctified," both words having the basic meaning of "cut off," "separated." God has always given his people the same choice of either living up to the covenants made with him or being in Satan's power; there is no middle ground (Moses 4:4). True, we spend this time of probation in a no-man's land between the two camps of salvation and damnation, but at every moment of the day and night we must be moving toward the one or the other. Progressive testing takes place along the way in either direction; the same tests in every dispensation and generation mark the progress of the people of God"
Hugh Nibley, Approaching Zion 342.

[Michelle]

Revelation 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Only in a consecrated society can we have what we need without buying or selling. A loophole in the law of the beast. Zion will come about not in spite of wickedness, but in response to it.

Opposition in all things.

The prophets aren't lying when they say it is a wonderful time in history to be alive. It truly is, and will be, the best of times, because it is also the worst of times.

[Kingdom of ZION]

Revelation 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Only in a consecrated society can we have what we need without buying or selling. A loophole in the law of the beast. Zion will come about not in spite of wickedness, but in response to it.

Opposition in all things.

The prophets aren't lying when they say it is a wonderful time in history to be alive. It truly is, and will be, the best of times, because it is also the worst of times.

I believe the power of the Beast will be centered in Europe. Their are two nation that are prophesied to not come under the power of the anti-Christ: Yesrael and Jordan (See Daniel). However, it appears that we are Yesrael's only friend and that since the winds of the eagle were broken off of the Lion, England (See Daniel), and then in Revelations, where John tells us of the combo beast (the kingdom that comes after the New World Order, and the wings of an Eagle are still missing, that we will not be apart of that 10 nation/kingdom beast.

Zion will come up as people gather (are shifed) separated like as in the wheat and the tars (final harvest), we will see and have the return of the Lost Tribes, and another Dispensation comes with more light, scriptures, additional Priesthoods (Phineas and Patriarchal) and the Elect are gathered on the very last day by the 144,000. And yes: You are right! They will be Glorious Times!

[iWriteStuff]

Revelation 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Only in a consecrated society can we have what we need without buying or selling. A loophole in the law of the beast. Zion will come about not in spite of wickedness, but in response to it.

Opposition in all things.

The prophets aren't lying when they say it is a wonderful time in history to be alive. It truly is, and will be, the best of times, because it is also the worst of times.

The above text, which I have enlarged, is perhaps one of the most succinct and accurate statements I've read in a while. Great observation!

I would also add that in addition to being the best of times and the worst of times, it is also the last of times.

I believe that the time is soon coming that choosing Zion won't just be a demonstration of faith - it will be necessary for survival.

[iWriteStuff]

Do We Choose Zion or Destruction?

What would the human drama be to us without an element of conflict and competition? We would find it insufferably dull. Who would exchange this for the pale and bloodless activities of Eden? In the Book of Mormon, the Nephites, the Jaredites, and the Jews at Jerusalem all walked straight to their certain destruction because they were helpless to conceive of acting in any other way. They were so completely captivated by one way of life that they could not conceive of any other. Laman and Lemuel saw nothing but visionary insanity in the teachings of their father and of their brother Nephi (1 Nephi 2:11). When Mormon suggested wisdom and restraint to the Nephites, they became hysterical and furious with him (Moroni 9:4-5). They were so hypnotized by the necessity of what they were doing that they didn't even let the fear of death deter them, he says.

The Jaredites fought to the last man for nothing, rather than change their ways. They were reduced to the nightmare of private shelters and total insecurity, and finally total destruction. This is what the Greeks called ate, the point of no return, beyond which it becomes impossible to change, and only one solution to a problem remains possible. You simply have to play out the play to the end the way you've been doing it.

I find this especially timely given recent events.... Will we change our warlike ways or will we cling to our "security" until we have qualified for destruction? The warning signs are there, if we have eyes to see them.

Have a great weekend, y'all!

[Michelle]

Today I was talking with my kids. We decided that forced cooperation (Satan's plan/Socialism/Communism) doesn't work. Competition (Capitalism) works better. But that Voluntary Cooperation works best (Zion.)

[Michelle]

I have been studying the Amish more and the thing that stands out the most to me is that they live so well the Law of Consecration.

They provide a real life example of how to live, in a practical way, the Law of Consecration and I think anybody interested in Zion should take a closer look.

I just finished this book and it is an excellent overview of their society from worship, to tragedy, to daily living, to service and forgiveness.

https://www.amazon.com/Amish-Peace-Simp ... mish+peace

Edit:
They are actually living what we, as Latter-day Saints, have been commanded live by modern prophets.

[iWriteStuff]

I have been studying the Amish more and the thing that stands out the most to me is that they live so well the Law of Consecration.

They provide a real life example of how to live, in a practical way, the Law of Consecration and I think anybody interested in Zion should take a closer look.

I just finished this book and it is an excellent overview of their society from worship, to tragedy, to daily living, to service and forgiveness.

https://www.amazon.com/Amish-Peace-Simp ... mish+peace

Edit:
They are actually living what we, as Latter-day Saints, have been commanded live by modern prophets.

Just added to my reading list! Thanks Michelle!