Tagged: spiritual warfare RSS

  • mormongandhi 22:44 on May 26, 2009 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , lucifer, , , premortal life, spiritual warfare, , , , weapons,   

    weapons in the war in heaven – mormon conflictology 

    direct violence

    So imagine for a minute, if you can, the war in heaven… I think quite a few of us are wondering: so how did we fight this war? All things earthly being in the likeness of what was first spiritual – with what weapons did we fight? was it solely a battle of ideas or did we have atomic bombs of spiritual proportions and rocket-missiles? or did we only have swords and shields with which we were maiming each other? did we suffer spiritual wounds?

    .

    the wounded angel

    the wounded angel

    .

    we must have had guns (if not bow and arrows), I mean, what would a war in heaven be without guns? and if not guns, perhaps we had light sabers? a real star wars? and perhaps we are suffering from spiritual post-traumatic stress disorder and we are all just very unnecessarily paranoid? can you blame us for seeing the enemy where ever we turn our way?

    .

    gender-based violence

    were women allowed to fight in the war in heaven? or were there children that they needed to take care of while the angels that are male were out doing the fighting? gender being part of our eternal identity, is fighting gender-neutral, if so why? if women were allowed to fight in heaven – and we do say that women are more in tune spiritually than what men are – were they better warriors than men? male physical strength posited against female spiritual strength makes men weaker spiritual warriors than what women were in heaven, so why do women have subordinate roles in most cultures on earth? are both genders equally able to make decisions of eternal consequences? if so, why do men tend to have control over family resources or have the last say in family decisions? what were the gender roles in heaven?

    if we were all brothers and sisters in heaven with equal standing, why are earthly family structures here on earth so important? or did we organize ourselves differently in heaven? did we have churches in heaven with male apostles, bishops, elders, and with female relief society presidents and young women leaders too? because without motherhood back in heaven, what other spiritual role did women play?

    .

    female angelic warriors for the plan of eternal peace

    female angelic warriors for the plan of eternal peace

    .

    cultural violence

    some say that we were co-creators in heaven of the earth on which we now dwell, as we are now co-creators with God. so was all the work done on drawing boards by architects and fashion designers, or in laboratories by biologists, chemists, meteorologists, doctors, surgeons? did we have social scientists, who came up with the different ways of organizing ourselves socially, as a test to how we could establish a just and ideal society on earth? did we debate socialism, liberal market democracies, theocracy, military dictatorships, parliamentary democracies, kingdoms, different types of religions in our pre-mortal university classes or were we actually using eternity to try those systems out? if we had all those different ways of organizing ourselves in heaven, how do we know today which one is the best way, since probably none of those ways of organizing ourselves in heaven have been realized in their perfect form on earth?

    .

    Jesus the warrior king

    Jesus the warrior king

    .

    did we have militaries in heaven? was Jesus a military leader with his heavenly hosts? did we have generals in heaven and was Lucifer a guerilla leader, a rebel leader, an agitator, a communist? what kind of pre-mortal being was Adolf Hitler and what plans did he make in heaven? how did he keep his first estate and how come nobody in heaven noticed what kind of guy he would become on earth? what kind of pre-mortal being was Winston Churchill? did he figure Hitler’s plan back then in heaven and he told somebody in charge: send me to England for damn sake, have you seen who they are sending to Germany?

    what kind of pre-mortal being was Mahatma Gandhi? he obviously knew that he would be fighting the evil British Empire, but did he already plan then how he would do that? was he sent to teach us that empire-building is not building God’s Kingdom on earth? was nonviolence a strategy we used in heaven to fight off Satan? weren’t the British ultimately also cast out of India and Pakistan? what if the war in heaven was actually a fight for freedom from occupation, from a heavenly evil empire established by rulers of the darkness in the spirit world, a revolution against spiritual wickedness in high places? but was it a nonviolent resistant fight?

    .

    structural violence

    did we have money in heaven? If so, did we have financial crises, unemployment, medical insurances? did we have banks in heaven? did we befriend Mammon in heaven too? if there was no money in heaven, why is money so important to us now, if it wasn’t important then? did we eat in heaven, or is that only necessary here on earth? and if we did eat in heaven, did we have food crises due to unequal distribution of scarce food resources? were resources scarce in heaven or is this a problem that we only first encounter now on earth? turns out that spiritual talents were unequally distributed as well, or were they? or is it just that the way we have organized ourselves here on earth stands in the way of all of us fulfilling our true potentials?

    actually – perhaps we just lived in a state of perfect bliss in heaven. If so, why was there a war and with what weapons did we fight that war? and the questions go on and on for eternities, like many other LDS blogs do when it comes to speculating about the conditions of our premortal existence – without asking questions that really challenge us.

    .

    who is on the lord’s side, who?

    perhaps our pre-conceived ideas and notions of how life was in heaven prevents us from organizing ourselves in such a way on earth that we all become partakers of the heavenly gift – the eternal gift of life? should that be the case, we become in mormonism perpetrators of cultural violence and structural violence. The day will come when we will have to explain to Him – the Shepherd of our souls – our attitudes and our behaviors towards the other  (those spiritual attitudes and behaviors that possessed us when we died) and the conditions that we created for the other in consequence of those attitudes and behaviors, and He will ask: ‘on which side were you really fighting?’

    on which side were you really fighting?

    on which side were you really fighting?

     

  • mormongandhi 13:28 on May 16, 2009 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: angels, , , , , , , , , , , , , spiritual warfare, ,   

    a lost and fallen people – mormon conflictology 

    .

    What does the scripture mean, which saith that God placed cherubim and a flaming sword on the east of the garden of Eden, lest our first parents should enter and partake of the fruit of the tree of life, and live forever? And thus we see that there was no possible chance that they should live forever. Now Alma said unto him: This is the thing which I was about to explain. Now we see that Adam did fall by the partaking of the forbidden fruit, according to the word of God; and thus we see, that by his fall, all mankind became a lost and fallen people.

    .

    __________________________________

    .

    In the war in heaven – mormon conflictology, it is made clear that the outcome of that mighty war, that battle of wills, was in mere fact the prolongation of that war here on earth. Nephi teaches that without the Atonement of Christ ‘our spirits must have become like unto [the devil], and we [would have] become devils, angels to a devil, to be shut out from the presence of our God, and to remain with the father of lies, in misery, like unto himself; yea, to that being who beguiled our first parents, who transformeth himself nigh unto an angel of light, and stirreth up the children of men unto secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness’ (2 Nephi 9:9). So, according to the Book of Mormon, the enemy’s plan is clear and the end he seeks is also made bare for all to see.

    Lucifer and his angels, as enemies to God and to His righteousness, are seeking to make the entire posterity of Adam and Eve as miserable as they themselves had become. The question emanating from such a belief must be the following: what are the means by which these fallen angels may achieve their ends, and what are the ends achieved through those means? What are the weapons with which they fight? I make three propositions based on Galtung’s ABC triangle of violence/peace:

    .

    ABC triangle - triangle of conflict

    .

    A. Cultural Violence – negative attitudes towards the other

    Means: hatred, pride, fear-mongering, demonizing the other, us versus them, group-thinking, mocking, bullying, lies, secrecy

    Ends: Keeping God’s children from uniting and ensuring that they are kept for ever ignorant from more truth and knowledge

    And I also cast my eyes round about, and beheld, on the other side of the river of water, a great and spacious building; … And it was filled with people, both old and young, both male and female; and their manner of dress was exceedingly fine; and they were in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit. And after they had tasted of the fruit they were ashamed, because of those that were scoffing at them; and they fell away into forbidden paths and were lost.

    .

    Lehi's dream

    Lehi's dream

    .

    B. Direct Violence – destructive behavior toward the other

    Means: war, destruction, rape, violent conflict, fighting, killing, maiming, torture, bombs, tanks, guns, armies and navies

    Ends: shortening the probationary state of human beings and thus take away from them the opportunity to repent, to change their ways, before being judged by God

    And the children of men were numerous upon all the face of the land. And in those days Satan had great dominion among men, and raged in their hearts; and from thenceforth came wars and bloodshed; and a man’s hand was against his own brother (and sister, and his brother’s and sister’s son and daughter) in administering death, because of secret works, seeking for power.

    .

    dead-civil-war-soldiers

    .

    C. Structural Violence – oppressive conditions toward the other

    Means: systemic injustice, inequality, oppression, colonialism, economic exploitation (gold and silver), imperialism,  patriarchy, denial of basic human rights, food security, power, greed, tyranny

    Ends: creating and maintaining inequality and perpetuating temporal and spiritual misery

    Yea, he saw great inequality among the people, some lifting themselves up with their pride, despising others, turning their backs upon the needy and the naked and those who were hungry, and those who were athirst, and those who were sick and afflicted. And thus we see how great the inequality of man is which comes by the cunning plans of the devil which he hath devised to ensnare the hearts of men.

    .

    Inequality

    Inequality

    .

    Found out more about LDS counter strategies in the article mormon peacebuilding – who is the keeper at the gate?. If you are curious about what the flaming sword and the cherubim meant, the answer is to be found at the bottom of that article.

     

    • Angel Palmoni 08:44 on June 11, 2009 Permalink | Reply

      Impressive article, I quite enjoyed it! Keep up the writing! So how far are we all along in the process of making our calling and elections sure? Sure would be nice, of course in the world today one would almost have to be a hermit to achieve the required level of obedience. Or maybe just repent real fast lol.

      web.me.com/angelpalmoni

  • mormongandhi 16:02 on May 3, 2009 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , laws, , , , , peacemakers, , , spiritual warfare, , , warriors   

    “the kingdom of god or nothing” – mormon civil disobedience 

    .

    Polygamists in striped prison uniforms, including George Q. Cannon (center with cane). These men were also known as "Prisoners of Conscience."

    Polygamists in striped prison uniforms, including George Q. Cannon (center with cane). These men were also known as "Prisoners of Conscience."

    .

    John Taylor, the third president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, gave the sermon The Kingdom of God or Nothing as an Apostle on 1 November 1857, in the Tabernacle in Salt Lake City. Taylor was concerned with the rights of the Saints after having been driven from state to state, but explained congruously the rationale behind a people devoted to the establishment of God’s Kingdom on earth. The Saints had lived for approximately a decade in the Salt Lake valley, when yet again the American government  for various reasons, many of them politically expedient, instigated a sort of crisis against the Mormon settlers in the 1850s. John Taylor is recorded having said the following in the Journal of Discourses:

    “Was the kingdom that the Prophets talked about, that should be set up in the latter times, going to be a Church? Yes. And a State? Yes, it was going to be both Church and State, to rule both temporarily and spiritually. It may be asked, How can we live under the dominion and laws of the United States and be subjects of another kingdom? Because the kingdom of God is higher, and its laws are so much more exalted than those of any other nation, that it is the easiest thing in life for a servant of God to keep any of their laws; and, as I have said before, this we have uniformly done’.

    .

    if the law is itself clearly unjust

    Henry David Thoreau and many with him believe that in the contrary, that if the Saints were to be subjects of a higher law, that of the Kingdom of Christ, they would most probably at times come at odds with the laws of the nation-state in which they were to live. If the law is itself clearly unjust, and the lawmaking process is not designed to quickly obliterate such unjust laws, then Thoreau says the law deserves no respect and it should be broken. In the case of the United States the Constitution itself enshrined the institution of slavery, and therefore falls under this condemnation. Abolitionists, in Thoreau’s opinion, should completely withdraw their support of the government and stop paying taxes, even if this means courting imprisonment:

    “Under a government which imprisons unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.… where the State places those who are not with her, but against her, – the only house in a slave State in which a free man can abide with honor.… Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will not hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men were not to pay their tax bills this year, that would not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any such is possible”.

    .

    the choice between nonviolence and nonexistence

    =   the Kingdom of God or nothing

    Latter-day Saints are conscious that, ‘if you have not chosen the Kingdom of God first, it will in the end make no difference what you have chosen instead.’ In my mind, ‘the Kingdom of God or nothing’ resonates with Martin Luther King’s declaration that ‘we live in a time and age, where we have the choice between nonviolence and nonexistence’. Andrew Bolton, looking at the history of the LDS movement, supposes: ‘What if the Mormons – with all their visionary leadership, their positive Zion-building energy, their organizational and administrative genius, and their opportunity for a frontier haven – had responded from strength with nonviolent love? Would they have failed miserably, losing their lives and their vision? Or would they have transformed the world?’

    Were the Saints to defend themselves in 1857? The idea of non-resistance was not foreign to the Saints back then. John Taylor indeed touches upon the subject: ‘Does an army come to make war on us? We acknowledge the hand of God in it. We feel that we are in his hands, and say, “It is the Lord; let him do what seemeth good unto him, and we will seek to do what is right on our part. Have we to go to war? We will acknowledge the hand of God in it. If we are told not to kill our enemies, we will not kill them, but cultivate a spirit of meekness and humility, doing what the Priesthood of God dictates—what the servants of the living God tell us. In peace and prosperity, war and adversity, we will lean on the hand of God, and acknowledge, it, and say, “Hallelujah! the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth.”

    .

    how can his kingdom ever be established?

    In a sense, there is a sort of pragmatism that is non-pragmatic in John Taylor’s sermon. The Saints must do what the servants of God would tell them, be it to go to war or not to resist the attacks of the enemy. For what was of most importance for the Saints was the establishment of God’s Kingdom on Earth, and in order to do so, they would have to listen and obey the words of the Prophet – scrupulously:

    ‘If there cannot be a people anywhere found that will listen to the word of God and receive instructions from him, how can his kingdom ever be established? It is impossible. What is the first thing necessary to the establishment of his kingdom? It is to raise up a Prophet and have him declare the will of God; the next is to have people yield obedience to the word of the Lord through that Prophet. If you cannot have these, you never can establish the kingdom of God upon the earth. What is the kingdom of God? It is God’s government upon the earth and in heaven’.

    .

    God's Army (april 2000)

    God's Army (april 2000)

    .

    The early Saints were fearless in their rhetoric and in their actions, and very conscious of their rights under the law, but perhaps more importantly they had the conviction necessary and the ‘sacred rage’ that one would expect of religious militants. John Taylor affirmed:

    “Are you not afraid of being killed?” you may ask me. No. Great conscience! who cares about being killed? They cannot kill you. They may shoot a ball into you, and your body may fall; but you will live. Who cares about dying? We are associated with eternal principles: they are within us as a well springing up to eternal life. We have begun to live for ever’. Did not Jesus also say: And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. (Matt. 10:28)

    And if the following words were those of a nonviolent believer, of a latter day satyagrahi, wouldn’t you also think twice before attacking? ’Who would be afraid of a poor, miserable soldier—a man that gets eight dollars a month for killing people, and a miserable butcher at that—one of the poorest curses in creation? Mean as the Americans are, they will not, many of them, hire for soldiers. But the Government must hire foreigners for eight dollars a month to come out here to kill us! Who is afraid of them? Let them come on or stay and wiggle, it is all right. We are the Saints of God; we have the kingdom of God, and the devils in hell and all the wicked men on the earth cannot take it from us. [...] They may fight against us, if they like, or they can back out and leave us; but the kingdom will go on. They may take what course they please: the kingdom is ours, and we are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s’.

    .

    acquiring the right of civil disobedience

    When using satyagraha in a large-scale political conflict involving civil disobedience, Gandhi believed that the satyagrahis must undergo training to ensure discipline. He wrote that “only when a people have proved their active loyalty by obeying the many laws of the State that they acquire the right of Civil Disobedience.” This obedience has to be not merely grudging, but extraordinary (see mormongandhi article on being subject to kings, rulers, presidents and magistrates). He therefore made part of the discipline that satyagrahis:

    - appreciate the other laws of the State and obey them voluntarily

    - tolerate these laws, even when they are inconvenient

    - be willing to undergo suffering, loss of property, and to endure the suffering that might be inflicted on family and friends.

    Taylor in his sermon surely makes a good case as to whether the Saints qualified for a campaign of civil disobedience as a people, if Gandhi’s rule above were to apply (see also article on Mormons and Civil Disobedience):

    ‘And now, having been forced from the United States, after having been driven time and time again from our homes by our murderous enemies—having fulfilled all the requirements that God or man could require of us, and kept every law necessary for us to observe,—after all this, and more, I say, shall we suffer those poor, miserable, damned, infernal scoundrels to come here and infringe upon our sacred rights?

    ["No!" resounded throughout the Tabernacle, making the walls of the building tremble.]

    NO! It shall be “The kingdom of God or nothing” with us’.

     

c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
esc
cancel