Two Jerusalems

ROBERT J. MATTHEWS AND THE NEW JERUSALEM

"The New Jerusalem is mentioned in the Book of Revelation but it does not define where that New Jerusalem will be.  It does say it will be in the last days, associated with the Millennium, but you get the idea, from reading the Bible only that the New Jerusalem is the old Jerusalem rebuilt and made new again.  I like Ether 13:5-6 where a clarification is given concerning of this:

5. And he spake also concerning the house of Israel, and the Jerusalem from whence Lehi should come (that is, Jerusalem in the Middle East) —after it should be destroyed it should be built up again, a holy city unto the Lord; wherefore, it could not be a new Jerusalem for it had been in a time of old; but it should be built up again, and become a holy city of the Lord; and it should be built unto the house of Israel—(Jacob's name was changed to Israel)

6. And that a New Jerusalem should be built up upon this land, unto the remnant of the seed of Joseph, for which things there has been a type.

Then concerning this type, we are told in 3rd Nephi 20:22, (Jesus is speaking):

22. And behold, this people will I establish in this land, unto the fulfilling of the covenant which I made with your father Jacob; and it shall be a New Jerusalem. And the powers of heaven shall be in the midst of this people; yea, even I will be in the midst of you.

So that covenant was made to Jacob, father of the Twelve Tribes.  We don't always realize that the New Jerusalem has been known from way back in Old Testament times.

The Bible indicates there will be a New Jerusalem but it does not define it.  The Book of Mormon indicates in 3rd Nephi, just read and in Ether 13, also just read, that it will be in America, but it takes the Doctrine and Covenants to define it little by little, until D&C 57:3 which reads:

 

3. And thus saith the Lord your God, if you will receive wisdom here is wisdom. Behold, the place which is now called Independence (Missouri) is the center place; and a spot for the temple is lying westward, upon a lot which is not far from the courthouse. (That's a geography lesson of the highest order).  

We all know this beautiful hymn, The Holy City, which is sung at Easter and Christmas. (Recently sung by the tenor Stanford Olsen at Pres. Monson's birthday celebration at the Conference Center)  It is a wonderful song, but it wasn't written by a Latter-day Saint.  If you listen to the lyrics it talks about the New Jerusalem, the Holy City, coming down out of heaven, joined with the Jerusalem in the Middle East.  I like the song and particularly the melody but can't accept the doctrine, because it doesn't make two Jerusalem's."(From a BYU panel discussion on the Book of Ether)

Life

THE NEW JERUSALEM AND THE MILLENNIUM (McConkie & Millet)

"True, no man knows or shall know the day or the hour of our Lord's return; that knowledge is retained in the bosom of heaven, for good and sufficient reasons. But all men may read the signs of the times… They also know there are many things yet to be done before earth's rightful King comes to change the kingdoms of this world into the kingdom of our God and of his Christ. One of these is the building of the New Jerusalem in Jackson County, Missouri."  {Zion and the New Jerusalem, Bruce R. McConkie, New Witness for the Articles of Faith (1985)}

"It should be obvious that Satan's final conquest over the souls of men at the end of the Millennium will be limited to mortals. Exalted, immortal beings—those who have been changed in the twinkling of an eye, or resurrected personages who minister on earth from time to time—cannot fall, cannot apostatize. Their salvation is secure. The father of lies will thus have his way only among those living during the final years of the Millennium, those who have not arrived at the age of one hundred.

 Those who choose to reject the Lord and his plan at this late date do so against the light of heaven; they in essence say that the sun does not shine while they see it. They are thus consigned hereafter to a kingdom of no glory as sons of perdition.  "It is easy in our busy and complex world to become ensnared by programs, points of view, and ways of life that have no lasting value, no everlasting import. We are eternal beings involved in a mortal experience, and one of the tasks of this estate is to see to it that we do not become preoccupied with that which is wholly temporal, In a not too distant day, the light of the great Millennium will dawn, and things will be very different on this earth.

When the Lord of Sabaoth, the Lord of Hosts, literally the Lord of armies, returns in glory, every corruptible thing will be destroyed. "The presence of the Lord shall be as the melting fire that burneth, and as the fire which causeth the waters to boil. . . . It will be a selective burning, for those who are of a celestial or a terrestrial state or order shall abide the day; all else will be cleansed from the surface of this planet… The Second Coming in glory is 'the end of the world,' meaning the worldly…" Life in the Millennium Robert L. Millet.

The Holy Ghost

THE GOSPEL TEACHER

"The Holy Ghost is the converter.  The gospel teacher has much to do in the preparation of the lesson, the search of the scriptures, the declaration of the truth; but the Holy Ghost is the converter.  The Gospel teacher must never forget this.  He or she must never seek to usurp the role of the Spirit nor upstage Him whose influence results in renewal and righteousness.  The person who bears pure testimony never seeks for cheap substitutes for the Spirit.

He never relies upon methodologies which might confuse sentimentality with spirituality, emotional display with edification.  His witness is more than story and his testimony is more than an expression of gratitude.  He tries the virtue of the word of God (Alma 31:5), trusts in the power of the scriptures, and the words of the prophets to penetrate to the heart of his listeners and bears witness of his message with sincerity and with soberness." (Joseph Fielding McConkie and Robert L. Millet, The Holy Ghost, pgs. 119-120)

Then from the August 2013 Ensign, by Jack Lyon, pgs. 67-68 we read, "A Sunday School teacher asks, 'Who were the first two people on earth?'  She looks expectantly over her class of teenagers, but no hands go up. The class members look down at their feet or leaf idly through their scriptures.  'It's a simple question,' the teacher says.  'Doesn't anyone know the answer?'

Next door, in the Gospel Doctrine class, the teacher asks, 'What is the most important principle of the gospel?'  A sister timidly raises her hand. 'Faith?' she asks.  That's a great response,' the teacher replies, but not quite what I'm looking for.  Anyone else?'

Silence.

Teachers ask questions because they want to involve class members in their lessons.  They understand that students who are involved learn more than those who just sit and listen.  But questions like those above generally don't work.

'Who were the first two people on earth?' is an ineffective question because the answer is so obvious that no one wants to respond - or sees a need to. 

'What is the most important principle of the gospel?' is also an ineffective question.  No one knows the answer the teacher is looking for, except the teacher, who is essentially saying, 'Guess what I'm thinking.'

These are questions of fact; each has a specific answer.  But great classroom discussions come from a different type of question - oddly enough, from questions without a specific answer.  That is the key.

If you're a teacher of an adult class, you might ask, 'What principle of the gospel has been most important in your life and why?'  Class members will probably pause to think about their experiences and that's OK.  If you relax and wait a few seconds, hands will start going up and you'll hear about real, heartfelt experiences people have had with the gospel.  You'll also notice that one person's comments will spark comments from others.  Before long, the class will be having an interesting and inspiring discussion!

If you want the class to have a discussion about something specific like faith, consider saying something like this: 'Today we'll be talking about faith, the first principle of the gospel.'  Then ask a question about faith that doesn't have a specific answer such as:

1. 'What part has faith played in your life?'

2. 'Why do you think the Lord wants us to have faith?

3. 'What are some ways we can increase our faith?'

…There's an added benefit to asking open-ended questions:

Even class members who don't add to the discussion will be thinking about the questions.  Their understanding and testimony may grow even though they haven't said anything.