Bored with the Facsimiles?
So, you have scoured over the facsimiles in the Book of Abraham and have gleaned all possible knowledge from them. Malaise sets in as you realize that you have gone as far as any mortal can. Well, my friend, you are in luck today. In 1847, the Millennial Star (vol. 9 pg. 23-24) carried a diagram of the mysteries of Godliness, including substantial commentary. Behold!
The text is steeped in primitive LDS notions of exaltation, which are rather uncommon in the modern church. Images of the original document are available here. The following are highlights from the explanatory text:
The eternal Father sits at the head, crowned King of kings and Lord of lords. Where-ever the other lines meet, there sits a king and a priest unto God, bearing rule, authority, and dominion under the Father.
…and such as do the will of the Father, the same are his mothers, sisters, and brothers. He that has been faithful over a few things, will be made ruler over many things. He that hath been faithful over ten talents, shall have dominion over ten cities…It will be seen by the above diagram that there are kingdoms of all sizes, an infinite variety to suit all grades of merit and ability.
The chosen vessels unto God are the kings and priests that are placed at the head of these kingdoms. These have received their washing and anointings in the temple of God on this earth; they have been chosen, ordained, and anointed kings and priests, to reign as such in the resurrection of the just. Such as have not received the fullness of the priesthood, (for the fullness of the priesthood includes the authority of both king and priest) and have not been anointed and ordained in the temple of the Most High, may obtain salvation in the celestial kingdom, but not a celestial crown. Many are called to enjoy a celestial glory, yet few are chosen to wear a celestial crown, or rather, to be rulers in the celestial kingdom.
Regrettably, I am unable to determine who the artist and author were. Any help in this area would be appreciated.
Orson Hyde describing the program of priesthood adoption. I’ve been sitting on a lot of material about that which I will post….. some day.
Comment by Jeffrey Giliam — 6/14/2005 @ 4:36 pm
Jeffrey, do you have a source for the attribution?
Comment by J. Stapley — 6/14/2005 @ 5:05 pm
There is mention of it in The Words of Joseph Smith. I think the original source in the M* said it was from Hyde didn’t it? See also here.
Comment by Jeffrey Giliam — 6/14/2005 @ 5:15 pm
The first time I saw the diagram, I saw a scary-looking, one-legged winged monkey.
I think Hyde is traditionally credited as the writer since the piece is unsigned and he was the Star’s editor at the time. I don’t know that there is direct evidence that he was the artist but that seems to be the common assumption.
On another note, I recall that Lance Owens tried to draw parallels between the Kabbalistic Tree of the Sefirot and the above diagram in the course of his Dialogue article on Joseph Smith and Kabbalah. I wasn’t too convinced.
Comment by Justin — 6/14/2005 @ 5:24 pm
I don’t buy it either. What it’s trying to explain is that each person needs a Priesthood father which will form the chain going back to Adam and God through Joseph and his apostles. Since we can have only one priesthood father, but a father can have many sons, it will look like a tree, a family tree to be exact. This explains the shape of the diagram.
Comment by Jeffrey Giliam — 6/14/2005 @ 5:41 pm
Potentially a Mormon Rorschach test? One legged winged monkey?…hmmm.
Comment by J. Stapley — 6/14/2005 @ 5:45 pm
I saw the one-legged winged monkey too. But then I saw some parallels to some diagrams by Goethe, though his conception was circular and certainly kabbalistic.
Comment by john fowles — 6/14/2005 @ 7:11 pm
http://letusreason.blogspot.com/2004/04/orson-hyde-on-kingdom-of-god.html
http://www.aliveonline.com/grasshopper/hyde_diagram.html
Comment by Grasshopper — 6/15/2005 @ 1:53 am
The first time I saw the diagram, I saw a scary-looking, one-legged winged monkey.
I’m assuming the monkey was part of the artwork, and not a diagram-induced hallucination.
I saw the one-legged winged monkey too.
This could get scary if everyone who sees the diagram starts to have the same diagram-induced monkey hallucination.
It’s late.
Comment by S. Hancock — 6/15/2005 @ 3:00 am
Is this where Nu-skin got its marketing plan, or was that Ponzi?
Comment by Scott — 6/15/2005 @ 7:37 am
Or, how fractal geometry relates to the gospel. Impress your friends in priesthood by bringing in esoteric mathematics and the Journal of Discourses.
Comment by Clark Goble — 6/15/2005 @ 11:07 am
Oh, OK, I see the monkey now too. It’s catching. (It could also be a sick Christmas tree with a dead monkey head instead of a Star.) Also, in what way can this particular set of lines aspire to the lofty designation of diagram?
Comment by S. Hancock — 6/15/2005 @ 1:46 pm
It’s JS’ way of saying “gotcha.”
Comment by Henry S — 6/26/2005 @ 10:08 pm