Christmas Reflections, 2011



"Adoration of the Wise Men," Murillo, 17th ct.

It’s Christmas Eve in midtown Manhattan. My wife has just returned from picking up some sundries at a local clothing store, where she was mistreated by staff, and actually held by the shoulders and repositioned out of the way, by one fellow on a quest for bargains. “New York is a rough place on Christmas Eve,” she told me on her return, and so it is.

There has certainly been a manic feel in the air over the last week or so. Yesterday I passed a fellow while crossing 57^th Street at 6^th Avenue. In that strange modern custom whereby people advertise the most intimate details of their lives to total strangers as they yell into their mobile phones, I heard this gentleman shouting, “It’s crazy! Out of control! I just spent $600 on gifts . . .” before he walked out of range.

Again, so it is, crazy and out of control. It is a commonplace observation to note that Christmas has become overly commercialized. But distortions always have something that they are distorted from, so we might well look to see what is the pure impulse that is at the heart of this holiday that has become so identified with heavy expenditure. And here we find something to ponder. For although buying is not at the real heart of the holiday, giving is.

The late Gordon B. Hinckley, then the second counselor in the First Presidency of the LDS Church, had this to say about the meaning of Christmas:

Christmas means giving. The Father gave his Son, and the Son gave his life. Without giving there is no true Christmas, and without sacrifice there is no true worship. There is more to Christmas than neckties, earrings, toys, and all the tinseled stuff of which we make so much. (“‘What Shall I Do Then with Jesus Which Is Called Christ?’,” December 1983 Ensign, emphasis in original)

The traditional interpretation that Latter-day Saints make is that Jesus was actually born on the ancient equivalent of April 6, 1 bc, and that Jesus was crucified on the same date in 33 ad. So it is that the day of Jesus’ birth marks his Father’s gift to us, and the day of his death marks the gift to all humanity of the Atonement of Christ—and it is the same day.

The world knows little of this. For the world at large, the whole gift-giving-at-Christmas meme begins with the arrival of the Wise Men, the Magi, who came to adore the infant Jesus, and bestowed upon him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. This moment has been immortalized in uncounted works of art through the centuries, such as the 17^th century work by Murillo shown above.

So what does that all mean for us? What is it that we are to learn from all this collection of gift-giving, giving that is conducted even on a cosmic scale? Perhaps we can learn something from Murillo’s painting, above.

There is Jesus in a manger, attended by his mother Mary and Joseph. There are no supernatural elements in the painting, no nimbus of glory here that says This child is the Savior of the world. (Well, maybe there’s the tiniest hint of a nimbus about baby Jesus’ head. But I’m guessing that no one is really noticing this.)

To someone completely ignorant about Christianity, this looks like quite the curious visit: some extraordinarily well-dressed, well-to-do individuals, heavily guarded (see the pointy spears) and laden with some very serious bling (note the jewel-encrusted gold box at the foot of the manger), who have visited a very ordinary-looking family in the humblest of circumstances. (The place surrounding the manger has collapsed timbers and disordered stonework.)

Now, we who know the account in the New Testament know why these powerful individuals were visiting this family of seeming nobodies. The Wise Men possessed special knowledge that this was Someone Special. And that is what prompted everything: the long and arduous journey, the expensive gifts, the danger.

But let’s consider this. Latter-day Saints, too, possess special knowledge. We know that the people we pass by each day are not nobodies; each one of them is a literal Child of God, with a divine birthright that includes the potential of veritable exaltation to godhood. That’s everybody, including the people who live beneath bridges, or huddle in the cold in doorways and alleys just off the street.

So here’s my thought, my suggestion for acting out the spirit of giving in a Magi-like way: Bring some gift to the homeless tonight or tomorrow. Pizza works very nicely, take-out sandwiches, food of just about any kind, really. Orange juice or simply pure bottled water. In many cases, baby food. Yes, you may well be working outside of your comfort zone to do this. (On the other hand, I’m sure the whole journey-across-the-desert-sands thing was a bit uncomfortable for the original Magi, too.)

Twenty centuries ago, God gave us His Son as the ultimate Christmas present. That baby was honored by some of the greatest people of that generation, even though he was in a smelly stable, born to a poor family. (In a way, for that night at least, Jesus Himself was homeless.) It would be a particularly appropriate way of commemorating that birth to go bring gifts to those whom the world least honors, for each of them is also a Child of God.

As President Hinckley continued:

Christmas means giving—and “the gift without the giver is bare.” Giving of self; giving of substance; giving of heart and mind and strength in assisting those in need and in spreading the cause of His eternal truth—these are of the very essence of the true spirit of Christmas.

Merry Christmas.

Copyright 2011 Mark E. Koltko-Rivera. All Rights Reserved.

[If you like what you read here, do think about becoming an official member or follower of this blog.]

[The image is a reproduction of the painting “Adoration of the Wise Men,” by Bartolomé Esteban Murillo (1617-1682). The image is in the public domain, and was obtained through Wikipedia.]

Last Chance! "Hunting The Lost Symbol" on Discovery Channel, Today

The documentary "Hunting The Lost Symbol" will be broadcast today, Sunday, November 1, on Discovery Channel, from 4 pm to 6 pm (Eastern time; check your local listings).


Of course, this documentary focuses on Dan Brown's new novel, The Lost Symbol. There are prominent segments about George Washington, the missing cornerstone to the U.S. Capitol building, Freemasonry, noetic science, Aleister Crowley (mentioned in the novel as an inspiration for the villain), and other topics related to the novel. I myself am one of several experts who are interviewed for the documentary.

The issue of particular interest to Latter-day Saints involves a segment where I discuss Dan Brown's concept of apotheosis--humans becoming gods--and relate that to the LDS doctrine of exaltation. (I was disappointed that the editor cut out my identifying myself as a Latter-day Saint, but such is life.) Dan Brown's novel puts this concept in front of tens of millions of people; this documentary is putting it in front of a few millions more. Enjoy.

Salt Lake Tribune Article on The Lost Symbol Discusses the LDS and Freemasonry

Two articles by Ms. Peggy Fletcher Stack in the Friday, October 16, 2009 issue of The Salt Lake Tribune discuss Dan Brown’s new novel The Lost Symbol, and along the way highlight some of the controversial history that connects Freemasonry with the Nauvoo period of LDS history.

In one article, “Psst! Let’s Talk About Masons,” Ms. Stack writes about Freemasonry as it is depicted in The Lost Symbol, and describes aspects of her visit to the Salt Lake Masonic Temple. She quotes John C. Liley (Senior Grand Warden of the Grand Lodge of Utah), Dan Burstein (editor of the forthcoming Secrets of The Lost Symbol), and myself. (I describe my reaction to this article as a Freemason in a post on another blog.)

The LDS connection shows up in another article in this issue, “Mormons Off the Hook in Brown’s Book.” (I am quoted in this article, as well.) Ms. Stack notes that a major theme of The Lost Symbol, apotheosis, or the potential for human beings to become gods, is an echo of the LDS doctrine of exaltation. (I consider this matter in some detail in an earlier post on this blog.) Then she turns to the topic of Masons and Mormons.

Ms. Stack touches briefly on the complicated history of relations between the Latter-day Saints and the Masonic Grand Lodge of Illinois in the early 1840s. She mentions one of the great hairy issues still unresolved from the period, the matter of the relationship between the Masonic rituals of initiation and the Latter-day Saint temple endowment ceremony.

Perhaps it’s just me—I’m sensitized to both sides of the issue, being a Latter-day Saint Freemason, or a Masonic Mormon, take your pick—but I think I’ve seen the profile of this issue slowly rising over the last decade or so. The Latter-day Saints have seen about a 50% increase in membership during this period. The overall number of Masons in the USA and worldwide has dropped during this period (as it unavoidably must, with the passing of the WWII generation of Masons); however, the last six years or so (roughly since the publication of The Da Vinci Code, where Dan Brown mentioned Freemasonry, and since the release of the first National Treasure movie, where Masons are prominently featured), Masonic Lodges around the country have seen an increase in the number of applications. Perhaps the growth of new members in both organizations is why a variety of people—anti-Mormons, anti-Masons, Masons and Saints, and the curious John Q. Public—have shown more interest in the whole Mormon-Mason thing.

I have been writing a book on this issue for some time. Perhaps I need to blog about it as well. It’s a complicated issue, but one concerning which it would be wise for Latter-day Saints to educate themselves, given the certainly rising profiles of Freemasonry and the Latter-day Saints separately, and the possibly rising profile of their long-ago association. For the record, I’ll just throw out a few points:

• This is my reconstruction of events. Over the course of his life, the Prophet Joseph Smith on several occasions encountered some spiritual text, and then received a vision that represented a major development of LDS doctrine and/or practice. Thus, his reading of the letter of James in the New Testament preceded his cataclysmic First Vision of the Father and the Son; his study of a passage in the Gospels preceded his Vision of the Three Degrees of Glory; his viewing of some Egyptian papyri, as these were traveling the country as part of an exhibition, preceded his translation of the Book of Abraham. In my opinion, his exposure to Masonic rituals preceded a vision in which he received the LDS Temple endowment.

• The Masonic rituals of initiation and the LDS temple rituals differ in purpose, form, and mythic setting. What similarities there are, are minimal. Joseph Smith did not steal from the Lodge to give to the LDS Temple.

• The politics of Illinois during this period provoked all sorts of anti-LDS violence. There may well have been Masons in the crowd that assassinated Smith. However, overall, the Lodge is not inherently anti-Mormon, either.

In recent years, I have been disappointed to read some LDS authors repeat some long-held shibboleths regarding Joseph Smith’s involvement in Freemasonry, claiming that Smith was hardly exposed to Masonry, etc. etc. In fact, we know the following.

• In the late 1820s and early 1830s, the beginning of the Anti-Masonic period of American history, there were many public performances of Masonic ritual put on by anti-Masons, precisely in the upstate New York locales where Joseph Smith lived. (This is what the world was like before movies, radio, and television.)

• Joseph Smith’s entry into Masonry was a big public event. His involvement in the procedings was noted in the media, and was exceptionally prominent.

• The Nauvoo Lodge, in the founding of which Joseph Smith was involved, grew so quickly that its irregular procedures became the subject of Masonic investigation.

My own observation is that many Latter-day Saints get qwinky when the subject of Freemasonry comes up. Maybe this is because the modern LDS know so very little about Freemasonry. Maybe this is because, until the mid-1980s, there was a legacy of mutual distrust between the Masons of Utah and the Saints. Maybe this is because the anti-Mormon literature has always made hay out of the Mason-Mormon connection.

For whatever reason, the time has come to get past it all. Freemasonry is an honorable fraternal organization that spreads good values, a claim that I have made publicly in many places. (I write a blog for Freemasons here. Freemasonry is a frequent topic on my Dan Brown-related blog.) We Latter-day Saints have nothing to fear from an honest consideration of the relationship between Freemasonry and the Nauvoo Saints. What I have labeled above as ‘my reconstruction of events’ is a way to understand the relationship between Masonic ritual and LDS temple ceremonial in a way that fits the facts of history, promotes LDS faith, protects the sanctity of the LDS Temple, and maintains the dignity of both the Church and the Lodge.

(Copyright 2009 Mark E. Koltko-Rivera. All Rights Reserved.)

The Conclusion of Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol and the LDS Doctrine of Exaltation

[Spoiler Alert: In this blog post, I reveal the conclusion of The Lost Symbol. The major "thriller" plot is resolved before the conclusion, and so I do not reveal the main plot. I believe that the importance to Latter-day Saints of knowing this material outweighs considerations of 'spoiling' one's entertainment experience by reading what follows. However, the choice is yours: if you wish the experience of reading the novel's conclusion 'blind,' then do not read this post until after you have completed reading the novel.]

I must admit: I did not see this coming.

A book destined to become the year's best-selling novel around the world features a version of a central and controversial LDS doctrine. In this post, I describe the situation, and my ideas about what it is that Latter-day Saints might do in response, to further the interests of the Church and the cause of the Gospel. This is a long post; however, given what is potentially at stake for the Latter-day Saints, I think that it will be well worth your attention.

Background: Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol

For the last three months, I have been following the hoopla surrounding the release of Dan Brown's then-forthcoming novel, The Lost Symbol, the sequel to the monumentally successful book, The Da Vinci Code. In particular, I established a blog to analyze the clues that Brown's publisher, Doubleday, had been issuing concerning the contents of the then-forthcoming novel. (This blog is now titled "Discovering The Lost Symbol: The Blog"; it is found at http://lostsymboltweets.blogspot.com/.)

The book became available at some Manhattan locations as early as 12:01 a.m. on Tuesday, September 15. I purchased my copy at the Lincoln Center Barnes & Noble, literally across the street from the Manhattan New York Temple. Having a contract to write a chapter on the book, and hoping to obtain a deal to write my own book on the novel, I felt it important to skim the whole book immediately. Boy, was I in for a surprise.

The Lost Symbol is a thriller featuring Dan Brown's signature character, Harvard symbologist Robert Langdon (played by Tom Hanks in the movie adaptations of The Da Vinci Code and Angels & Demons). The new novel is noteworthy for being placed in Washington, DC, and involving the history and symbolism of Freemasonry, the world's oldest and largest fraternal organization. (Disclosure: I am a Freemason.) The Lost Symbol combines Masonic symbolism, a cutting-edge discipline known as 'noetic science,' and a lot of derring-do in a thriller that is more rescue mission than murder mystery.

Much of this was to be expected. It was also to be expected that some religious or spiritual theme would be addressed as a subtext or motif throughout the novel; this is also a signature characteristic of Brown's Langdon novels. In Angels & Demons, the issue was the relationship of science and religion. In The Da Vinci Code, the issue was the nature of Jesus. As it turns out, the issue in The Lost Symbol is the relationship between God and humankind -- and the way that Brown resolves this issue is both startling for the general reader and unexpectedly resonant for the LDS reader.

Humanity and God in The Lost Symbol

Early on in The Lost Symbol, Robert Langdon looks up from inside the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol building, and sees the 1865 painting by Constantino Brumidi, The Apotheosis of Washington (shown above; click on the image for a larger depiction). The ancient Greek word "apotheosis" has no common single-word equivalent in English; it indicates the event of a human being becoming a god. (See the last page of Chapter 20, and all of Chapter 21, in The Lost Symbol.)

Throughout the novel, one of the subplots is that the leading female character in this story, Dr. Katherine Solomon, is engaged in research involving a field called noetic science. In the novel, we learn that she has uncovered a variety of paranormal, even godlike capacities in the human mind -- capacities that can be developed even in this world.

Much later, at the conclusion of The Lost Symbol (Chapter 133 and the Epilogue), Robert Langdon is taught some fascinating philosophical, religious, and spiritual concepts by Dr. Solomon. One of these concepts is the idea that the destiny and birthright of human beings is to take on the role of divine Creators. We join these two in discussion in Chapter 133, with Dr. Solomon speaking:

"... We've been reading the Bible too literally. We learn that God created us in his image, but it's not our physical bodies that resemble God, it's our minds. ... [O]nce we realize that we are truly created in the Creator's image, we will start to understand that we, too, must be Creators. When we understand this fact, the doors will burst wide open for human potential.

... Langdon gazed up again at the image of The Apotheosis of Washington--the symbolic ascent of man to deity. The created . . . becoming the Creator. (Page 501 of the English language edition of The Lost Symbol)

Langdon then reflects on the Hebrew word Elohim:

"Elohim," he repeated. "The Hebrew word for God in the Old Testament! I've always wondered about it."

Katherine gave a knowing smile. "Yes. The word is plural." ...

"God is plural," Katherine whispered, "because the minds of man are plural." (Page 505)

In essence, Katherine Solomon is teaching Robert Langdon the ideas that (a) human beings have the potential within them to develop into gods, and (b) such a development would result in a plurality of gods. The "Lost Symbol" of the novel's title reflects the notion of God as a symbol for the highest potential of humankind.

The LDS Doctrine of Exaltation

Of course, all of this has a strong resonance to the LDS doctrine of exaltation. As the Latter-day Saints teach, those who make certain sacred covenants with God, and keep those covenants throughout their lives, then at some undefined time after death experience a change. As the LDS scriptures put it:

Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them. (The Doctrine and Covenants, Section 132, Verse 20)

Such individuals are permitted to maintain their family structure throughout the eternities, and go on to create and populate worlds for themselves. This is the highest blessing possible, and is the essence of eternal life, the kind of life that God has. (Some further basic information about the LDS doctrine of exaltation is available here.)

The LDS doctrine of exaltation does have certain differences from the concept that Dan Brown puts forth in The Lost Symbol. For Dan Brown's characters, the notion that humanity is made in the image of God is figurative ("it's our minds" that resemble God, as Dr. Solomon says); for the LDS, humans resemble God both mentally and physically (that is, God has a body in whose image humans are made).

Nonetheless, the idea of humans becoming exalted to godlike status -- long a doctrine held virtually uniquely by the LDS -- is now being reflected in a novel that is almost guaranteed to be a global best seller.

The Plurality of Gods in LDS Doctrine

Robert Langdon's insight about the plurality of Gods, of course, was anticipated over a century and a half ago by Joseph Smith, Jr., the first LDS prophet in modern times. As Joseph Smith put it in a sermon, just east of the Nauvoo Temple, on June 16, 1844 (that is, eleven days before he was martyred):

Paul says there are Gods many and Lords many; and that makes a plurality of Gods, in spite of the whims of all men. ... I have it from God, and get over it if you can. ... I will show from the Hebrew Bible that I am correct, and the first word shows a plurality of Gods .... An unlearned boy must give you a little Hebrew. Berosheit baurau Eloheim ait aushamayeen vehau auraits*, rendered by King James' translators, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." ... Eloheim is from the word Eloi, God, in the singular number; and by adding the word heim, it renders it Gods. It [that is, Genesis 1:1] read first, "In the beginning the head of the Gods brought forth the Gods," or, as others have translated it, "The head of the Gods called the Gods together." ...

In the very beginning the Bible shows there is a plurality of Gods beyond the power of refutation. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 371-372)

[*In modern transliteration of Hebrew, this would be given as Bereshit bara Elohim 'et ha-shamayim v'et ha-aretz.]

Some aspects of doctrine that Dan Brown misses involve the character and origin of God -- in essence, what sort of being God is, and how God came to be God. These are subjects concerning which Joseph Smith taught boldly and publicly in the last three months of his life. In the so-called King Follett Discourse (April 7, 1844), Joseph taught the following:

God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible,--I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form--like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man ....

These are incomprehensible ideas to some, but they are simple. ... God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did; and I will show it from the Bible. (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-346, italics omitted. The first of these two paragraphs appears in the current manual of study for priesthood quorums and the Relief Society for 2008-2009: Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, Chapter 2, p. 40.)

All of this raises two questions: how did Dan Brown happen to incorporate (as it seems he did) LDS doctrine into his novel? And, what implications does this have for the Latter-day Saints? I address each of these issues below.

Dan Brown Visits Temple Square

Dan Brown visited Temple Square in 2004 and 2006, as reported by KSL-TV in Salt Lake City. During his 2004 visit, as his host noted, Brown was specifically interested in what seemed to him the Masonic-like symbols on the Salt Lake LDS Temple: "He was ... very interested in the symbology on the Mormon temple ... the pentacles and the suns and the moons and the stars and all that. So, I gather his primary interest was to ... see the Mormon embellishment of Masonry as it exists, in his mind ...." (Of course, the LDS Temple is deeply associated with the LDS doctrine of exaltation.) In 2006, as reported on TV, Brown was granted access to certain LDS historical archives.

Thus, for whatever reason and in whatever way, Dan Brown has had a certain interest in the Latter-day Saints and our most important and distinctive spiritual practices and doctrines. I think that he saw fit to adapt the LDS doctrine of exaltation for literary purposes in The Lost Symbol.

So what does this all mean to us, as Latter-day Saints?

The Implications of The Lost Symbol for the Latter-day Saints

The doctrine of exaltation has been a sticking point for the Latter-day Saints as they have tried to share the Gospel for over a century and a half, from the time that this doctrine was revealed during the Nauvoo period until this very day. Despite a great deal of evidence that this doctrine was known and taught in the earliest days of Christianity by the ancient apostles and their associates in the Old World**, it is clear that this was one of the many pure and precious doctrines of the Gospel that were dropped as early Christianity fell into the centuries known among the LDS as the Great Apostasy.

Consequently, the majority of Christian churches are shocked by the very idea of the doctrine of exaltation. The LDS have been condemned as unchristian heretics by several major Christian denominations and many of their authors. To some extent, this has gotten in the way of our missionary work for many years.

Now, however, we have an interesting and unexpected opportunity.

The publication of Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol opens an opportunity for the Latter-day Saint doctrine of exaltation to enter the public discourse in a way other than through partisan, sectarian condemnation. Individual Latter-day Saints could usefully make efforts to bring this doctrine to the attention of news media. In addition, this opens opportunities to share the Gospel on an individual basis.

Let me explain what I mean.

What The Da Vinci Code Demonstrated

Some readers may remember the big fuss that Brown's earlier novel, The Da Vinci Code, caused. The back story in The Da Vinci Code was the idea that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had descendants.

Having researched the issue, I can testify that this idea caused a sensation in certain sectors of the Christian community. Many books and other media were developed specifically to refute what Dan Brown's characters were claiming about Jesus (and other aspects of early Christianity portrayed in the novel). And why was this such an issue? The unspoken subtext here is that it was somehow unbecoming for a divine Person to be involved in the procreation of children.

Of course, this is no problem whatsoever for the Latter-day Saints.

And, what happened with all this fuss and bother? An interesting thing, actually.

There remained many people, of course, who were unmoved by Dan Brown's concepts. However--and I admit that this is an impression, not something based on hard data--it seems to me that a substantial number of his readers arrived at an attitude like the following: "Jesus married? Hmm. Well, why not? Sounds okay to me."

These days, a lot of people are open to believing different things than the doctrines of the historically dominant Christian churches. They do need to be exposed to different ideas, but when they are, a fair number of people find these different ideas acceptable. It is just that simple. And this fact can work to the benefit of propagating the LDS approach to the Gospel.

The debate and fuss that followed the publication of The Da Vinci Code (2003) and the release of the movie version (2006) demonstrated that the 21st century public was receptive to ideas that might have gotten Dan Brown burned alive at the stake--or at least run out of town--in an earlier era. So, how do we use this receptivity?

What Latter-Day Saints Can Do

I suggest that Latter-day Saints do the following four things:

1. Become more familiar with the doctrine of exaltation.
2. Become familiar with Dan Brown's not-quite-enough approach to exaltation in The Lost Symbol.
3. Alert news media to the resonances between Dan Brown's novel's conclusion and this important LDS doctrine.
4. Use the novel as an opportunity to bring up this central aspect of the Gospel with their non-LDS friends, neighbors, co-workers, and other associates.

I expand on each of these suggestions below.

1. Get to know the doctrine of exaltation.

Before one can share a doctrine, one should be sure to understand it. Fortunately, there are many easy-to-access resources available for this purpose, several of them online. These include the following:

• The Standard Works. (It always starts here, doesn't it?) In particular, D&C Section 132: 19-24 is central to this topic, as is D&C Section 131.
• The LDS manual, Gospel Principles, Chapter 47, "Exaltation," is particularly useful in understanding the basics of this doctrine.
• The Encyclopedia of Mormonism has a brief but useful article on exaltation.
• Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, particularly pp. 345-346, 370-373, states these doctrines in powerful and straightforward fashion. (See also Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, Chapter 2, p. 40.)
• For 'extra credit,' as it were, read the wiki page published by the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR, a pro-LDS group) regarding the "Deification of Man"; see it here.
• Further 'extra credit': read the evidence published by the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) that this doctrine was taught in ancient Christianity.**

2. Familiarize yourself with The Lost Symbol

On a practical level, it is hard to engage people in conversation regarding a book one has not read. The Lost Symbol is a pretty quick read. Yes, the real punchline, from our perspective, is in Chapter 133 and the Epilogue -- but, if you're going to talk about a book, you should really read the whole thing.

3. Contact your local news media.

Yes, you. If we're going to raise the profile of the Gospel and this doctrine, we have to engage the media.

It's not so hard. These days, many newspapers, radio, and television stations have e-mail addresses listed on their websites for specific reporters. Almost every media outlet in sight has published some kind of story on The Lost Symbol, on or about September 14-15. Simply contact some reporter who had a story on this novel (or the editor of the paper or station itself) and tell them that there is a side of this story that has not been told yet.

If you want talking points, take a look at the blog post that I wrote on my Dan Brown-related blog, regarding this issue:

http://lostsymboltweets.blogspot.com/2009/09/secret-behind-final-secret-of-lost.html

You may even find it handy to forward that link to the news people. (I suggest you send the link from that blog, rather than this blog that you are reading, because that blog is written for the general reader of Dan Brown, rather than the LDS public.)

4. Engage your non-LDS associates in conversation about exaltation.

You're going to see a lot of people reading this novel. How many? Consider this:

• The Da Vinci Code sold 81 million copies, about 45 million of those in the United States. About 1 American adult in every 5 read The Da Vinci Code. The Lost Symbol may be even bigger than The Da Vinci Code.
• Doubleday published 6.5 million copies of The Lost Symbol in English, just as a first printing. (Keep in mind that 30,000 copies is considered an "okay" first printing!)

Thus, you will likely have many opportunities to do something like the following:

• Ask people how they liked the novel.
• Ask them what they thought about the end of the novel, regarding the idea that the potential destiny of human beings was to become gods.
• Ask them whether they knew that Latter-day Saints teach a very similar idea.
• Ask them if they'd like to know more. If so, invite them to church.

Bring pass-along cards with you. If you follow the plan above, I would guess that you'll go through quite a few.

Conclusion

We have the opportunity here to use this likely bestselling novel to raise the profile of the Church in a good way. This novel is introducing a version of one of our central but controversial doctrines in a positive manner, to millions upon millions of people around the world. Let us use this opportunity to help introduce the Gospel to people with whom we might not otherwise have such an easy point of connection.

**See point #5 ("Do Latter-day Saints believe that men and women can become gods?", pp. 25-29) in Robert L. Millet and Noel B. Reynolds (Editors), Latter-Day Christianity: 10 Basic Issues (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, BYU, 1998; ISBN 0-934893-32-2).

[The image of Brumidi's "The Apotheosis of Washington" is from pictures taken by Raul654 in 2005. The image was obtained from Wikimedia Commons and is shown here under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 license.]

The Doctrine of Exaltation, Part 2: Why This Doctrine Will Come Up in Future Public Discussion

(For the preceding post in this series, see link at end of this post.)

This series, "The Doctrine of Exaltation," concerns the distinctly LDS doctrine that, under the right circumstances, in the next life, righteous men and women may become gods. As I promised at the end of Part 1, today I shall consider why I think the doctrine of exaltation will come up with increasing frequency in future public discussions of the LDS faith. This has important practical implications: Latter-day Saints need to thoughtfully consider how they shall discuss this doctrine with their neighbors (a matter that I shall consider further in a future post).

As I see it, there are several reasons why the doctrine of exaltation will likely come up more frequently in public and private discussions of the LDS faith in the future:

• the growth of the LDS Church


• the growth of opposition to the LDS Church


• the rise of the Internet
  

I consider each of these below.

The Growth of the LDS Church

The growth of the LDS Church has been nothing short of phenomenal. When I was baptized as a college sophomore in the Fall of 1975, the Church had about 4 million members worldwide--a smaller population than my home town (NYC), by a large margin--and I was regularly mocked about our ambitions to grow throughout the world. Today, the Church has over 13.5 million members, and is rapidly growing. With this growth, it is only natural that more people would know someone who is LDS, and that they would be curious about LDS beliefs.

One can estimate the degree of interest in and curiosity about the LDS Church, in a rough and indirect way, by looking at the degree to which there are depictions of Latter-day Saints in popular culture. I do not recall a single mention of the LDS church on the television comedies and dramas that I watched, the movies that I viewed, or the plays that I saw on Broadway, during the years when I was growing up in New York City during the 1960s and 1970s. However, during the 1990s and subsequently, Latter-day Saints and their faith were portrayed--albeit in a highly distorted, often insulting manner--on such television shows as Frasier (in the episode "The Zoo Story"), South Park (in the episodes "Probably" and "All About the Mormons?", the latter pictured above), the series House (where an LDS character is a regular), and of course the series Big Love (which I have discussed in a previous post), as well as on the stage in Angels in America (Parts I and II). The public does not get us, yet, but they do know that we exist, in a way that they did not, only a generation ago--and they are curious about us.

With a net LDS growth rate of about 5% or more annually, more and more people are going to know some Latter-day Saint, and hence more people will be curious about our beliefs. When people have questions about us, they want to know what makes us different, and few things are more distinctive about us than the doctrine of exaltation.

The Growth in Opposition to the LDS Church

Perhaps because of the growth of the LDS Church, which draws converts from the membership of other Christian churches, the opposition to the LDS Church has grown as well. Anti-Mormonism is a complex phenomenon that I hope to treat in detail in later posts on this blog. However, one aspect worth mentioning here is that one strategy of anti-Mormonism is to focus on distinctive aspects of the LDS faith in the hope of making these aspects seem "strange." The doctrine of exaltation has received a lot of attention from anti-Mormon authors over the years, and as the volume of anti-Mormon voices rises, we shall certainly hear more about this doctrine from the anti-Mormon perspective.

The Rise of the Internet

The Internet also has a role in making more frequent discussion of the doctrine of deification almost inevitable. Pre-1993 or so, those who wished to cast aspersions on the LDS Church had certain inherent limitations on the extent to which their views could be spread. Anti-Mormonism was a really narrow niche market, with narrow channels of propagation. Anti-Mormon writings were done up on typewriters and photocopied, or were published otherwise with relatively low production values, distributed through certain Christian bookstores. With these limitations, the distorted claims of the anti-Mormon community regarding the doctrine of exaltation would only reach so many people.

Enter the Internet. Now, any claim--no matter how distorted or inaccurate--can reach a large proportion of humankind, in the garb of a nicely designed website. The Internet has made it easy to propagate anti-Mormon views, and anti-Mormonism focuses on the doctrine of exaltation as a distinctly LDS doctrine.

Next: The basis for stating that the doctrine of exaltation is authentic LDS doctrine.

Previous Post in This Series

"The Doctrine of Exaltation, Part 1: Its Content and Controversy"

The Doctrine of Exaltation, Part 1: Its Content and Controversy

In an earlier post, I mentioned that, now that the producers of Big Love have shown a small snippet of their version of the endowment in the episode "Outer Darkness," it seemed likely that we would see other depictions of the LDS temple ceremonies; I suggested that it would be worthwhile for Latter-day Saints to be prepared for discussions of the temple ceremonies as these would inevitably arise with their non-LDS acquaintances. However, this is not the only controversial area that the Saints will need to be prepared to discuss, in this post-"Outer Darkness"-era. Another issue that is likely to arise in the future involves an important LDS doctrine underlying the temple ceremonies: the doctrine that, under certain circumstances, after this life, human beings can become divine--that is, the doctrine that men and women may become gods. This is the doctrine of exaltation

Today, I open a series of posts on the doctrine of exaltation. Over the course of the series, I shall consider the following:

• the content of this doctrine


• the reason that this doctrine is considered controversial in the majority Christian world


• why I think that this doctrine will arise with increasing frequency in future public discussions of the LDS faith


• the basis for stating that this is authentic LDS doctrine


• the basis for stating that this doctrine is authentically Christian


• how to discuss this doctrine with members of the general public
  

The Doctrine of Exaltation: What It Says

Underlying the doctrine of exaltation is the idea that, as the literal children of God, we are meant to obtain the same status as our Heavenly Father. Thus, if we prove ourselves worthy, we are to 'inherit all that the Father has,' including all the divine capacities. Those who attain godhood shall still be subordinate to the Father, but they shall be empowered to have spiritual children and create and populate worlds, as the Father has done.

Why the Doctrine of Exaltation is Controversial

The doctrine of exaltation is controversial because it highlights a fundamental difference between the LDS and other ways of understanding the relationship between God and humanity. The majority Christian understanding of God is deeply influenced by certain currents in ancient Greek philosophy (particularly neo-Platonism). In these forms of Greek philosophy, there is a deep conceptual divide between the realm of the divine (which is entirely spiritual) and the realm of the human (which is basically material). The notion of human beings becoming gods is inconceivable in this kind of philosophy.

The majority Christian churches do not understand the LDS doctrine of exaltation. (For example, they do not understand that only the pure become gods, and that the pure do so only after a lifetime of obedience in this world, followed by a process of training and growth in the next world.) Lacking this understanding, the majority Christian world lumps together the LDS doctrine of deification with the type of polytheistic beliefs seen in the ancient world, such as the traditional popular Greek religion, with its Pantheon of gods. (The popular Greek religion thus had a notion of the divine that was very different from the ideas of the neo-Platonic Greek philosophers.) The gods and goddesses of the ancient Greek Pantheon were basically like regular people given immense power, with all the major human failings--pettiness, jealousy, hunger for control, murderous rage, immorality--writ very large.

Because the majority Christian churches falsely equate the LDS doctrine of exaltation with the ancient Greek notion of polytheism, the majority Christian world is scandalized by the LDS doctrine of exaltation, perhaps more so than by any other LDS doctrine or practice. Sensing this negative reaction, it seems that many Latter-day Saints have responded by simply avoiding this doctrine altogether, in discussion with non-LDS people.

There are several problems with this approach. First, it appears duplicitous to others; it looks as if we preach one set of doctrines to the world outside the Church, and another set within the Church. Second, it leaves the Saints unprepared to discuss the doctrine when it comes up in discussion with non-LDS people. These problems become especially important when we realize that discussions of this doctrine have now become inevitable, and will become a part of our interchanges with the non-LDS world with increasing frequency.

In Part II: Why discussions of this doctrine will become increasingly frequent in the future.