Mormonism and the United Firm

[BCSpace]

so what you are saying is that you know better than the Prophet how the affairs of the Church or programs of the Gospel/Church should have been run.

Nope. I'm saying I follow what the Church says about it's own doctrine.

[erichard]

WARNING: In my mind, this is an extremely important religious topic and one of the great spiritual evidences for the authenticity of Mormonism. ...

...

David. I greatly appreciate your concern and interest in the principles of the United Firm/Order. And I agree that we need to understand it according to the Spirit, and not according to the philosophies and ideas of the world. I have not read all of this thread, but wanted to make a few comments.

I find D&C 51 (May 1831) very revealing:

HEARKEN unto me, saith the Lord your God, and I will speak unto my servant Edward Partridge, and give unto him directions; for it must needs be that he receive directions how to organize this people.

2 FOR IT MUST NEEDS BE THAT THEY BE ORGANIZED ACCORDING TO MY LAWS; IF OTHERWISE, THEY WILL BE CUT OFF.

3 Wherefore, let my servant Edward Partridge, and those whom he has chosen, in whom I am well pleased, appoint unto this people their portions, every man equal according to his family, according to his circumstances and his wants and needs.

4 And let my servant Edward Partridge, when he shall appoint a man his portion, give unto him a writing that shall secure unto him his portion, that he shall hold it, even this right and this inheritance in the church, until he transgresses and is not accounted worthy by the voice of the church, according to the laws and covenants of the church to belong to the church.

5 And if he shall transgress and is not accounted worthy to belong to the church, he shall not have power to claim that portion which he has consecrated unto the bishop for the poor and needy of my church; therefore, he shall not retain the gift, but shall only have claim on that portion that is deeded unto him.

6 And thus all things shall be made sure, according to the laws of the land.

7 And let that which belongs to this people be appointed unto this people.

8 And the money which is left unto this people--let there be an agent appointed unto this people, to take the money to provide food and raiment, according to the wants of this people.

...

13 And again, let the bishop appoint a storehouse unto this church; and let all things both in money and in meat, which are more than is needful for the wants of this people, be kept in the hands of the bishop.

14 And let him also reserve unto himself for his own wants, and for the wants of his family, as he shall be employed in doing this business.

15 AND THUS I GRANT UNTO THIS PEOPLE A PRIVILEGE OF ORGANIZING THEMSELVES ACCORDING TO MY LAWS.

...

America has enjoyed a long history of prosperity and progress. But it is becoming more and more believable that things could become very unstable and crazy in the future.

In the last days it may become as important for temporal and spiritual salvation to unite with others and organize economically according to the Lord's laws as it was to enter the Ark in the days of Noah.

If anyone has any interest, here is a selection of 2BC revelations (Mormon, but non LDS) that deal with the United Order. I have been in the United Order authorized by the 2BC since 1989. It has been a challenge, but I do feel much more ready for the calamities than when I first entered it.

Richard

[Calm]

I've thought about this before, FYI, and I suggest you give a little more thought to what I have said.

Imagine everyone bringing their products to a big warehouse for distribution, or better yet, posting what they have to offer on an online message board while saying something like this: ......

Hint: Thing bigger than some small bartering stand on a road side. The sky isn't even the limit.

I think one of the major difficulties here is how the 'outside' world might have an impact on those living the LoC. I suspect many imagine different conditions and thus are thinking of different requirements to make it work. I see it as very problematic to not have private ownership if the major part of society around those living LoC is primarily a private ownership economy, especially if the LoC community is dependent on the outside for basic, not necessary but nice, or even nicest stuff. OTOH, if the dominant part of the society is the LoC Community than there are tons more options of how to set things up.

Bottomline for any LoC community is that it is a volunteer experience just as church membership is, if you want to be LDS you are required to be baptized and pay tithing as well as other sacrifices (to be a full member and receive blessings the Lord has promised us), if we want to be part of the LoC community, other things will be required of us...one possibility I see as having all things in common 'legally' while having responsibility or care of---and thus the benefit of as well to the extent of one's needs---what is seen as appropriate. Anyone who feels they can do things better, whether for the community or for themselves, can opt out, but then they will not be entitled to the benefits of the community as they won't pay the costs (in a world prior to the 2nd coming, there will likely be exceptions to this rule as there will be some in positions to contribute more to the community by remaining technically outside of it, but here intent would be judged).

I think my biggest issue with the idea of insisting that there is private ownership while saying that ownership must still carry the willingness to give it all away if commanded to do so is that internal behaviour is very influenced by external behaviour and I see it as problematic to legally label something as "mine and I have the total right to do with it what I want no matter what" even while saying in one's heart "what I want to do with it will always be what the Lord will want me to do with it" because eventually the legal pretense may become more real to someone than the sense of community and gratitude for all to the Lord. They may never not follow through on their commitment, but isn't what we want to do is to have as a 'second nature' to us every godly instinct and not have to school our emotions and greed each time we are challenged to sacrifice?

[Calm]

But for involuntariness and no religion, the remainder of other systems are far more close to the principles of Gospel.

I think the fact of involuntariness and not allowing religion are such overwhelming principles as to negate the potential similarities with any other gospel principles. Better to start from scratch in a discussion rather than point to a system of forced and faithless community and ask us to imagine how this community would work if it wasn't forced and had God at the helm. The impact of being forced to contribute so dramatically influences the way contribution and involvement in the community are done that it renders the forced community useless for prediction and evaluation of the volunteer community, imo.

[Calm]

I have been in the United Order authorized by the 2BC since 1989. It has been a challenge, but I do feel much more ready for the calamities than when I first entered it.

Richard

This is very interesting, Richard. It would make for a great thread if you would relate to us how this works in a practical matter. If you don't want to hassle with debate on the correctness of the doctrine etc., then I would greatly appreciate you posting the information in the Social Forum as I would love learning about this type of community and how it works in the modern world.

[wenglund]

I've thought about this before, FYI, and I suggest you give a little more thought to what I have said.

Imagine everyone bringing their products to a big warehouse for distribution, or better yet, posting what they have to offer on an online message board while saying something like this...

I have thought, and can still think, long and hard about what you said, but that will not eliminate the limitations of barter systems listed in the Wiki article I linked to in my previous post.

To further illustrate the point, here is a scenerio from an online article on Noney vs. Barter:

"Imagine an economy in which I can sell services as a consultant to banks, but what I want is to buy a new suit. The clothing store that sells suits does not have any use for my services as a banking consultant. The bank does not sell suits. How can barter work?

"One can imagine a computer system that finds a bank that wants my consulting services, a clothing store that needs banking services, and then arranges a three-way trade where I get my suit in exchange for consulting services. As the economy gets more complex, the computer system has to arrange barter trades that are more and more elaborate.

"Instead of a computerized bartering system, we use money to implement complex exchanges. I sell consulting services for money, and I buy a suit using money. Money serves as a medium of exchange."

Here is an article on "E-money vs Fiat Money: Will Central Banks Survive", where: "We argue first that money evolved as a way of reducing the costs of transacting. It economises on information, by making all information about the buyer in a particular transaction irrelevant, and concentrating attention on what is being offered. As society evolves towards the use of a single money, so it evolves to a situation where the same information is needed for every transaction. One good will emerge as the money of a society, provided two conditions are satisfied. These are that not all goods are equally suitable as a medium of exchange and that the marginal costs of acquiring information about one good fall the more that good is used.

"Having argued informally that the information-economising property of money is key to its evolution, a model of exchange based on that property is developed, and the cost of transacting in that system is compared with the cost of barter. The model is of a strategic market game, in which the stipulated means of exchange is fiat money and all transactions need cash in advance. (Note that constraint is not imposed arbitrarily, but emerges as a natural consequence of our prior argument that money exchange requires less information than does barter exchange.)

"The model is then contrasted with one of

[wenglund]

Actually, if you check out my siggy, you'll find a link to an LDS manual section on the subject.

I just read through it and found it very informative, and I would recommend it to others. In concert with David's kindly request, the lesson material provides scriptural support and interpretation by leaders of the Church.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Deborah]

I think my biggest issue with the idea of insisting that there is private ownership while saying that ownership must still carry the willingness to give it all away if commanded to do so is that internal behaviour is very influenced by external behaviour and I see it as problematic to legally label something as "mine and I have the total right to do with it what I want no matter what" even while saying in one's heart "what I want to do with it will always be what the Lord will want me to do with it" because eventually the legal pretense may become more real to someone than the sense of community and gratitude for all to the Lord.

But it sounds like that is the very thing that happened among the Nephites. In 4 Nephi we read:

23 And now I, Mormon, would that ye should know that the people had multiplied, insomuch that they were spread upon all the face of the land, and that they had become exceedingly rich, because of their prosperity in Christ.

24 And now, in this *two hundred and first year there began to be among them those who were lifted up in pride, such as the wearing of costly apparel, and all manner of fine pearls, and of the fine things of the world.

25 And from that time forth they did have their goods and their substance no more common among them.

26 And they began to be divided into classes; and they began to build up churches unto themselves to get gain, and began to deny the true church of Christ.

It appears to me in reading this that they voluntarily held things in common, implying some ownership, as when they started to become prideful they witheld these things. There is the very strong implication of ownership as it talks about "their goods and their substance."

Prior to that it states in v. 15 & 16 "And it came to pass that there was no contention in the land, because of the love of God which did dwell in the hearts of the people. And there were no envyings, nor strifes, nor tumults, nor whoredoms, nor lyings, nor murders, nor any manner of lasciviousness; and surely there could not be a happier people among all the people who had been created by the hand of God."

The thing that kept them united and sharing all things was the love of God and others, not that everything belonged to God in the sense that people seem to be saying here. I don't think anyone believes otherwise, but like a parent who loves his children, the parent is willing to share all that he has with the child and gives him responsibility (or ownership) of those things the parent imparts. Once that love started waning then all those divisions began to appear.

Also I don't think the attitude of those professing ownership is "mine and I have the total right to do with it what I want no matter what." Rather the ownership given by God and their love of God and man makes them responsible for their neighbor. It was only when pride starts entering in that things changed.

[jwhitlock]

Do you envision the existence of a currency? Or will all transactions be "in kind"? Or do you not envision any kind of equal exchange of one manifestation of wealth for another? Will all such questions of equivalency of value go by the wayside under the system you envision?

As I have noted in this thread, I believe that our current system of economics and finance will be done away with in Zion. The principles of the law of the Celestial kingdom, which are required in Zion, require the saints to behave with a totally different mindset than that which comes with the use of money as the medium of exchange.

Hence, I do not see the existence of currency or credit as being necessary; in one sense, the storehouse (and the Zion "storehouse" may be markedly different from the storehouse as we understand it today) becomes the clearing house for exchange of that which is needed and desired in the Zion society.

[jwhitlock]

I am wondering if there is a difference between the LoC during mortality verses the LoC during immortality. The reason I am wondering about this distinction is because of the notion that Will mentioned earlier--i.e. "consumption". Is their consumption in heaven? If not, then I am not sure an economic system is even necessary there.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I believe that anything implemented in the temporal existence must be, of necessity, different than that which exists in the Celestial kingdom. Our abilities and understanding differ significantly before and after the resurrection, and influence the extent to which we can live the LoC.

[wenglund]

I believe that anything implemented in the temporal existence must be, of necessity, different than that which exists in the Celestial kingdom. Our abilities and understanding differ significantly before and after the resurrection, and influence the extent to which we can live the LoC.

I agree. However, my point was in regards to the differences in the physiological natures of mortals versus immortals. While we mortals can't survive for long without consumables like food or drink, I don't know that Celestial beings have need for food and drink or shelter or healthcare or physical means of transportation or other consumables. As such, they have no need for an economic system to provide for consumption. Without consumption, there is no scarcity, and without scarcity, there is no economics.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[jwhitlock]

I agree. However, my point was in regards to the differences in the physiological natures of mortals versus immortals. While we mortals can't survive for long without consumables like food or drink, I don't know that Celestial beings have need for food and drink or shelter or healthcare or physical means of transportation or other consumables. As such, they have no need for an economic system to provide for consumption. Without consumption, there is no scarcity, and without scarcity, there is no economics.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Absolutely. The rules of the game, so to speak, are significantly different enough after the resurrection that there's a totally different mindset towards the concept of possessions and how we use and interact with material things.

I'm reminded of Mother Theresa, IIRC, who termed material possessions to be the anchors in our lives that keep dragging us down. Zion, as it will exist before and during the millennium, will be an interim step towards the sociality that exists in the Celestial kingdom.

At this point, I will throw one rather speculative notion out concerning the establishment of Zion before Christ comes in glory. The scriptures refer to the return of Zion before His coming; I've wondered how we as a Church would be able to carve out something like Zion in today's world. Even though we've grown, it would seem that we are rather limited in our ability to do such a thing, and will be limited for quite a long time. The return of Enoch, his city, and his people would facilitate the kind of change and separation from the world that would be needed, and would enable the Latter-day Saints to not so much build or create Zion, but rather unite with it. I see Zion coming down as an unassailable island in a wicked world, and the seed for what will encompass the entire world after Christ returns in His glory. That seems to be the most likely facilitator for the change needed to live a more pure LoC in Zion based on Celestial principles.

[wenglund]

At this point, I will throw one rather speculative notion out concerning the establishment of Zion before Christ comes in glory. The scriptures refer to the return of Zion before His coming; I've wondered how we as a Church would be able to carve out something like Zion in today's world. Even though we've grown, it would seem that we are rather limited in our ability to do such a thing, and will be limited for quite a long time. The return of Enoch, his city, and his people would facilitate the kind of change and separation from the world that would be needed, and would enable the Latter-day Saints to not so much build or create Zion, but rather unite with it. I see Zion coming down as an unassailable island in a wicked world, and the seed for what will encompass the entire world after Christ returns in His glory. That seems to be the most likely facilitator for the change needed to live a more pure LoC in Zion based on Celestial principles.

That is an interesting prediction. If it doesn't happen literally/physically, I can't see why it couldn't happen figuratively/spiritually.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mfbukowski]

In other words, I see little if any cause to get highly emotional or zealous or dogmatic about this topic. But, to each their own.

Nailed it, as usual.

[David Bokovoy]

I read them and am able to reconcile them with those church leaders who say that private property was still a part of the Law of Consecration. I believe that Joseph Smith still recognized private property in the form of stewardship--I offered a quote which supported this position. I determine that Joseph Smith believed in private ownership in the context of a stewardship granted by God through his church leaders.

As I have illustrated, the secular concept of private ownership is completely at odds with not only the historical evidence, but with the D&C itself. Here is the quote from Joseph Smith you provided:

"Every one is steward over his own."

Now, given everything we have seen from the Prophet on this subject, what is more logical?

[William Schryver]

Ahab:

Imagine everyone bringing their products to a big warehouse for distribution, or better yet, posting what they have to offer on an online message board while saying something like this:

Come and get it. No money required. Just check in with one of our clerks to let them know what you're taking as you leave so we can keep track of the inventory. Also, if there is anything else you need, please let one of the clerks know so we can inform our suppliers about what we stand in need of. That way, the people who bring stuff will have a better idea of the kind of things people would like to have.

And then in the fine print below there would be a message that would read something like this:

While what we have here is free for the taking, we would prefer that you bring something in exchange for what you take. Anything at all, as long as it's something you think someone else would find useful, or funny, or both.

Oh, but... says some well-meaning fellow... what if someone comes and just takes everything away without leaving anything in exchange. What then?

Well... says another well-meaning fellow... that's okay. People will still continue to come and drop off what they can give, and the guy who tries to sell it will find himself at a disadvantage because people will still be able to come here and get what they want for free.

I have to admit that reading this produced in me a reaction of stunned silence. I actually read it last evening, but refrained from replying to it simply because I wanted to see if anyone else would have anything to say about it. But, alas, nothing.

Bear in mind, I am not an advocate for the square peg of free-market capitalism stuffed into the round hole of the Law of Consecration, but as this thread has progressed, I have been increasingly shocked by what seems in my eyes to be stunning displays of illogic and naivete when it comes to your envisioned scenarios about life in a LoC society. The hypothetical "warehouse" above is just the most egregious example so far. But I don't mean to single out Ahab for ridicule. I don't mean my comments to come across that way. This is not meant to be a personal attack or critique, nor, if one could actually hear my voice and see my face, would my following remarks come across as mean-spirited or unduly critical or even (I believe) condescending. So bear with me as I attempt to make my points.

Frankly, I think the failure to truly "think through" this problem is endemic, and it makes me wonder if anyone who posts on this message board has ever taken an economics class in their lives. Not that modern economics classes teach the LoC. Obviously they don't. But they must (as I imagine, not ever having taken one myself, either!) dwell upon the realities of things like labor, capital, production, distribution, supply, demand, etc. People apparently believe that these elements of an economy either a)all disappear or b)take care of themselves once the Law of Consecration is instituted in a society. Such notions are, in my judgment, patently ridiculous. Unless you intend that life under the LoC is to consist of nothing but an agriculturally based subsistence economy, much more akin to the so-called "Third World" of today than to the "First World" typified by the United States, then one must face the realities of determining market demands, designing and adjusting production capabilities to meet that demand, and working out the means by which the demanded products are distributed to the market in an expeditious and economical fashion. In addition, one must deal with the realities of how to staff the labor needs of the production facilities; to likewise provide for the housing, feeding, health care, education, recreational wants and needs (among countless others) of the labor force.

But wait, there are similar requirements both upstream and downstream from your production facility. How are the raw materials harvested, prepared, and distributed to any production facility that needs them? How do you staff the labor needs of the raw materials producers? It goes on and on and on ... Imagine any product in your hypothetical warehouse. How about a brand new killer personal computer, with all the bells and whistles. Everyone wants one, in order to tap into the the amazing new fiber optic broadband being installed in Zion.

There's a new show that has been on the History Channel lately where a guy "back tracks" from the meal in front of him at a restaurant to all the places and ways by which the products represented by that meal came to be. It's called Food Tech. It is an utterly fascinating program that really drives home the concepts that there is an entire interdependent economy that is working in the background in order to provide us with the things we have come to take for granted in our modern world.

Well, we could take any product in our hypothetical warehouse and examine it in this fashion, and you would soon see that the notions at work in your warehouse scenario are, to put it mildly, simply ridiculous. No such thing could ever work. You talk about "informing suppliers" about what the warehouse needs. ??? What do these suppliers supply? Where do they get it? How much inventory do they keep on hand? Who decides what products get produced and when? Who then produces them? How do the laborers at the production facilities get what they need (and want) to live?

When you stop to think about it all, it really starts to make your head spin.

But I challenge anyone here to stop for a moment and consider what goes into the production of the following short list of desirable products, and then address the ways those products will be provided in the economy you imagine to be typical of a society living the Law of Consecration:

• 
  
• A pencil (with a nod to Droopy the Banned)
  `
  
• A personal computer
  `
  
• An iPod, iPad, and iPhone
  `
  
• A pair of well-constructed hiking boots--like the kind that cost $150 at the local shoe store
  `
  
• PVC pipe for a sprinkler system
  `
  
• An ATV
  `
  
• A fine guitar--like a $4000 Gibson J-45 (or piano, or clarinet, or flute ...)
  

Let's just start with those, or any others you'd like to come up with. Anything. Take any product that we can easily purchase in our current economy and describe how its production process would be changed under the Law of Consecration.

[William Schryver]

DB:

As I have illustrated, the secular concept of private ownership is completely at odds with not only the historical evidence, but with the D&C itself.

Let's suppose that, in my comfortable suite on Main Street and 7th Avenue in Zion I decide to construct for myself the best acoustic guitar ever made. I obtain the maple, mahogany, and ebony I will need. I permit it to age. I acquire all the tools and the various products I will need to make the guitar. I spend an entire year carefully hand-crafting the beautiful instrument.

When I'm done, will I "own" the guitar? Will my ownership be guaranteed forever under the laws of Zion?

[David Bokovoy]

DB:

Let's suppose that, in my comfortable suite on Main Street and 7th Avenue in Zion I decide to construct for myself the best acoustic guitar ever made. I obtain the maple, mahogany, and ebony I will need. I permit it to age. I acquire all the tools and the various products I will need to make the guitar. I spend an entire year carefully hand-crafting the beautiful instrument.

When I'm done, will I "own" the guitar? Will my ownership be guaranteed forever under the laws of Zion?

Will, as my last post in this thread makes clear, under the laws of Zion, you will be a steward, which means that you will not have any personal ownership. Since I am trying to keep this thread focused on the doctrinal precepts of the Law of Consecration and the historical application thereof, I

[jwhitlock]

Frankly, I think the failure to truly "think through" this problem is endemic, and it makes me wonder if anyone who posts on this message board has ever taken an economics class in their lives. Not that modern economics classes teach the LoC. Obviously they don't. But they must (as I imagine, not ever having taken one myself, either!) dwell upon the realities of things like labor, capital, production, distribution, supply, demand, etc. People apparently believe that these elements of an economy either a)all disappear or b)take care of themselves once the Law of Consecration is instituted in a society. Such notions are, in my judgment, patently ridiculous. Unless you intend that life under the LoC is to consist of nothing but an agriculturally based subsistence economy, much more akin to the so-called "Third World" of today than to the "First World" typified by the United States, then one must face the realities of determining market demands, designing and adjusting production capabilities to meet that demand, and working out the means by which the demanded products are distributed to the market in an expeditious and economical fashion. In addition, one must deal with the realities of how to staff the labor needs of the production facilities; to likewise provide for the housing, feeding, health care, education, recreational wants and needs (among countless others) of the labor force.

But wait, there are similar requirements both upstream and downstream from your production facility. How are the raw materials harvested, prepared, and distributed to any production facility that needs them? How do you staff the labor needs of the raw materials producers? It goes on and on and on ... Imagine any product in your hypothetical warehouse. How about a brand new killer personal computer, with all the bells and whistles. Everyone wants one, in order to tap into the the amazing new fiber optic broadband being installed in Zion.

There's a new show that has been on the History Channel lately where a guy "back tracks" from the meal in front of him at a restaurant to all the places and ways by which the products represented by that meal came to be. It's called Food Tech. It is an utterly fascinating program that really drives home the concepts that there is an entire interdependent economy that is working in the background in order to provide us with the things we have come to take for granted in our modern world.

I've had quite a few thoughts jumbling around in my head as I've considered the structure of the Zion society in which the LoC would be practiced. Frankly, I don't really know what the structure will be; my gut feeling is that we'll be rather surprised at the form things take when Zion is established. You make excellent points concerning the current production requirements that result in meeting the needs of the end consumer in our current system; as I try to envision how these things will occur in Zion, and after that in the Celestial kingdom, the following observations have shaped my thoughts. I'll present them here for consideration, ridicule, eye-rolling or agreement.

- Our current economy is consumer driven in the end. However, a good deal of what we "consume" today simply won't be of interest in Zion to people who are living a Celestial law. The mix end products will change rather dramatically, and that new mix will significantly alter the structures of the production systems that are currently in place to meet what I will call trendy consumer goods which no longer are desired, resulting in a much reduced manufacturing base. In addition, technology will not be eliminated in Zion, but rather enhanced. The smaller base of manufactured goods, coupled with additional advancements in manufacturing will result in a commodity based demand where there is plenty to go around and production "costs" are very minimal. Just like the industrial revolution in our time which moved people off of the farms and into the cities, Zion will result in another magnitude of shift in how our production systems are viewed and how plentiful things are.

- Zion is not the Celestial kingdom, and the CK will be quite different than Zion, primarily due to the capabilities of resurrected beings. The concept of "God speaks and matter obeys" becomes a very foundational principle which we will operate from. Economics, exchange, and production will have little, if any, relevance in the CK. Hence, as we look at the trend from our current society, to Zion, to the CK, we see are shift and de-emphasis on how we view production and economics as it exists today.

- I've also noted that the fact that Zion is composed of people who are committed to live the law of the Celestial kingdom has been ignored by some on this thread as they posit scenarios where someone comes and "cleans out the warehouse", so to speak. There's a totally different mind-set involved with the saints in Zion and how they live and interact with each other. I don't think that most of us really understand how very different that mind-set is; institutions and procedures that are driven currently by the need to deal in arms-length transactions are not particularly relevant in Zion.

- I agree that production in Zion is not going to be some kind of disorganized "things will appear as we need them" kind of scenario. However, I think that there will be a significant shift in the principles of production that we now take as necessary simply because there will be a significant change in the rules of the game in Zion. I don't pretend to know the details of what will happen, but I am sure the change will not be minor.

- Nibley comments that currently we use brute force in how we interact with our environment to shape it. That includes how we address production. We should not forget that Zion is blessed with the presence of the Lord, and that all things obey Him; Zion could possibly see a partial implementation of the harmony of spirit and matter in a society where things are produced far more easily, and without many of the problems (drought, strikes, etc.) that affect production today. Zion is in many ways very, very different than what we have now.

- The concepts of private ownership and stewardship that have been quibbled over so much in this thread are not really the main worry about living the LoC in Zion. We will enjoy living in Zion, will have what we need and desire for the most part. The attitudes of conflict and confrontation and the need to be "fair" in our interactions with others now drive a lot of the speculation I've seen on this thread about such things. By definition those attitudes need to change for those who live in Zion. Otherwise, it won't be Zion and it won't be the LoC.

Those are some of the things I've been thinking about. Maybe it's just a lot of rambling, but when the Lord directs us to Zion, it's going to be very different than what we have here. I think lots of things are going to be uprooted and changed, though I don't know the final form they will take.

[William Schryver]

Will, as my last post in this thread makes clear, under the laws of Zion, you will be a steward, which means that you will not have any personal ownership. Since I am trying to keep this thread focused on the doctrinal precepts of the Law of Consecration and the historical application thereof, I

[William Schryver]

I've had quite a few thoughts jumbling around in my head as I've considered the structure of the Zion society in which the LoC would be practiced. Frankly, I don't really know what the structure will be; my gut feeling is that we'll be rather surprised at the form things take when Zion is established. You make excellent points concerning the current production requirements that result in meeting the needs of the end consumer in our current system; as I try to envision how these things will occur in Zion, and after that in the Celestial kingdom, the following observations have shaped my thoughts. I'll present them here for consideration, ridicule, eye-rolling or agreement.

- Our current economy is consumer driven in the end. However, a good deal of what we "consume" today simply won't be of interest in Zion to people who are living a Celestial law. The mix end products will change rather dramatically, and that new mix will significantly alter the structures of the production systems that are currently in place to meet what I will call trendy consumer goods which no longer are desired, resulting in a much reduced manufacturing base. In addition, technology will not be eliminated in Zion, but rather enhanced. The smaller base of manufactured goods, coupled with additional advancements in manufacturing will result in a commodity based demand where there is plenty to go around and production "costs" are very minimal. Just like the industrial revolution in our time which moved people off of the farms and into the cities, Zion will result in another magnitude of shift in how our production systems are viewed and how plentiful things are.

- Zion is not the Celestial kingdom, and the CK will be quite different than Zion, primarily due to the capabilities of resurrected beings. The concept of "God speaks and matter obeys" becomes a very foundational principle which we will operate from. Economics, exchange, and production will have little, if any, relevance in the CK. Hence, as we look at the trend from our current society, to Zion, to the CK, we see are shift and de-emphasis on how we view production and economics as it exists today.

- I've also noted that the fact that Zion is composed of people who are committed to live the law of the Celestial kingdom has been ignored by some on this thread as they posit scenarios where someone comes and "cleans out the warehouse", so to speak. There's a totally different mind-set involved with the saints in Zion and how they live and interact with each other. I don't think that most of us really understand how very different that mind-set is; institutions and procedures that are driven currently by the need to deal in arms-length transactions are not particularly relevant in Zion.

- I agree that production in Zion is not going to be some kind of disorganized "things will appear as we need them" kind of scenario. However, I think that there will be a significant shift in the principles of production that we now take as necessary simply because there will be a significant change in the rules of the game in Zion. I don't pretend to know the details of what will happen, but I am sure the change will not be minor.

- Nibley comments that currently we use brute force in how we interact with our environment to shape it. That includes how we address production. We should not forget that Zion is blessed with the presence of the Lord, and that all things obey Him; Zion could possibly see a partial implementation of the harmony of spirit and matter in a society where things are produced far more easily, and without many of the problems (drought, strikes, etc.) that affect production today. Zion is in many ways very, very different than what we have now.

- The concepts of private ownership and stewardship that have been quibbled over so much in this thread are not really the main worry about living the LoC in Zion. We will enjoy living in Zion, will have what we need and desire for the most part. The attitudes of conflict and confrontation and the need to be "fair" in our interactions with others now drive a lot of the speculation I've seen on this thread about such things. By definition those attitudes need to change for those who live in Zion. Otherwise, it won't be Zion and it won't be the LoC.

Those are some of the things I've been thinking about. Maybe it's just a lot of rambling, but when the Lord directs us to Zion, it's going to be very different than what we have here. I think lots of things are going to be uprooted and changed, though I don't know the final form they will take.

You make some interesting points and observations. But I still feel that you are failing to "think it all through" in terms of taking into consideration the realities of the material world in which we will continue to live, even as resurrected beings.

Now, if you want to posit that, in Zion (both before and after the second coming of Christ) we will be provided with the equivalent of the "replicators" used in Star Trek (devices that can convert energy to matter, and thus produce anything desired, from a cup of tea to a complex matter/anti-matter reactor) then I suppose the need for raw material production, manufacturing facilities, and distribution networks will disappear. That, I admit, will be cool--if that's how it's going to work. In fact, I'm all for it if that's what the Lord has in mind.

But, just for the sake of discussion, let's assume for a moment that replicators will not be provided, and that we will be forced to "make it work" within the constraints of the existing parameters in terms of the creative process described by: producing and harvesting raw materials, converting those materials via some kind manufacturing process, and then distributing the resulting products to those who want/need them.

During this lifetime, I have always wanted to be able to take some of my family and friends with me and go to Lake Powell in southern Utah. I want to have a houseboat there, with other smaller boats and personal water craft attached to it which we can use to waterski, fish, and race around on the lake. I want to spend two weeks there every summer, provided with all the food, fuel, and other necessary items in order to produce a joy-inducing experience with my family and friends. In a hypothetical future Zion society, how will I be able to do this? Who will provide for me the boats, waterskis, fishing poles, bait, fuel, hamburger buns, potato chips, Diet Dr. Pepper, sunscreen lotion, etc., etc., etc. that will be required for my Lake Powell trip?

You see, it's not enough to talk about love, charity, unity, etc. Zion consists of much, much more than those things. We cannot separate the spiritual from the material in any discussion about Zion. They are inseparably connected, and always will be.

[wenglund]

Let's just start with those, or any others you'd like to come up with. Anything. Take any product that we can easily purchase in our current economy and describe how its production process would be changed under the Law of Consecration.

Also, keep in mind that the 13 or so million members of the Church are currently scattered throughout the world, which makes for complex administration and distribution problems. Let's say that nenber X in Price, Utah is somehow assigned to make pencils, and somehow manages to produce the pencils. How will member X get a pencil to member Y in Zimbawbia Affrica? And, how does member Y cover the cost that member X encured in making and shipping he pencil?

Well, you may asy, all the 13 million saints will be gathered in one location in Independance, Missouri. This means that at some point half the homes in Utah suddenly went up for sale, creating a glut on the market, and demand for homes in Independance had skyrocketed, thus making today's housing crisis look rather tame. But, leaving such things aside, if all the saints are gathered in one location, the question then posed is how those in that central location get the raw materials for production to that location that are scattered throughout the world? Who is going to mine the lead whereever for the pencils? Who will ship it to Independance? And, by what means will they ship it, if all the saints are gathered in one location?

Just a few fun and interesting things to think about in terms of translating breezy theories into practical application.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

With due respect to all parties, I think what we may be experiencing here is the unavoidable tension between academia (where theory is one's bread and butter) and the business world (where practical application is one's bread and butter).

I have been an euntrapeneur for a number of years now, and I have learned from sad experience how seemingly good ideas can quickly turn bad when not thought through very carefully. I have seen people invest thousandss and even millions in ventures the idea of which at first had everyone salivating, but when it came to developing and implementing the idea, it soon became clear just how infeasible and wrong-headed it was, and subsequently all the investments were evaporated into thin air. That deeply troubles me because I feel partially responsible for the incredable loss.

So, if I seem a little pushy in trying to look at the practical application, I hope you can understand why, and forgive and indulge me a bit.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[David Bokovoy]

] Well, I have to say that I know you're wrong.

Thank you for sharing your opinion. May I once again remind all parties that this is a scripture based discussion and that anyone who wishes to express an opposing view should support his or her perspective via scriptural analysis and the historical application of the Law of Consecration by the Latter-day Saints.

[frankenstein]

dwell upon the realities of things like labor, capital, production, distribution, supply, demand, etc.

I highly doubt the gluttony that attempts to feed Americas insatiable appetite will exist in the United Order(s) consider revelations about how the merchants of the earth more the loss of Babylon wherein they were made rich.

so here is my opinion on the matter.

we already know that labor is divided according to skill. takes care of production and distribution.

Wants, must and can be defined by the scriptures "The Lord is my Shepard I shall not want". so there goes the killer pc with all the bells and whistles

supply and demand have no part in the LoC. Suplly and Demand determining prices is really 99.9999999% greed. For instance a place ticket for travel in 1month cost 200 but for travel on Thanksgiving or any other holiday the price increases 3 to 4 fold, the airline claims supply and demand, yet the airline does not provided additional services, therefore the airline has no reason other than greed to raise the price. now some may say "well the consumers determine the price" wrong, the consumers choices boiled down to "squeal like a pig" or nothing, so most decide to squeal like a pig. ; and the economics keep the promoting the farce that is supply and demand.