Hie to Kolob

[Calm]

First Thursday and Friday in August at the Provo Marriott unless something has changed that I haven't heard.

http://www.fairmormon.org/fair-conferences/2017-fairmormon-conference

3-4 Aug

Edited March 15, 2017 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

On 3/14/2017 at 1:09 AM, Stargazer said:

..........................................................  

We're just going to have to agree to disagree.

I suppose so . . .

[Kenngo1969]

On 3/13/2017 at 3:54 PM, Bernard Gui said:

My band Uncle Lumpy and the Friends of Calvin Coolidge played in the Provo/SLC area in the early 70s. We had about 20 members and could supply a group for just about any gig. The bluegrass contingency (me on fiddle) played Friday and Saturday nights at the Snowbird Tram Room. Also played gigs at Jimba's in Provo.

Would you ever come back to Happy Valley?  I'd pay real money to hear you fiddle!  

 

[Kenngo1969]

On 3/13/2017 at 4:25 PM, pogi said:

... I really miss playing! 

Wouldn't mind hearing you play, either, my Brother.  I wish you well.  

[Kenngo1969]

Largely, this is instrumental (it does have a choir coming in on verse five, which is the hymn's main message):

Quote

 

There is no end to glory;

There is no end to love;

There is no end to being;

There is no death above.

There is no end to glory;

There is no end to love;

There is no end to being;

There is no death above.

 

 

Lack of the hymn's complete text being sung might mean that someone who is unfamiliar with that text might lack a full appreciation of this version.  But it, along with the images of the cosmos included on the slide show which it accompanies, is one of my favorite, if not my very favorite, version/rendition/interpretation.

 

[notHagoth7]

Kolob...has to do with reckoning time.

Same with it's appearance related to reckoning/shortening/abridging the latter-day time of tribulation in Greek  [*]kolob-**, which appears four times in two verses in latter-day-related prophecy (in Matthew and Mark). 

 

So the reference to Kolob isn't just some latter-day figment of Joseph's fevered imagination, as critics prefer to believe/assert.

Some who claim Kolob has no ancient precedent apparently can't be bothered to factor in ancient NT verbiage.

Not surprising that Joseph was spot-on accurate in his proffered insight/revelation here...as in other things.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/123.15-17?lang=eng#p13

 

Thoughts?

Edited March 17, 2017 by notHagoth7

[Ahab]

6 hours ago, notHagoth7 said:

Kolob...has to do with reckoning time.

Same with it's appearance related to reckoning/shortening/abridging the latter-day time of tribulation in Greek  [*]kolob-**, which appears four times in two verses in latter-day-related prophecy (in Matthew and Mark). 

 

So the reference to Kolob isn't just some latter-day figment of Joseph's fevered imagination, as critics prefer to believe/assert.

Some who claim Kolob has no ancient precedent apparently can't be bothered to factor in ancient NT verbiage.

Not surprising that Joseph was spot-on accurate in his proffered insight/revelation here...as in other things.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/123.15-17?lang=eng#p13

 

Thoughts?

Yeah, a lot of people are very slow at learning the things which Joseph learned, and that Abraham learned, even when they explain it to them in English l.

Oh well. I usually just try to be patient with everyone, figuring they'll probably figure it out eventually, in their own time, while I will just keep on learning and get even more ahead of them, in some things.

[Five Solas]

On 3/13/2017 at 10:18 AM, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

Of course I so...not sure what I typed that would have prompted that question. 

Appreciate the reply.  In answer, you prompted my question ("Do you worship Jesus?") with your adamancy that you only worship "one God."  Jesus, in the LDS scheme of things, is "a God" (per my old LDS Bible Dictionary).  But of course, he is not the only deity to be described as "a God."  There are a couple more, as you probably know already (unless you're a recent convert). 

And the LDS Jesus, at least some of the time & to some degree, eschews worship (e.g., instructing "Nephites" not to pray to him but to the Father instead, see various prayer instructions to this effect in the latter chapters of 3 Nephi).

Hopefully that helps you understand where I was coming from.  I find your perspective is sometimes more in line with what I used to hear at LDS Church meetings vs. what I've read on the internet, so I really didn't know what you were going to say in reply.  And now I do.

:0)

--Erik  

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Five Solas said:

Appreciate the reply.  In answer, you prompted my question ("Do you worship Jesus?") with your adamancy that you only worship "one God."  Jesus, in the LDS scheme of things, is "a God" (per my old LDS Bible Dictionary).  But of course, he is not the only deity to be described as "a God."  There are a couple more, as you probably know already (unless you're a recent convert). 

And the LDS Jesus, at least some of the time & to some degree, eschews worship (e.g., instructing "Nephites" not to pray to him but to the Father instead, see various prayer instructions to this effect in the latter chapters of 3 Nephi).

Hopefully that helps you understand where I was coming from.  I find your perspective is sometimes more in line with what I used to hear at LDS Church meetings vs. what I've read on the internet, so I really didn't know what you were going to say in reply.  And now I do.

:0)

--Erik  

Maybe I should re-read what I wrote, I worship Jesus Christ as this is His Church, we do work in His Temples, and He is the author and finisher of my salvation. But I worship Him as He commanded, I pray as He instructs, all that I know of God the Father is what He taught and as He lived. I worship Him always...maybe another thread would help to make my point, as it would seem I have not done so in this thread. 

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

Maybe I should re-read what I wrote, I worship Jesus Christ as this is His Church, we do work in His Temples, and He is the author and finisher of my salvation. But I worship Him as He commanded, I pray as He instructs, all that I know of God the Father is what He taught and as He lived. I worship Him always...maybe another thread would help to make my point, as it would seem I have not done so in this thread. 

I would love to hear more of your point. 

[Teancum]

On 3/12/2017 at 1:43 AM, MiserereNobis said:

Hi LDS friends,

I imagine this topic won't get too many responses because it isn't about gays, evolution/science/creationism, or philosophy (ha! clarkgoble has been a wonderful contributor of late on this board, much to Mark's happiness I'm sure). And I'm not going to be confrontational or anything, so I figure this thread will waste away after a few responses  

I was reading over the lyrics for "If You Could Hie to Kolob" and was struck by the mystical nature of this hymn.  I was also struck by how blatant the unique Mormon theological beliefs are in this song.  It doesn't shy away from controversial Mormon ideas, such as eternal progression and the plurality of gods.  It seems a bit of an anomaly to me, in that it is not "Child of God" or "I Believe in Christ" or any other hymn which most Christians (Protestants?) might find acceptable, which is why I'm making this thread.  How often is this song sung?  How much thought do you think the congregation gives to the lyrics when they sing it?  I mean the average LDS congregation, of which the more thoughtful and educated posters here might not be representative (this is true in Catholicism or any other religion, so I'm not trying to say the average Mormon isn't thoughtful, but that the average religious person doesn't devote as much time to thinking about their religion as those who post here or on other religious forums).  Also, when the hymn is sung, how often are all verses sung?

I'm drawn to the mystical interpretations of the hymn.  Eternity means beyond time, so in eternity there is no beginning, middle, or end.  My answer to the text would be no, we cannot find where these things begin or end, because when we experience the vision beyond time and place in mystical experience, there is no beginning or end.  Everything just is.  God, and by extension our deepest truest self, has always been.

Finally, I've often advocated that Mormons should celebrate their unique (and sometimes controversial) doctrines.  Yes, many people would probably find this hymn to be odd and the doctrines behind the hymn to be odder still.  But they're your doctrines -- don't shy away from them or try to explain them in such a way that they become mainstream.  Instead, offer them up as the unique ideas of Mormonism.  From my experience on this board, JLHPROF is a good example of not showing any hesitation about doctrines that other Christians might find weird at best or heretical at worst (yes, JLHPROF, I'm expecting a rep point from you...)

 

I think we sing it once or twice a year maybe in our ward. I don't know how many members contemplate the doctrine the song teaches.  I was thinking about this today,  Well not this song. But I taught my HP quorum today from the President Hinckley manual.  Lesson 6 on prayer.  I think it was a nice lesson. I appreciated President Hinckley's comments about prayer. Even as a skeptic I still pray and maybe I pray now with more intent then when I just accepted all LDS dogma is true.  But I thought to myself, where did the church of my youth go where we used to with pride claim out unique doctrine that the song illustrates.  We have traded our uniqueness to be more main stream and to peddle milk toast.

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, Teancum said:

Even as a skeptic I still pray and maybe I pray now with more intent then when I just accepted all LDS dogma is true.

I think that is why God allows doubts to come.  If we never doubt, we never question.  If we never question there is no reason for God to provide an answer.
It's the parable of Job.  What choice do we make when we begin to doubt.

Quote

But I thought to myself, where did the church of my youth go where we used to with pride claim out unique doctrine that the song illustrates.  We have traded our uniqueness to be more main stream and to peddle milk toast.

Agreed.  But the no-longer preached unique doctrines are still there.  We may not teach them but God has never revoked or changed them.  And many still know them to be true.  But sadly the effects of your observation can be seen weekly.

[strappinglad]

According to the ' apocryphal ' King Follet  discourse, there is a  chief or head God that called the council of other Gods to discuss the plan to establish the earth etc. Is He the God whose Son is Christ?

This thread deals in the realms of infinity which as a mathematical concept I somewhat understand, but it still makes my head hurt. All I can do is take solace in the oft quoted statement that " not only is the Universe stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we CAN imagine."

[JLHPROF]

15 hours ago, strappinglad said:

According to the ' apocryphal ' King Follet  discourse, there is a  chief or head God that called the council of other Gods to discuss the plan to establish the earth etc. Is He the God whose Son is Christ?

No.
He is the head of the Council of the Gods, overseeing all the Gods involved in the creation of worlds.
Each Christ is the son of the God of each world.  Many fathers and many sons.

And while the KFD may not be canon, calling it apocryphal is a bit of a stretch as well.  The only reason it's not canon is because we never voted it in.  Doesn't impact the truthfulness one iota.

Edited March 20, 2017 by JLHPROF

[halconero]

35 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

No.
He is the head of the Council of the Gods, overseeing all the Gods involved in the creation of worlds.
Each Christ is the son of the God of each world.  Many fathers and many sons.

And while the KFD may not be canon, calling it apocryphal is a bit of a stretch as well.  The only reason it's not canon is because we never voted it in.  Doesn't impact the truthfulness one iota.

As I've said before, doctrine is closely correlated with truth, but it is not synonymous with it. It's what is authorized by presiding authority to be taught and dispensed to the world, baptized members, and endowed members at various stages. That Yahweh was the only God with whom Israel would have dealings with was once doctrine. Now we have communion with three by invoking the Father in the name of the Son and with the accompaniment of the Holy Ghost. We know that will expand in the future.

[strappinglad]

All those in favor of accepting the KFD as canon ( and the lectures on Faith ??? ) ... JLHPROF , you did notice the scare quotes didn't you?

[mfbukowski]

On 3/12/2017 at 1:54 PM, MiserereNobis said:

I found it in a round about way.  I was watching the AMC show "Hell on Wheels."  They often have some great music that I'll look up later to listen to.  One song they played was by Lower Lights, so I was introduced to how Mormon hymns can be played old-timey style, which was great.  On the album I was perusing, they had an instrumental version of "Hie to Kolob" that was gorgeous (a clawhammer banjo plays the melody, yummy!), so I checked out the lyrics.

Interestingly enough, the reason why I made this post is because the other day I was watching "Penny Dreadful" and they had witches humming the tune (a traditional ballad) and I thought, well, there it is again, so I better ask the good folk at MDDB about it.  It is nice irony that I discovered this gem of a hymn by watching R-rated television, ha!

I understand this idea, but it's nice to have the deep mysteries available, too.  It's what I was getting at when I said that, in my opinion as a non-LDS guy, Mormons should embrace their uniqueness a bit more.

I totally agree with you here.  The Catholic conception of God is that He is beyond space and time, which means He is ultimately beyond the ability of our space/time bound minds to comprehend.  Couple this with the fact that concepts are rooted in language, and you get one reason why we say the nature of God is a mystery.  The closest we can come to describing His nature is through poetry and paradox (there was a discussion about this on another thread somewhere recently...).  The immediate knowledge of God comes to the chosen few through direct mystical experiences, and then those who are in Heaven whose knowledge of Him is not mediated through space/time and language.

I have a deep interest in mysticism and perhaps that's why this hymn stuck out to me as something quite special.  It's a tad bit better than, say, "In Our Lovely Deseret"

Again, I see what you are saying, but I don't fully agree.  Embrace the uniqueness.  Also, the proselytes should be made known of the Mormon theology of Gods and eternal progression before they are baptized, shouldn't they?  So they know what type of theology they are subscribing to?

Absolutely, which is why it is appealing.  Thanks for your thoughtful engagement!

It's a wonderful hymn and we sing it probably three or four times a year- about as often as a "medium favoritie" might be played in our Ward.  I am also a Scottish ballad fan so I find the melody to give me a very familiar, warm feeling.

Of course I agree about the limits of language and consider myself a good Wittgensteinian mystic fideist.  On the issue of big G vs little g, our definition of doctrine is flexible enough to handle both interpretations, I think.  Since we have no objective understanding of the future, to me the effect of either paradigm in our lives is what counts.  My goal is to emulate Christ and have as many direct experiences of his presence as I can and leave the rest to speculation.  I have no need to know more than knowing in my heart what I want and I have already summarized that.  I know I want to be as much like God as I can be and that is quite enough of an aspiration to occupy me without trying to figure out if that is possible or a "correct" belief, not even knowing what that could mean when the answer is unknowable in principle.

[mfbukowski]

On 3/12/2017 at 1:56 PM, MiserereNobis said:

"O My Father" is beautiful, too.  I hadn't heard it before.  Thanks for sharing your rendition -- I enjoyed it.  Is it sang more often than "Hie to Kolob"?  They are both pretty open about some very unique LDS beliefs, but I wonder if it gets more play because it is more like a traditional song?

Slightly more play in my opinion but it is clear both are somewhat controversial.  When I was Ward Mission Leader a hundred years ago I would cringe at "Praise to the Man" and still do, big time BUT do so much less with the others.  Just as the catechumens were kept out of the cathedral in the baptistry, there is a time and place for learning and advancement.

And perhaps controversially, I see no reason to emphasize controversial doctrines when they may not even be "Doctrine" which has been pointed out here.   We have no magisterium to decide these things, but have to have our own personal revelations about these mysteries.

[mfbukowski]

On 3/12/2017 at 7:11 PM, Ouagadougou said:

Since I don't believe the Book of Abraham is historical scripture (but a failed translation), I don't believe in Kolob.  I believe the first time Kolob was mentioned was in the Book of Abraham.  

Joseph Smith also said the following:

"Kae-e-vanrash receives its power through Kli-flos-is-es or Hah-ko-kau-beam, Kli-flos-is-es and Hah-ko kau-beam receive their light from the revolutions of Kolob. From the foregoing it appears that our solar system, the governing planet of which " the sun " is known in this Abra hamic system as Enish-go-on-dosh, is governed by, or has for a centre around which it revolves a star known as Kae-e vanrash. Kae-e-vanrash is governed by or has for a centre around which it revolves, together with its attendant systems of worlds, Kli-flos-is-es or Hah-ko-kau-beam ; and these two stars with their attendant systems are governed by or revolve around Kolob,the great centre of that part of the universe to which our planetary system belongs."

Roberts, B. H. (2013). pp. 442-3. New Witnesses for God: I, Joseph Smith, the Prophet (Vol. 1). London: Forgotten Books. (Original work published 1911) Pearl of Great Price, pp. 60, 61; 1907 edition. Reynolds' "Book of Abraham, a Divine and Ancient Record," p. 30.

 

I don't think Kolob exists--and it's just another name (like the many mentioned above) that Joseph Smith fabricated.

The words of this hymn are interesting (and I enjoy how the hymn sounds), but I don't believe Kolob is an actual planet or star.  

Oh my.

Certainty about non- existence?   Of anything?

Oh my.  How does one prove non-existence, oh master logician?   Just linguistically how can one be certain about names and their translation and variations?

Scary thinking indeed, if one can call it thinking.

[Ouagadougou]

26 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Oh my.

Certainty about non- existence?   Of anything?

Oh my.  How does one prove non-existence, oh master logician?   Just linguistically how can one be certain about names and their translation and variations?

Scary thinking indeed, if one can call it thinking.

"Kokob" and "Kokaubeam" appear at Abr 3:13, and are interpreted respectively as "star" and "stars".   These are genuine Hebrew words.   "Shinehah" in the same passage, meaning "the sun" is probably based on the Hebrew word for "year" ("shanah").   "Olea" for the moon is a word invented by Smith.   "Kolob" (Abr 3), which is supposed to be the "star" nearest to the throne of God, is perhaps intended to be the Hebrew word 'keleb' ("dog") and may refer to the star Sirius, nicknamed the "Dog Star" (Alpha Canis Majoris), the brightest star in the northern-hemisphere sky."

 "Here, too, Joseph Smith was perhaps trying to be too clever: Abraham lived at a time long before the Hebrew language had even developed.   According to the article "Hamito-Semitic Languages" in The Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed., Macr 8:592, Hebrew did not develop until the 13th century BC.   Thus, Abraham could not possibly have spoken Hebrew, since (if he existed at all) he lived about 2000 BC."

http://packham.n4m.org/linguist.htm#KOLOB

[mfbukowski]

12 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said:

"Kokob" and "Kokaubeam" appear at Abr 3:13, and are interpreted respectively as "star" and "stars".   These are genuine Hebrew words.   "Shinehah" in the same passage, meaning "the sun" is probably based on the Hebrew word for "year" ("shanah").   "Olea" for the moon is a word invented by Smith.   "Kolob" (Abr 3), which is supposed to be the "star" nearest to the throne of God, is perhaps intended to be the Hebrew word 'keleb' ("dog") and may refer to the star Sirius, nicknamed the "Dog Star" (Alpha Canis Majoris), the brightest star in the northern-hemisphere sky."

 "Here, too, Joseph Smith was perhaps trying to be too clever: Abraham lived at a time long before the Hebrew language had even developed.   According to the article "Hamito-Semitic Languages" in The Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed., Macr 8:592, Hebrew did not develop until the 13th century BC.   Thus, Abraham could not possibly have spoken Hebrew, since (if he existed at all) he lived about 2000 BC."

http://packham.n4m.org/linguist.htm#KOLOB

I can understand why you think that is relevant, but it is not.  Surprise: Scripture is not about science and is about metaphor and symbols. But nevermind anyway.

Edited March 21, 2017 by mfbukowski

[Five Solas]

On 3/13/2017 at 6:27 PM, Bernard Gui said:

 

Artistic merit notwithstanding, the answer to, "Were you there when the angels sang?" for any of us alive today is--No.

Just for fun, consider God's answer to Job's charge of injustice, beginning in Job 38:4--

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding

To which Job can only conclude (42:6)--

Therefore I despise myself,
and repent in dust and ashes

Now try to imagine this exchange if Job had been LDS:  Where was I ?!?  Well, I was right there in the pre-mortal existence!  With your latter-day prophet Joseph Smith and a whole lot of other worthy people.   No, I don't remember it exactly because of your veil thing.   But what kind of rhetorical question is that, LDS Heavenly Father?  Surely you remember.  And it's your fault that I don't!

--Erik

PS.  Of course, maybe that's how it really did go--and wicked scribes & translators over the millennia made some adjustment.  What does the JST say again?

;0)

[JLHPROF]

10 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

When I was Ward Mission Leader a hundred years ago I would cringe at "Praise to the Man" and still do, big time BUT do so much less with the others.

One of my absolute favorites.  I have no idea why so many would cringe.

[Bernard Gui]

9 minutes ago, Five Solas said:

Artistic merit notwithstanding, the answer to, "Were you there when the angels sang?" for any of us alive today is--No.

Just for fun, consider God's answer to Job's charge of injustice, beginning in Job 38:4--

Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell me, if you have understanding

To which Job can only conclude (42:6)--

Therefore I despise myself,
and repent in dust and ashes

Now try to imagine this exchange if Job had been LDS:  Where was I ?!?  Well, I was right there in the pre-mortal existence!  With your latter-day prophet Joseph Smith and a whole lot of other worthy people.   No, I don't remember it exactly because of your veil thing.   But what kind of rhetorical question is that, LDS Heavenly Father?  Surely you remember.  And it's your fault that I don't!

--Erik

PS.  Of course, maybe that's how it really did go--and wicked scribes & translators over the millennia made some adjustment.  What does the JST say again?

;0)

Were you there when they crucified our Lord?

 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

One of my absolute favorites.  I have no idea why so many would cringe.

 I wasn't aware that it was doctrinal that he was exalted or planning for his brethren  with various gods or that it was necessary for the earth to atone for anyone's blood.

And since many believe that whatever the church publishes repeatedly is Doctrine it must be Doctrine.

Edited March 21, 2017 by mfbukowski