ALL THINGS IN COMMON
A good friend of mine asked the following question regarding my post yesterday on “there could not have been a happier people”
“Please help me understand this part…
You wrote: "All things were common between them. Regardless of being a man, woman, child, divorced, sick, widowed etc. ALL things were equal before them. How they managed to do it id not explained, but the result was peace. One person did not put himself or herself above another. They did not think they deserved more. In sharing and in equality they were all free."
To me it seems quite a jump of meaning from the word ‘common’ to the word ‘equal’… please explain.”
I already responded in the comments to a degree, but I thought that it lead to such a good discussion that I wanted to pull it up to the main level.
This is the dictionary definition of common
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/common
12 dictionary results for: common
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) – Cite This Source – Share This
com⋅mon
/ˈkɒmən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kom-uhn] Show IPA Pronunciation
adjective, -er, -est, noun –adjective
1. belonging equally to, or shared alike by, two or more or all in question: common property; common interests.
2. pertaining or belonging equally to an entire community, nation, or culture; public: a common language or history; a common water-supply system.
3. joint; united: a common defense.
4. widespread; general; ordinary: common knowledge.
5. of frequent occurrence; usual; familiar: a common event; a common mistake.
6. hackneyed; trite.
7. of mediocre or inferior quality; mean; low: a rough-textured suit of the most common fabric.
8. coarse; vulgar: common manners.
9. lacking rank, station, distinction, etc.; unexceptional; ordinary: a common soldier; common people; the common man; a common thief.
You can take the any of the first 4 definitions of "common" and I see equal all over the definition of common, especially in the first two primary definitions. It does not seem like much of a jump – they sound more like synonyms.
Now, I think that the concern, if I can put words into my friends mouth, is that he an others have been looking at equality from a playing field stand point. We should all have the opportunities, but it is up to us to make of them what we will, and some will be better than others.
That is the main topic that I would like to address.
Looking in 3rd and 4th Nephi we gain a greater understanding of what was meant. We do not have to take the dictionaries word for it. Here are the verses that stick out to me as Mormon describes what happened as the all-things-in-common phenomenon disappeared.
3Ne 6:12-14 – The Nephites began to be distinguished by rank, riches, chances for learning, pride, persecution – "And thus there became a great inequality in the land"
4Ne 1:24-26 – pride, wearing costly apparel and fine things of the world – lead to divisions into classes and "their substances no more in common among them"
Regardless of which scripture you look at you can see that on the good/peaceful side equality and commonality are synonymous with peace. Class divisions lead to dissention and eventually destruction.
There are two other major periods of peace that I think are instructive. Words of Mormon – Mosiah 6 and Mosiah 10. In both of these periods the definition of the common or equal ideal is outlined – especially well by King Benjamin. In both of these instances peace was obtained, one for 3 years and the other for 22. In neither of them was it mentioned that they had all things in common, and in both the period is comparatively short when juxtaposed to the almost 200 years of peace in 4th Nephi.
In both instances it was dissension that ended the peace. The end of peace for Mosiah 6 is found in Mosiah 26. For Mosiah 10 it is in Mosiah 11.
Mosiah 26 and 27begins the story of Alma the Younger and the sons of Mosiah.
Mosiah 11 begins the story of King Noah
Both of these individuals/groups thought they were better than those around them. They rejected the equality of the church which said that everyone should care for the poor if possible (Mosaih 4) – that they should labor with their own hands (Mosiah 11:6 and 27:4) and not expect others to provide for them.
Their desire to aspire to the riches of man and to set themselves above their brethren led to great dissension, then inequality and then eventually destruction.
Now, the system by which they obtained equality was based on love and free choice. In the two Mosiah examples, everyone worked and apparently followed King Benjamin’s council to provide for the poor without thinking whether they deserved it or not. KB said they would have peace if they did it, there was peace, so it must have been followed to a large extent. In Mosiah 10 all the people worked to provide for their sustenance.
That will help gain a measure of peace, and it is based on the free agency of man. But it did not obtain lasting peace. We can speculate as to why, but I think that I can make a strong case for some thinking that they deserved to retain more than their brethren, because they worked "harder" or had better luck or whatever. We do not know why they thought they should have more, but we see in 3rd and 4th Nephi that some did in fact believe that they did deserve more and this led to dissension.
Now, I see the dissension on two fronts. D&C 56: 16-17 describes it well.
16 Wo unto you rich men, that will not give your substance to the poor, for your riches will canker your souls; and this shall be your lamentation in the day of visitation, and of judgment, and of indignation: The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and my soul is not saved!
17 Wo unto you poor men, whose hearts are not broken, whose spirits are not contrite, and whose bellies are not satisfied, and whose hands are not stayed from laying hold upon other men’s goods, whose eyes are full of greediness, and who will not labor with your own hands!
If the poor demand distribution, and the rich refused it – I can see major dissension in the ranks.
Anyway, the point of all of this is the most peaceful period in all of Nephite history came during a time where all things were common among them (and I dare say equal). There were other times were there were large periods of peace where all parties worked for their labor, and shared to a large extent with those who’s minimum standard of living was not equal to their own (but to the degree that "all things were common" between them). And in both of these scenarios I see that it was proceeded by a people that were converted to the gospel. Keep the commandments, and developed a great love one towards each other. And that the more perfect the love got, the more equal things became.
It was not forced, but it was equal. And I believe that equality broke down because some felt they deserved more – both rich and poor – selfishness was still the root cause.
If we tried to transfer this into a political realm I think that one could not assume that a governing force of "equality" would obtain the same end result. I supposed you could make something look equal in the short term, but this would only end in tyranny. But we should not assume that all end results that end in equality resulted from tyranny.
Some will also say, well Matt, you know that it takes a great amount of money to become a doctor (for example). Don’t you think that they deserve to earn more? It is so expensive that if they did not earn more no one would go into medicine. To which I have to admit, that yes, under the current system that would be true.
But what I am talking about here, and what I believe to be backed up by these scriptural accounts is a completely different system. Under the rules of 4th Nephi if I had a proficiency in medicine I would be able to attend without the high price. The cost of education is high because we make it so. Not because it has to be. If everyone and every company had all things in common companies would not have to spend billions to develop a cure. And then they would not have to charge billions to receive the cure and recoup the cost. And if that were not in place then the whole organization of the schooling system to insurance etc would be so minimal that it would not take any more to educate a doctor as it would to educate a preschool teacher. It certainly would not be more valued. The doctor, who would have been supported by the community in getting the education he or she needed to provide care back to that community would not feel an obligation to be better off than the community that made them what they are today, but to do all things to support and sustain that community so that all would be better off together.
I’m talking about a radical transformation in the economic and political systems.
But I am not talking about radical change that is forced on these same organizations and people. The change in the scriptures was not based on a government being able to coerce those under their power into equality. That is barely a shadow of the right way, or right end result.
No, what Christ is offering is that if we believe on him, accept his will, keep his commandments, change our hearts and very natures completely from the natural man, that if we will do all of that, we will want to organize ourselves in such a way as to make the conditions of peace possible, which will lead not only to prosperity for some, but to equality for all. And at the same time, this love will ensure that the less fortunate mentally or in talent do not feel that they can take from any other person, they will learn to contribute in their own way to the maximum of their ability. Both parties will see the intrinsic value in the other and not feel better or worse. They will not demand anything of each other, but they will both love each other and contribute in all ways possible.
That to me is the standard that Christ has given to us, and it is up to each of us to decide to live it. We do not have to wait for Christ to come; we do not have to wait for the Church to institute the law of consecration. We can chose to live this way simply because we love our neighbor.
We can start. It starts inside each of us.
Be Healthy – Enjoy Life!
Matthew Stearmer
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
I love it. Thanks for the long post and discussion. Now, if we can get a few
more to engage we will have something going here. So, thank you!
I understand the concern very well, but I do not think that it is a
hijacking of the term equal – so much as the means to reach it. I think that
both capitalism and communism will both be done away with. Here is why.
The concept of ownership also leads us down a bad path a well. It makes us
think that this is mine, mine, mine. Anything that we are blessed with in
this life do not truly belong to us. The government might establish rules
that codify ownership, but it is not truly ours.
If we recognize this from the outset, then property/ownership begins to
matter very little. What we have in this life is a gift from God. It is not
ours. We are granted a stewardship, that is true, but we do not own it.
Communism has its own problems as you have already pointed out. So both
paths are not going to get us to Zion.
Any system of government that tries to enforce one or the other is not going
to get us there either. Currently the political system offers us a false
dichotomy – both of which do not get us to Zion – and the only real
difference that I see is that one group prefers one side of the argument to
the the other because of where they happen to stand at the time, or where
they hope to stand.
This is what I mean by we need a radically different system. I don't want to
try an fix either of them per se (not that I advocate doing nothing), but
even if we got either system working it still would not take us where we
want to be.
Now, we can argue over what is worse – communism or capitalism – but that is
not really my point. The argument again boils down to where you stand.
Capitalism has exploited nations and destroyed lives – you cannot say
murdered, but there are millions dead because resources were taken from one
place for the good of another and leaving poverty and despair in it wake.
Communism has been the banner under which millions have been murdered – not
exactly a stellar resume. My feeling is that Satan is going to use whatever
path he can take to do evil in the world. He has used capitalism, fascism,
communism, religions, etc. to do his work. All of these things are like a
Sword of Laban. In the right hand much good can be accomplished. The sword
was originally owned by Laban who used it to pursue and try tied to kill
Nephi and his brothers. When it was in the hands of Nephi it was used as a
defense of righteousness and a way of life.
So much in life is like that sword.
So my goal is to identify what Zion should look like – and then, instead of
trying to fix the current system – I want to help create a pattern that will
transform us as individuals into a group of people that will become
zion-like. There is no need to wait. We can make changes now to move forward
to Zion. But I do think that it is going to quite a bit different that the
systesm we currently have in place.
Sure, in the mean time let's get the systems in place now as good as we can,
but we should not fool ourselves into thinking that make a better boat will
change its course of direction. Do you agree or disagree with that
assessment?
I think that I am going to need to start a forum here, so we can get more
comments and let others start threds. I like your idea for future topcis and
I will include them for sure. Thanks!
Matt S
To be brief, I agree. The notions of man mingled with scripture have led many to destruction of some degree or another. Definitions and implementations are so varied as to sometimes not allowing rational people to carry on a productive exchange. That is why early on in other discussions I attempted to establish some basic understanding of terms and the definitions that we give to them. Some of that clarification has taken place over the course of our exchanges. Perhaps that could be a place to start another discussion of critical principles and ideas essential to peace and happiness for the human family.
To answer your question, you wrote “Sure, in the mean time let's get the systems in place now as good as we can,but we should not fool ourselves into thinking that make a better boat will change its course of direction. Do you agree or disagree with that
assessment?”
My reply is this… I have been on a few boats and the only one that is safe is the Lord's. However, as a citizen of the USA and a member of the LDS faith, I have an obligation to stand for truth and uphold liberty… Pres. Packer's most recent conference talk has spoken directly to the duty of Latter-day Saints in that regard. So I do not believe that making a better boat is a viable solution. The divine establishment of this country as it has been revealed in D&C requires our faith and best efforts to protect and honor its foundations. As Elder Packer explained “We will anchor ourselves as families and as a church to these principles and ordinances. Whatever tests lie ahead, and they will be many, we must remain faithful and true.”
So what does the implementation of being 'true and faithul' mean to the proper role of our government? I'm not sure exactly… So like you I want to identify what Zion would be like… What did Enoch have that we don't? Further more, what is it that allowed his people to love one another so much? I agree that all that we claim as ours is certainly not our own, but God's blessing. So to view things as 'they really are' is key I think. For some (and me) it is a big step from comprehending the truth that all things are His, and acting in accordance to that truth. I believe it can be useful to learn line upon line in this regard (idea of private property) so we grown in light and truth eventually to the greater understanding that all things are God's.
Perhaps the prophets have already told us the better way and it is for us to find it and follow. So I agree with you in that my goal is also to identify what Zion is and how I can become what God has encouraged me to be. I have feeling that the 'pattern' you refer to has already been given.. now can I quote it? Not yet. I do know this.. Christ is the rock upon which if men build they can not fall and that Ezra Taft Benson has told us it takes a righteous people to secure liberty. Those might be a starting point for further discussion.
This is certainly not a exhaustive list of topics, but another that has recently grasped my attention is the family. This core foundation of human kind is where the best department of education, health and human services resides.. or at least the best possibility of the best. :0) To me, this is where we can all start improving and as the families of communities and nations are established upon truth and light, our institutions to protect those God given rights will reflect that success. Perhaps it is a sad realization that many parts of the world do not enjoy the most basic of human rights and live in fear and poverty. So in the end, all of the struggles that are advocated in the halls of congress, parliaments and battlefields do not have as much power as the loving environment of good families.
Thank you for putting up with my meager attempt at making sense of difficult and complex concerns. I love simplicity and truth.
Your friend,
Jonathan
It was wonderful post and the good article we can learn a lot of things from this and i learned a lot of information by reading this post.
Synonyms play a great role in our words. We actually do not speak or write appropriate words in the right place. So knowledge of definitions of every word is important.
The article provides much information about the religion matters and which is very n=much useful information can be seen but the thing is the article should in a user friendly understood manner it should need little modifications to understand easily
It is very interesting,thank you for given a lot of information about religions.I learned a lot.It is very useful to the people.Once again thank you for this blog.
Thank you for the clarification… I believe we are on the basic same page in this idea.. I'll just be direct to my concern.
I think to many times words have been high-jacked (some may call it) to have quite a different meaning… Again, it's about the implementation of this idea and it's practical application. Equality does not always equal peace…
Take for instance…
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes. (so the state is the sole 'owner' of property… to hold all property collectively to achieve a egalitarian society.)
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. (since no one 'owns' the production of their own labor.. the untaxed amount is a blessing from the state)
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture. (responsibility shared by all to work.. demanded by force)
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country. (equality of the use of land…?)
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c., &c. (equality to the same limited understanding… for the production of better workers.)
My own comments added.
Of course you might recognize this as the 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto. (This seems extreme… but if you can stay with me…) Much of this philosophy relies upon the egalitarian ideal. Again, equality does not always equal peace. So many times it is a matter of a few degrees that leads some down the path of destruction. As you know both plans presented at the Great Council in Heaven had the same result, just very different courses. My point is the term equality can be used to justify evil purposes that sound so right. I'm happy to see that you quoted the prophets and the Lord in your reply to my question rather than this list… :0)
I whole heartedly agree with the references from the Book of Mormon and other scriptures. Unfortunately, in today's world not many are referencing those passages in their daily discussion of equality.
One of my main concerns in all of this is the idea that a blinded equality can lead to the removal of private property, which in my mind is the basis for liberty. Much of the peace that you referred to started with an awakening to the truth of who we are in relationship to God. This truth lead to a greater respect and truthful morality. Much can be said about the love of many after the Lord came to the Nephites. However as we read toward the end of 3rd Nephi we see that even the disciples were not welcomed in many parts of the land. The free exchange of ideas was limited.
You mentioned 3rd Nephi 6:12-14..
12 And the people began to be distinguished by ranks..
Notice the 'people' began to distinguish… Again much of the philosophy of Marxism relies upon the 'class' struggle.. the proletariate against the bourgeois.. 'Workers of the world unite.' Poor vs. rich… educated vs. uneducated… etc, etc. Turning toward a forced equality of the kind of Mr. Marx is of course destruction of the human soul. In verse 14 we read the cause of this iniquity… “Satan had great power…” Those people gave up their power to him as they replaced the light and truth for the 'vain things of the world.'
So what would you say to a distinction of the word equality? Might I suggest the terms blind equality and true equality.. blind because of the inability to recognize the truth of our relationship toward God and each other… and true to represent the Lord's equality that you referenced.
My conclusion is this.. thank you for your explanation of the true equality talked about in the scriptures. However, my concern remains. Many who use the the word 'equality' do not refer to the same passages. It would be of interest to me to continue this line of thinking and reasoning to identify, as best we can, the principles that allowed for liberty, peace, and true equality to fill the hearts of those who followed Christ. That to me would be very helpful. I have a suspicion that a true equality requires a righteous people or in the words of a prophet…
“Yes, I repeat, righteousness is an indispensable ingredient to liberty. Virtuous people elect wise and good representatives. Good representatives make good laws and then wisely administer them. This tends to preserve righteousness. An unvirtuous citizenry tend to elect representatives who will pander to their covetous lustings. The burden of self-government is a great responsibility. It calls for restraint, righteousness, responsibility, and reliance upon God. It is a truism from the Lord that “when the wicked rule the people mourn.â€
Ezra Taft Benson
http://is.gd/7WeW
Thanks,
Jonathan
p.s. some other interesting quotes on equality…
http://www.quoty.org/quote/1628
http://www.quoty.org/quote/2457
http://www.quoty.org/quote/2518
p.s.s.
I must mention your explanation of the Doctor and his education 'rubs' me the wrong way… I'm tired and would like to address it another time, but here are a few thoughts. My thoughts on private property (not just land.. but mind and body and our stewardship) will have to partially speak to those ideas. Also, another discussion of the idea of 'high prices' would be interesting to tackle… If we pay for it is it too high?