13
Seeing It All at Once
All of the elements of the dream have been presented and interpreted. Everything is in place. The tree, the building, the iron rod, and the mists of darkness have ascended from the ground. “Numberless concourses” of mankind have entered and divided themselves into the four groups Lehi saw. Now, we can imagine ourselves walking along with Lehi—what will we do?
President Boyd K. Packer said:
You may think that Lehi’s dream or vision has no special meaning for you, but it does. You are in it; all of us are in it. (“Finding Ourselves in Lehi’s Dream,” 22)
It’s All about Agency
Picture in your mind each part of Lehi’s dream; try to see it all at once. Look at the front cover of this book if needed. You are looking at a grand illustration of agency. In fact, the entire metaphor doesn’t work unless there is agency. Agency is both wonderful and painful. The Lord taught, “Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man” (D&C 93:31).
In order for us to freely choose the tree of life, choosing the great and spacious must also be an option. Forced abstinence is not the same as freely chosen virtue. Satan wanted equality of outcome (“I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost” [Moses 4:1]). The Father’s plan was for equality of opportunity. How did Satan propose to redeem everyone? Simple. Satan “sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him” (Moses 4:3). By eliminating agency, he hoped to guarantee the outcome by limiting the opportunity. The Father’s plan is to guarantee the opportunity, allowing individuals to exercise their own agency and choose the outcome. He will force no one to heaven. Again, Lehi’s dream is a grand illustration of agency.
Some years after the vision, Lehi taught his son Jacob about “opposition in all things.” In that same conversation, he added:
Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself. (2 Nephi 2:27)
“Choose you this day whom ye will serve,” Joshua said, implying, of course, that there must be a choice (Joshua 24:15). In the world, as in Lehi’s dream, there are many choices. From the tree of life on one end to the great and spacious building on the other, and every “strange road” and “forbidden path” in between. We are placed into this world with the power to choose and act, and that is the beginning of our test. The Savior said, “And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them” (Abraham 3:25).
Four Groups, Four Paths, Four Soils
As a result of agency, we symbolically see in Lehi’s dream all of mankind dividing themselves into four groups. In fact, some have referred to Lehi’s dream as “the parable of the paths” since there are four paths in which we find everyone divided (see McConkie and Millet, Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon, 1:57).
The Savior also divided all of the world into four groups in his parable of the sower, which has also been called “the parable of the four kinds of soil.” Each of us can find ourselves in Lehi’s dream, just as we can also find ourselves in Jesus’ parable of the four different soils. Notice how the groups are similarly divided.
Recall that in the parable of the sower (see Matthew 13:3–8, 18–23) seeds fell upon four different kinds of soil, each of which brought forth different results. Jesus describes the spiritual readiness of all of mankind in that parable! Similarly, Lehi’s dream describes all of mankind. This sobering fact is also an opportunity for us to ask ourselves, “Where am I in these parables?” and “Is this where I want to be?”
Lehi’s Parable of 1 Nephi 8 |
Jesus’ Parable of the Four Kinds of Soil Matthew 13 |
Commenced in the path, overcome by mists, lost (23) |
Among thorns, heard the word, care of the world choked the word, unfruitful (7, 22) |
Partook, were ashamed, wandered off, were lost (25) |
Stony places, received the word, endured for a while, by and by was offended (5, 20–21) |
Partook, held fast, stayed (30) |
Good ground, heard the word, understood it, brought forth fruit |
No interest in the strait and narrow, moved directly toward the building (31, 32) |
By the way side, wicked one caught away that which was sown (4, 19) |
Personally, I believe these two parables are connected—and not just because they both divide mankind into four groups. When we look at Jesus’ parable of the four kinds of soil and Lehi’s parable of the four paths, I believe we are seeing different parts of a much larger story. One grand agricultural metaphor of soil, seed, season, and supper:
Part One: The Soil. Jesus sowed the seed, and the different responses men have to the seed are symbolized by four different types of soil. (See Matthew 13)
Part Two: The Seed. Alma the younger, encountered what we might call “good soil” among the poor of the Zoramites and persuaded them to plant the word (Christ) in their hearts so that it would grow. If it didn’t grow, Alma said, it’s because “your ground [or soil] is barren” (Alma 32:39), and the footnote directs us back to phase one—Matthew 13 and the parable of the sower, or four kinds of soil.
Part Three: The Season. Alma taught the Zoramites to nourish the seed with faith and patience so that it might have time to “take root” (Alma 32:42), and he indicated the type of plant he was teaching them to nourish when he warned, “if ye will not nourish the word . . . ye can never pluck of the fruit of the tree of life” (Alma 32:40; emphasis added).
Part Four: The Supper. Lehi partook of the fruit from the mature tree of life, and was shown his family’s and all of mankind’s various reactions to the tree in his dream (for a lengthier discussion, see the author’s “Weed Your Brain, Grow Your Testimony”).
The Tree of Life versus the Great and Spacious Building
“Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” This ancient riddle has baffled elementary school science classes for years. In this context, we may ask, which came first, the tree or the seed? The tree came from a seed, which came from a tree, which came from a seed, and so forth back through eternity. The tree of life is an eternal symbol. We first read of the tree of life in Genesis 2, where God made the “tree of life [to grow] also in the midst of the garden” (Genesis 2:9). Lehi saw the tree of life in his dream, Alma the Younger referred to it, and we are promised that “to him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God” (Revelation 2:7). Thus, the tree of life existed at the beginning of the creation story, in the middle of Lehi’s dream, and in the paradise of God at the end of the world. The tree is something God created or grew. The great and spacious building, by contrast, is temporary, man-made, and will eventually fall as Nephi testified (1 Nephi 11:36). The tree is spiritual and the building is secular. The contrast could not be greater.
Obviously, the place where we want to be, and where we want to remain, is near the tree of life. And yet, we are commanded to go “into all the world” and preach the gospel to every creature. This is a bit of a paradox—we are counseled to “stand . . . in holy places, and be not moved” (D&C 87:8) but also to “go into all the world.” Jesus clarified when asked the Father, “I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil” (John 17:15). The phrase “be in the world but not of the world” is a restatement of Jesus’ prayer.
In Lehi’s dream, we stay near the tree. But in life, we go out into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature, even knocking on the doors of residents of the great and spacious building. So it is vital that we take the tree with us wherever we go, and that is exactly what the scriptures promise us is possible. Alma assured the Zoramites that if they would plant the word in their hearts, and maintain it through a season of growth, it would “become a tree, springing up in you unto everlasting life” (Alma 33:23, emphasis added). Thus, the tree of life is portable, and it can be “in you” or in us as we go out into the world. The tree of life is a symbol of Christ, and we are promised each week at the sacrament table that we can “always have his Spirit to be with [us]” (Moroni 4:3) as we live in the world.
The great and spacious building is nothing but one giant distraction. It is large enough to distract our eyes and loud enough to distract our ears. It is modern and spacious and has more glitz and glamour than a simple tree. I suppose it had some measure of glory too, but it was temporary—a glory Hugh Nibley described very well:
Imitation glory is darkness; it’s sad. The glory of a merry-go-round, or the glory of Las Vegas, all that light, all that neon glitter. Is that your idea of glory? That’s not very glorious. It’s the opposite; it’s very sad, isn’t it. (Ancient Documents and the Pearl of Great Price)
Personally, I believe there were things to eat in the great and spacious building too, but nothing on the menu with the soul-satisfying power of the fruit at the tree of life. I suppose the dining experience in the great and spacious is described perfectly by Isaiah:
It shall be unto them, even as unto a hungry man which dreameth, and behold he eateth but he awaketh and his soul is empty; or like unto a thirsty man which dreameth, and behold he drinketh but he awaketh and behold he is faint, and his soul hath appetite; yea, even so shall the multitude of all the nations be that fight against Mount Zion. (2 Nephi 27:3)
It is spacious, so there must be a lot of room inside. Even though, as mentioned earlier, the activity of choice seems to be mocking and jeering. But every activity is just another distraction from the only activity that really matters.
One right thing to do, and a number of “fruitless” things to do. There is one way to live the “plan of happiness” and a thousand ways to live the “plan of misery.” To paraphrase William Law, “Unless you have chosen the kingdom of God first, in the end it will make no difference what you have chosen instead” (in Maxwell, The Smallest Part, iv). So it really makes no difference what all those spacious halls contained.
Nephi saw everything his father Lehi saw, but all of the symbols were intertwined with the life of Christ. After Nephi saw the more sobering and troubling events in the life of the Savior—events such as the trial and crucifixion and the multitudes of the earth gathered together to fight against the twelve apostles—he beheld the great and spacious building. In this case, the angel himself gives the interpretation: “Behold the world and the wisdom thereof” (1 Nephi 11:35). In the next chapter, the angel adds, “And the large and spacious building, which thy father saw, is vain imaginations and the pride of the children of men” (1 Nephi 12:18).
Nephi also added a couple of descriptors to the interpretation: “I saw and bear record, that the great and spacious building was the pride of the world; and it fell, and the fall thereof was exceedingly great. And the angel of the Lord spake unto me again saying: Thus shall be the destruction of all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, that shall fight against the twelve apostles of the Lamb” (1 Nephi 11:36).
The Fountain of Living Water versus the Fountain of Filthy Water
The water in Lehi’s dream doesn’t get as much attention as the other elements, perhaps because their descriptions are a little bit confusing. There is a fountain near the tree, but there is also a filthy river in which people drown. Are they two different rivers, or different ends of the same river? A careful reading of three different witnesses across three different chapters reveals the answer:
Lehi: I beheld a river of water; and it ran along, and it was near the tree of which I was partaking the fruit (1 Nephi 8:13; emphasis added).
Lehi: And it came to pass that many were drowned in the depths of the fountain; and many were lost from his view, wandering in strange roads (1 Nephi 8:32; emphasis added).
Nephi: I beheld that the rod of iron, which my father had seen, was the word of God, which led to the fountain of living waters, or to the tree of life; which waters are a representation of the love of God (1 Nephi 11:25; emphasis added).
The Angel: And the angel spake unto me, saying: Behold the fountain of filthy water which thy father saw; yea, even the river of which he spake; and the depths thereof are the depths of hell (1 Nephi 12:16; emphasis added).
Nephi: And I said unto them that the water which my father saw was filthiness; and so much was his mind swallowed up in other things that he beheld not the filthiness of the water (1 Nephi 15:27; emphasis added).
These verses seem to describe two fountains or rivers: A fountain of living waters, representing the love of God, and a fountain of filthy water, which is the depths of hell. These fountains and their symbolic importance are more than just a side note; they are a testimony of the reality of opposition in all things. Bruce Satterfield observed:
Lehi must have been able to see that everything the Lord established had its opposite. The tree which brought eternal life to all who endured in partaking of the fruit was opposed by the great and spacious building which brought destruction to all who dwelt therein. The living waters which brought the sweetness of life was opposed by the river of filthy water which brought the depths of hell. The rod of iron and the strait and narrow path which led those who entered therein to the tree was opposed by the mist of darkness which caused those who let go of the rod to wander off the path to their destruction. (“Lehi’s Dream”)
Although the people in the dream can be divided into four groups, we must be preoccupied with the one group—the group we must find ourselves in. The group who partakes of the tree of life and stays. Everything else is a distraction.
Feeling Joy versus Feeling Ashamed
Lehi’s dream may be described as a battle of feelings. Feeling the love of God, the joy of partaking of the fruit of the tree of life, versus the feelings of being ashamed, and the desire to conform with the pride, the vain imaginations, and the wisdom of the world. For some, feeling the joy of eating at the tree of life gave them the desire to stay at any cost. For others, feeling the disapproval from the world was just too much, and they wandered away.
Many investigators of the restored gospel would prefer to see the gold plates than go to all the trouble to gain a testimony and “feel” in their hearts that the record is true.
The world says “seeing is believing,” and—let’s be honest—who wouldn’t love to see an angel? Many of us might also prefer the “seeing” method for discerning and confirming truth. One of the steps of the scientific method is to “observe the data.” With what? With our eyes. We say, “show me, let me see it with my own eyes.”
The Lord, however, seems to prefer guiding his children by sending us feelings. He wants us to walk by faith, not by sight (see 2 Corinthians 5:7). He works more by the formula “believing is seeing.” The Lord promises that when we ask in faith we may “feel that it is right” (D&C 9:8). He doesn’t say, “now that you’ve seen, you will have faith.” Rather, “because of thy faith thou hast seen . . .” (Ether 3:9; emphasis added).
In Lehi’s dream, sojourners suddenly lose their ability to see, and must “feel” their way toward the tree of life by holding fast to the iron rod. Most of us seek to feel the truth of the gospel. But if we don’t already believe with our hearts, we are unlikely to believe with our eyes. Joseph Fielding McConkie has written:
All true religion centers in feelings, and since feelings are not subject to a system of weights and measures, it is difficult to describe them to the unspiritual. Again, our inability to describe those feelings doesn’t negate their reality. An infant’s inability to sense and feel the reality of parental love is not conditioned on his ability to explain those feelings. To know truth by sense and feeling without being able to explain or rationally defend it is an experience common to all mankind. (Seeking the Spirit, 8)
After Joseph Smith translated the golden plates, they were returned to Moroni. “How convenient,” the critics say, who must see something with their eyes in order to prove its existence. Suppose we were suddenly able to show people the plates. Do you think their presence would create instant believers? Not likely. What would be created would be a hundred theories about how someone had made a counterfeit set.
What would happen if the Lord showed us things that we could see with our eyes? Would unbelievers be convinced? Interestingly, Laman and Lemuel did see miraculous things. What happened to them? They didn’t believe their own eyes. In fact, they accused Nephi of tricking them. They said, Nephi “worketh many things by his cunning arts, that he may deceive our eyes . . .” (1 Nephi 16:38). “Show me, show me, show me!” some say, “I will believe it when I see it with my own eyes.” So the Lord shows them, and they say, “I don’t believe my eyes!” No wonder the Lord prefers to work by the “believing is seeing” method.
Those in the great and spacious building could obviously see from afar the tree of life, a glorious symbol of Christ! But it did them no good. It was impossible for them to know from such a distance the feelings that came to those who were partaking. They could not know, by sight alone, that the fruit filled those who partook with great joy. Similarly, many saw Jesus Christ during his mortal ministry. But they were past feeling, and never gained a testimony of who he was.
The great and spacious building also drew people to it because of feelings. Feeling embarrassed, feeling ashamed, feeling foolish caused many to leave the tree of life, and instead “feel their way” to the great and spacious building. There they were welcomed and felt safe in conforming with everyone else who was pointing and mocking. There they were immersed in the unrighteous feelings of pride and worldly wisdom. Popular opinion won.
Meanwhile, across the way, multitudes were partaking of the greatest joy available—and although those in the building could see what was happening across the way, they couldn’t feel a thing. It reminds me of a poster I saw once depicting a hobo dancing by the train tracks with the caption: “Those who danced were thought to be quite insane by those who could not hear the music.” In this case, those who partook were thought to be quite insane by those who could not taste or feel what those at the tree were tasting and feeling. And instead of wondering, What’s going on over there? in their pride, they simply decided that whatever those tree partakers are doing, it can’t possibly be as much fun as what we’re doing, and they decided to mock.