What's the lesson from the 10 Lepers healed?

In the Bible, we read of 10 lepers being healed. We understand from Luke 17 that there were 10 men outside the city limits and not able to assimilate into common life due to their contagious disease. They asked Jesus to heal them, He did, and 1 leper turned back to thank Jesus for the miracle and new life he had just been awarded.

Do we learn something of Christ's ability to perform miracles?
Well, we have many other accounts that could give us this kind of knowledge. So, without the 10 lepers account, we would already know Christ can perform miraculous healings-blind to see, lame to walk, dead to rise, demons to leave.

Do we learn something of the requirement of faith to have miracles performed?  Again, there are other accounts where Christ is clear that faith must come before a miracle is to be given-Mark 9:39,
Mark 9:23-24.

But what of the last part of that story, where the 1 leper returns to thank Jesus?

That part of the story contains 5 of the 9 verses that tell the whole story, (and the first verse merely orients us as to where Jesus was traveling). So more than half of the account of the 10 lepers speak of the leper who returned to give thanks.

Is it not important then if more is written about gratitude and thanks than is written of the plea for help and the miracle?

The lepers cried from afar off. But after their plea, they do not speak to Jesus again.

Do we do that?

Cry to God in prayer or in our minds for help, and that's it?

Or do we remember to thank Him for each and every blessing and help we asked him for?

It must mean a whole lot to God for someone to return and give thanks.

I know people who "live in thanksgiving daily" and they are some of the happiest people I know. Are they void of all hardship? No. But they understand where the focus should be and they don't forget.

Just like the 1 leper.

A few other articles that speak of the wonders of gratitude:

O How Great the Plan of Our God     "We are surrounded by such an astonishing wealth of light and truth that I wonder if we truly appreciate what we have."

Gratitude on the Sabbath Day   "Of all the blessings we can count, the greatest by far is the feeling of forgiveness that comes as we partake of the sacrament. We will feel greater love and appreciation for the Savior, whose infinite sacrifice made possible our being cleansed from sin. As we partake of the bread and water, we remember that He suffered for us. And when we feel gratitude for what He has done for us, we will feel His love for us and our love for Him."

The Divine Gift of Gratitude    Sincerely giving thanks not only helps us recognize our blessings, but it also unlocks the doors of heaven and helps us feel God’s love.

Said the Greek philosopher Epictetus, “He is a wise man who does not grieve for the things which he has not, but rejoices for those which he has.”

Notice that the Savior gave thanks for what they had—and a miracle followed: “And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the broken meat that was left seven baskets full.”

“And in nothing doth man offend God, or against none is his wrath kindled, save those who confess not his hand in all things.”

In the Book of Mormon we are told to “live in thanksgiving daily, for the many mercies and blessings which [God] doth bestow upon you.”

If ingratitude be numbered among the serious sins, then gratitude takes its place among the noblest of virtues. Someone has said that “gratitude is not only the greatest of virtues, but the parent of all others.”

President Joseph F. Smith, sixth President of the Church, said: “The grateful man sees so much in the world to be thankful for, and with him the good outweighs the evil. Love overpowers jealousy, and light drives darkness out of his life.” He continued: “Pride destroys our gratitude and sets up selfishness in its place. How much happier we are in the presence of a grateful and loving soul, and how careful we should be to cultivate, through the medium of a prayerful life, a thankful attitude toward God and man!”

10 Lepers

Luke 17:12 10 Lepers "stood afar off"-they were outcasts, unclean and unwanted.

(Do we feel like this? Have we ever battled something and felt alone, outcast or unclean? No? Just me? Ok, then no need to read any further in Luke 17. You're good!)

Luke 17:13 "Jesus, Master, have mercy on us" - they knew him from afar...had probably heard 'rumors' of a miraculous healing done before and then there were rumblings of Jesus coming to their lands....and they held out hope for a miracle to be done for them. 

We read in scriptures, and see examples around us of blessings we desire....but maybe we feel too far gone, unclean, unwanted, outcast from that extra special and privileged group. 

This group had enough faith to cry out.

We have just as direct access to Christ's healing power and blessings as these 10 lepers did! 

They cried out. We cry out!
The same "Physician" is on the other end. 

Luke 17:14 "Go shew yourselves unto the priests" 

This took faith and action. They could probably get into serious trouble for walking into the city and up to the priests while still being leprous and contagious. They were VERY well aware of this. Surely there were other lepers  in that area...but perhaps they didn't believe in the "stories" of miracles? And so they chose to stay in their secluded area? 

I wonder how those other lepers felt when they finally got wind that their bunk mate or chore chap was freed from his burden...and he/she was still stuck.

I bet they wished they could run the streets over in search of this miraculous healer.

(Do we search....intently & urgently....for an answer to what ails us? Do we know where to find Him who has the power to heal? )

(Do miracles happen today? When? To whom? To you? There may have been some we already took for granted in receiving. )

Luke 17:15-16, 19  Think for a moment how those lepers felt as they watched their bodies being healed in real time. 

With each step, more renewed strength and health. 

What were their thoughts? What did they do after seeing the priests? Who did they visit next?

At least 1 of them wasn't so totally & wholly consumed with what was happening to his/herself. He was cognizant of the source of this great blessing. 

He did not forget the reason, the root, for the beginning of his new life. For surely it was a new and different one from the life he previously envisioned just hours and days before. 

"One of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God. And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks."

Turned Back! ....more than lip service. More than a quick prayer of thanks....he walked back, or maybe ran, to say how grateful he was. 

Have we ever felt so full to the brim of gratitude for someone or something? What did you do? What do you wish you had done? 

Perhaps it is the moment you found your testimony. Or your testimony was renewed/strengthened. 

I bet that leper never forgot to give thanks in his prayers for his new life. 

"loud voice glorified God"--wasn't just between him and God...he wanted everyone to know what God had done. Gave all the credit to Him.  

Matt 11:28 "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest". 

Christ asks the same of us. 

Come unto Him, find rest.

This is a BIG deal. Let's not act otherwise.... LDS Church and Gay couples....and their children

The LDS Church "changed" a policy regarding children of same-sex couples who live in the home. There has been alot of discussion on this policy.....articles have been written, news stories have been reported, and just recently a resignation letter 'march' was organized by those discontented with the change in a park in Salt Lake City. I have read a fair amount of the articles...both for and against the policy change. At the risk of being tedious, I'd like to add my 'chatter' to the noise.

I first read about the change on Facebook. I thought it was a hoax at first. I checked google. It wasn't a joke. The Church was really keeping children from being baptized and ordained. I immediately thought of the scripture that so many have quoted regarding this 'change': "suffer little children to come unto me"... (Matthew 19:14)
But then I looked into the reason behind the policy. I thought about the implications it would have...on both the children and the parents. I felt like it was a good idea to attempt to get a perspective from every side (as I do not believe there are just 'two' sides to this...there are the children, the same-sex parents, the leaders of the LDS church who made the policy addition to the handbook, the active members of the LDS church, the members of the LDS church who have not stepped inside a church house in awhile, and those who have never been to a LDS church but feel just as inclined to make judgement calls). There are alot of players to this roulette. And be especially weary of that black and white print you read that uses false words like "shun", "hate", "bigotry" and "for humanity's sake".....that shows a lack of full and complete understanding regarding the whole topic.

The arguments against this new policy change are varied and many times heated. A few I've heard are this:

*I feel like this change is trying to make me feel bad enough as a parent to end my [same-gender] relationship [because I am now responsible for keeping them from being baptized or receiving ordination to the priesthood].

*Oh look, it's an old, gray monotonous-tone man interviewing another old, gray monotonous tone man." [Does this mean the church isn't 'hip' or trending right along with the world and so it must not be relevant? Or do they think that only those their relative same age have anything to offer them?]

*But Jesus said, "Forbid them not" and suffer the little children to come unto Him. Why is the church keeping children away from baptism and ordination when Christ told his disciples to let the children come to him?

*"It's 2015, man" 

*Doesn't God love ALL His children? This change affects people personally, and will cause alot of harm, damage, pain and heartache.

*The scariest one is this: "God is not in this decision" 

But, truthfully, if we sat down and addressed all these concerns, and any others, to the point of potential clear understanding, would any of those proponents for the above concerns all of a sudden change their minds? Would they flip their view point and claim adherence to the new policy that just previously they were vehemently against? There may be a few exceptions, but the majority will probably hold steady to what they brought to the table. 

So, if we are honest with ourselves, does this new policy change more accurately show what "side" we are already on rather than 'helping us choose' which side to align ourselves with. 

Most of the arguments have focused on ONE single item. Either the relationship between child and parent(s) or the relationship between the family and the Church.

Can we step back and focus on the BLESSING, COVENANT and ORDINATION this policy is dealing with. This may help. Not many arguments address these specific events in the child's life for which the policy change was dedicated.

Baby Blessing, Baptism (between ages 8-17) and Priesthood Ordination (prior to 18 years of age).

Side thought: For those who argue "for humanity's sake" and say that this policy change is targeting people that have done no wrong and are being ill-treated....we need to address something serious.
And that is: absolutes.
It seems as though the world would wish that 'whatever and whoever and however' people wish to live should be left alone. Of course we know that the full extent of that argument cannot hold true---the terrorist event in Paris and events in Egypt show that allowing people to do 'whatever' they want according to their beliefs is dangerous--fatally so.

But those same proponents of this strain of thought say, "those living in same-sex relationships are doing no one harm". There is no argument there. You are absolutely right. "But shouldn't they be allowed happiness and love, too?" Of course, no one wishes to condemn them, or anyone, to a life sub-par to that which would provide the greatest chance of happiness. But, using that same strain of thought, and not to diminish something so large and serious, I could say, "food makes me really happy and I should be able to eat as much and whatever I want. It just makes me happy." There are too many studies and real life examples to show that the effect of that free exercise of thought does not end up bringing happiness. It does for awhile. That hamburger, french fry, Marie Callender chocolate satin pie, all taste REAL good going down....but I CANNOT escape the equally real consequences. I will have to buy bigger clothes to support my 'happiness'. Some food is good, necessary even. But too much? Not a good idea. I know, people are not on the same level as food. But, hold on. Let me explain. First, read the scripture below:

2 Nephi 2:13  "And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away."

Now, back to absolutes. There are absolutes in this life. We cannot escape them. Gravity, cooking food to healthy temperatures...there are things that are true no matter how much people could scream the opposite. The arguments against absolutes do not hold up. How about bringing children into this world? Is that an absolute? Is there ANY other way other than bringing a man and a woman together, using their respective creative powers? So far, and I'm pretty sure it won't change, there has not been found another way to bring a child into this world. We need one man and one woman. This is the beginning of existence. Let me be bold and say that the purpose of existence, is to learn God's law, obey it and try to assist as many people along the way as possible before we pass onto the next life for judgment on those tenets.
We begin life with a man and woman, they have a child. That child is their responsibility until he/she reaches the age of maturity (though the law says 18, it can be argued that some reach that age much later on in life...some never do?). That child is best helped when taught right from wrong. The child is incapable of this lesson, cognitively speaking, until age 8. Now how does this relate to the LDS Church and its policy? The LDS Church baptizes children age 8 and above. But will no longer do so for children who live with parents who are in a same-sex gender relationship. Why? Let's first look at why the LDS Church does not baptize infants and little children :
Moroni 8:8, 10, 13,  "Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me.
Behold I say unto you that this thing shall ye teach—repentance and baptism unto those who are accountable and capable of committing sin; yea, teach parents that they must repent and be baptized, and humble themselves as their little children, and they shall all be saved with their little children.
Wherefore, if little children could not be saved without baptism, these must have gone to an endless hell." 

adf


Abraham 2:12 "Now, after the Lord had withdrawn from speaking to me, and withdrawn his face from me, I said in my heart: Thy servant has sought thee earnestly; now I have found thee"