Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Jaredites, Israelites, statements from Prophets speaking as prophets and perhaps inaccuracy of Bible


Doug the Hutt

Recommended Posts

Amos and the children of Israel.

Amos 3:1-2:

1 Hear this word that the Lord hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying,

2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.

...

Amos was the Lord's Prophet from 792-740BC. A straightforward reading of the above verses has the Lord through the Prophet Amos addressing the children of Israel and telling them that He, the Lord, has only known Israel of all the families of the Earth. It's plain and precious that there weren't any others with whom the Lord collaborated, blessed besides Israel. Sure, He punished lots of others but that's not the intimate kind of relationship He had with Israel.

The Jaredites.

According to (literalistic) LDS beliefs the Jaredites were a people who broke away by the Lord's command and grew into a great nation of millions of people in a land which was known by none others -- many many years before Amos was even born. The Lord Himself poked some rocks and made them glow. He revealed His spiritual body to Mohonri and called Himself "Jesus Christ", not even Jehovah or Yahweh or I-Am-That-I-Am. He instructed the Prophet Mohonri Moriancumer in how to build the barges. He delivered to Mohonri stones which a Seer could use to read the words which he would write owing to the confounding of the languages. He made the wind continuously and furiously pound against the barges to get them to their destination a mere 344 days later. These people were certainly known by the Lord and these people did know the Lord. These Jaredites continued on becoming prosperous until secret societies and greed destroyed then. King Zedekiah's son, Prince Mulek and his courageous band of fellow travelers landed somewhere in the Americas after 600 BC and found Coriantumr, one of two remaining "Jaredites" who lived with them for "9 moons". We only have 1% of their writings, teachings and interactions with the Lord. The rest aren't to be had by us and are in the Lord's or Moroni's possession.

How do we reconcile a knowledge of:

1. the Jaredites, lead by holy men, taught from on-high, chosen by God Himself to live in a choice land above all others.

and

2. a statement drafted from the desk of the Prophet Amos indicating that the Lord Himself through Amos only knew the children of Israel, and no other families on the Earth.

Is that beginning part of Amos 3:2 mistranslated? Did it at one time say "You and [one other/many other] family(ies) have I known of all the families of the earth,: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities and don't even ask what I plan on doing with _them_ lest you receive the same punishment"?

Did the Lord forget to mention that relatively massive population of chosen people on the other side of the world?

Did the Lord intentionally not mention this vast other-chosen-people to Amos or any other prophets?

Was Amos just trying to come up with a really good instructional device so the people would understand how blessed/wicked they were, independent of any specific instruction from God?

Did the Lord make the Jaredite people known to Amos and Amos just decided that the children of Israel just didn't need heavy-meaty-teachings like that because it would just confuse everyone (like reconciling the label "gentile" from "Israelite" and needing to figure out a label that works for this new gentilic-non-Israelite-also-chosen-people)?

Doesn't the Old Testament seem to suggest that there's an exclusive relationship between the Lord and the House of Israel? I get that feeling anytime I come across a passage where the Lord told His people "...and I will be your God and you will be my people."

Do we just shrug our shoulders and say that a single statement by a single leader (in this case Amos' statement) does not necessarily constitute doctrine?

I'm interested in what you think, if you've ever noticed things like that and how you make them uncontentious in your minds. G'nite folks.

Link to comment

First of all, it is a gross misunderstanding of the Church's position on the Bible for our critics to imply that every time an apparent discrepancy appears between their beliefs and ours, we would shrug our shoulders and say, well, the Bible has been corrupted. I for one am a little tired of it. We can defend our beliefs quite nicely utilizing the present text, thank you.

Now on to your question.

It is pretty obvious that by the time the house of Israel developed, most of the other descendants of Adam had lost the knowledge of the gospel that was once had upon the earth. So God established a special covenant with Israel. But would you deny that the "eight who were saved" in Noah's ark were a people of God? What about Abraham and the people of faith who clustered around him?

The Book of Mormon never claims that the Jaredites had circumcision, the Law of Moses, etc.

As for the name Jesus Christ being revealed to them, maybe it was. Not a faith-breaker to me. It is also possible that they knew Him by a name in their language which corresponds to Jehovah the anointed one saves, which is of course the meaning of the title familiar to us as Jesus Christ. Please note that the name Jehovah is contained within the name Jesus.

Link to comment

Amos and the children of Israel.

Amos 3:1-2:

1 Hear this word that the Lord hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying,

2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.

...

Doesn't the Old Testament seem to suggest that there's an exclusive relationship between the Lord and the House of Israel? I get that feeling anytime I come across a passage where the Lord told His people "...and I will be your God and you will be my people."

Do we just shrug our shoulders and say that a single statement by a single leader (in this case Amos' statement) does not necessarily constitute doctrine?

Think a little on the Hebrew behind "earth", as reflected in The Book of Moses, "I beheld many lands and each land was called earth." It's all a matter of reading with perspective, rather than presentist reading in terms of absolutes.

In the description of the plague of locusts in Exodus, we are told that the locusts covered the face of the earth. Including Terra Del Fuego and Point Barrow, and Tahiti? Or, just the face of the earth as perceived by a local observer? An unreasonable reader could make a similar misreading there, and generate similar problems.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Link to comment

Think a little on the Hebrew behind "earth", as reflected in The Book of Moses, "I beheld many lands and each land was called earth." It's all a matter of reading with perspective, rather than presentist reading in terms of absolutes.

You mean like this?

Gen. 19:23

Link to comment

Amos and the children of Israel.

Amos 3:1-2:

1 Hear this word that the Lord hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying,

2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.

...

Amos was the Lord's Prophet from 792-740BC. A straightforward reading of the above verses has the Lord through the Prophet Amos addressing the children of Israel and telling them that He, the Lord, has only known Israel of all the families of the Earth. It's plain and precious that there weren't any others with whom the Lord collaborated, blessed besides Israel. Sure, He punished lots of others but that's not the intimate kind of relationship He had with Israel.

The Jaredites.

According to (literalistic) LDS beliefs the Jaredites were a people who broke away by the Lord's command and grew into a great nation of millions of people in a land which was known by none others -- many many years before Amos was even born. The Lord Himself poked some rocks and made them glow. He revealed His spiritual body to Mohonri and called Himself "Jesus Christ", not even Jehovah or Yahweh or I-Am-That-I-Am. He instructed the Prophet Mohonri Moriancumer in how to build the barges. He delivered to Mohonri stones which a Seer could use to read the words which he would write owing to the confounding of the languages. He made the wind continuously and furiously pound against the barges to get them to their destination a mere 344 days later. These people were certainly known by the Lord and these people did know the Lord. These Jaredites continued on becoming prosperous until secret societies and greed destroyed then. King Zedekiah's son, Prince Mulek and his courageous band of fellow travelers landed somewhere in the Americas after 600 BC and found Coriantumr, one of two remaining "Jaredites" who lived with them for "9 moons". We only have 1% of their writings, teachings and interactions with the Lord. The rest aren't to be had by us and are in the Lord's or Moroni's possession.

How do we reconcile a knowledge of:

1. the Jaredites, lead by holy men, taught from on-high, chosen by God Himself to live in a choice land above all others.

and

2. a statement drafted from the desk of the Prophet Amos indicating that the Lord Himself through Amos only knew the children of Israel, and no other families on the Earth.

Is that beginning part of Amos 3:2 mistranslated? Did it at one time say "You and [one other/many other] family(ies) have I known of all the families of the earth,: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities and don't even ask what I plan on doing with _them_ lest you receive the same punishment"?

Did the Lord forget to mention that relatively massive population of chosen people on the other side of the world?

Did the Lord intentionally not mention this vast other-chosen-people to Amos or any other prophets?

Was Amos just trying to come up with a really good instructional device so the people would understand how blessed/wicked they were, independent of any specific instruction from God?

Did the Lord make the Jaredite people known to Amos and Amos just decided that the children of Israel just didn't need heavy-meaty-teachings like that because it would just confuse everyone (like reconciling the label "gentile" from "Israelite" and needing to figure out a label that works for this new gentilic-non-Israelite-also-chosen-people)?

Doesn't the Old Testament seem to suggest that there's an exclusive relationship between the Lord and the House of Israel? I get that feeling anytime I come across a passage where the Lord told His people "...and I will be your God and you will be my people."

Do we just shrug our shoulders and say that a single statement by a single leader (in this case Amos' statement) does not necessarily constitute doctrine?

I'm interested in what you think, if you've ever noticed things like that and how you make them uncontentious in your minds. G'nite folks.

[/quoThe

The Lord is the God of Israel and Israel are his chosen people. God only worked with Israel throughout the years and nobody else. The Gentiles were without God until Christ was resurrected and told his apostles to go to the Gentiles and preach the gospel. When Christ was here preaching he said he has come for the lost sheep of Israel. He taught only Israel when he was here and sent his Apostles to teach the Gentiles. Christ and Israel are a light unto the Gentiles. Yes there was an exclusive relationship with God and Israel until they rejected him and sinned and against the gospel so He turned to the Gentiles. The Gentiles have the gospel now. When the times of the Gentiles ends then the gospel will be given back to Israel.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...