CV75

The lens of the restored gospel certainly helps us understand the way things should be. Two questions I have about the article is (1) the relationship between the Hebrew word for "rule over" and "parable," which is the most common translation of the root. The translation "shall parable over" doesn't make sense except as a riddle or a pun, so why is the root of rule over "parable"? Is it because we are taught in parables (literal and virtual) instead of in God's direct presence? This gets into language (which is beyond the scope of the article). (2) Similarly, the Hebrew word for "desire" in Genesis 3:16 ("teshuqah"), meaning a complex dynamic of tension, needn't only be taken as contentious, but also in a sense of more positive, complimentary tension such as "ying-yang." The article doesn't get into it, but Genesis 3:16 (and surrounding text and story) could be simultaneously read as both the way Fallen and Redeemed relationships can be, and maybe both principles are being taught, leaving the choice of application to the reader/hearer. The article does admit to confirming an idea, so perhaps the author might someday explore and research additional ideas.

I am not a scholar. In my brief search, I found two Hebrew texts for this phrase in Genesis 3:16: וְה֖וּא יִמְשָׁל־ב (yimshal-bakh) is a direct translation of the Hebrew. "shall rule over you". Yimshal is an imperfect form of the root word mashal (מָשַׁל), often meaning "to rule," "govern," or "have mastery" HOWEVER! The most common translation of mashal is “parable” or “proverb” – a similitude (e.g., Job 30:19 says, "I have become a proverb [wa-et-mashel] like dust and ashes". A parable is "over " in that it "covers" the literal reality it represents so that those who choose to see will see. So, while these meanings are contextual, could it be that this is a multi-layered textual riddle suitable for our testing in a fallen condition? Could it mean that Adam is to rule over Eve as a parable, or in similitude, of the Son of God (the Word, the Parable), following His pattern for all attributes in context of expressing divine power through the administration of priesthood covenants and ordinances? Could our interpreted context be part of the test?

From Abraham 2, a very comprehensive record the Abrahamic Covenant teaches that the Priesthood is metaphorically the seed. The restoration of the priesthood through Joseph Smith is key to fulfilling the promise that the kindred of the earth are blessed, on both sides of the veil. 8 My name is Jehovah, and I know the end from the beginning; therefore my hand shall be over thee. 9 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations; 10 And I will bless them through thy name; for as many as receive this Gospel shall be called after thy name, and shall be accounted thy seed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their father; 11 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, in thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal. Joseph Smith is among Abraham's literal seed and his role is clear in fulfilling the promise to Abraham of blessing all the families of the earth. That is why D&C 124 refers to the Abrahamic Covenant in these terms: "And as I said unto Abraham concerning the kindreds of the earth, even so I say unto my servant Joseph: In thee and in thy seed shall the kindred of the earth be blessed." Joseph Smith restored and was given the keys for fulfilling this promise. 59 Therefore, let my servant Joseph and his seed [if not literal, then in the Priesthood] after him have place in that house [if not in this "Nauvoo Hose" for various, then in the heavenly House of the Lord], from generation to generation, forever and ever, saith the Lord. Since D&C 124 is about both sacred structures, they fulfil this promise in complimentary ways. The mission of the Nauvoo House was consistent with the Abrahamic Covenant. That resources were redirected from its completion to the higher priority temple construction doesn't change anything. The enemies of God only enjoy a temporary victory. The Manion House became a temporary solution to provide a home for the Smith family and provide room for, albeit fewer, visitors. Nauvoo House blesses the kindreds of the earth in a literal / temporal hotel setting where the things of the Spirit are facilitated, and the Nauvoo Temple blesses them in a symbolic / spiritual temple setting where the covenants of God are transmitted. Hopefully we can see their parallels with the literal seed of the body and the spiritual seed of the Priesthood. I haven't watched this, but I imagine it covers these points: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/video/joseph-smith-papers/2009-02-1041-episode-41-the-nauvoo-temple-and-nauvoo-house?lang=eng

I believe He had and has a sexual nature. Since you've qualified the second question in terms of entertainment, can you describe the functionality of your reproductive system, supported by the results of your semen analysis, and your ability to produce human offspring? This will help me to draw inferences, implications and speculations about the Lord's atonement in relation to your experience with these, since He comprehends everyone's situations, circumstances and particulars.

Here is how I see Christ exceeding my debt (tying it to Abraham 3, "I am more intelligent than they all [combined'...": I do no fully comprehend the depths a life, if any at all, without His intercession would be like. Yes, I feel bad when I sin and good when I repent, but I cannot comprehend just how bad I would feel if my trajectory continued to its unaided conclusion, complete and utter spiritual and physical death. He does not hold me accountable for what I do not know and cannot do (reducing my debt accordingly), but He does create a mansion and enable me to live there as if I did (a vastly larger payment). Christ suffered for what I do and do not comprehend. I may grow into this fullest degree of comprehension as I grow in Him, but He made room for that growth. Similarly, He has the wherewithal to pay my debt and then transform it into credit and wealth untold. Beauty from ashes. By paying more than the debt He both liberates me and owns the bank. Since God is more godly than all His children combined, His suffering had to cover the gap between the combination and whatever His greater than the combination is, hence His "all" exceeded our combined "all" by at least double.

I do not know (nor is it within my purview o know), but it is certainly available to all the posterity of Adam no matter the dispensation in which it was introduced or restored. We only call it the Abrahamic covenant because that is the reference point the Lord wants to work with as He prepares the world for His Second Coming. He seemed to refer to Moses and Abraham in His own mortal ministry as well.

The same anointing that Abraham received, and that any saint may receive when the keys are available for it. We refer to it as the Abrahamic covenant. Joseph Smith was the first in this dispensation to receive it, and so the saying (covenant) to Abraham serves as the pattern for what was said to Joseph Smith, which in its restoration through him is the pattern used for the rest of us who will receive it. The anointing in verse 57 is a subset of the anointings in verse 39, which are a subset of the ordinances in verse 38, which are a subset of the fulness of the priesthood in verse 28. The references to baptism for the dead, the tabernacle/temple/house and the administrative and temporal aspects thereof expand the understanding that this anointing principle to cover both sides of the veil and material aspects of the holy priesthood and its blessings.

I think no matter where we begin in ignorance (and even rebellion), if we are not willing to be open to correction through the means God has provided, we are worshipping a false god (ourselves, principles, etc.). Of course, we can be open to correction of even that!

The Abrahamic covenant applies to anyone's seed. The was Lord was speaking to Joseph at the time as the High Priest through whom these keys were restored, so what applies to him extends to all who make the covenant(s) under those auspices. If I'm still not understanding, hat is your specific question, and its context, about Joseph's seed?

No, because Nephi didn't say "always." The Lord prepares a way and may allow His enemies to frustrate it for the time being (perhaps Nephi wasn't the first the Lord commanded to get these plates into the hands of a righteous branch). I think the purpose and ramifications of the task at hand may also play a part in determining the Lord's guarantee of immediate and miraculous completion

Why is Moses the example used to show that God has always commanded his people to build tabernacles or temples? Why not name any people prior to him? Because Moses committed to Joseph Smith the keys of gathering and there's the tie-in. It seems like God did not make the choice all by himself but rather chose the place for the house that was already contemplated by Joseph or others. God often inspires people before He commands them ("great minds think alike" principle). It was probably a combination of both God's choice and Joseph Smith's contemplation. We often make a decision before the Lord confirms it; commandments rarely come out of thin air. What anointing was placed on Joseph Smith's lineage and how have the kindred of the earth been blessed through his seed? The anointing is Elias committing to Joseph Smith Abraham the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham and there's the tie-in. Is this the only time two people concurrently held the keys to bind and loose? No, there is the model of “a quorum of three presidents anciently” described in D&C 107, and all the first Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve have those keys today (all are prophets, seers and revelators). There is no longer a Church Patriarch, only stake patriarchs, for practical purposes. Do one or more people hold the keys of the patriarchal blessings upon the heads of all God's people today and does he/they still utter curses or has another revelation been given to stop the cursing? Yes, more than one (see answer immediately above). Today, stake patriarchs are called and set apart by the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. They are not prophets, seers and revelators in the official sustained sense and exercise only the keys they are permitted to. The cursing aspect of these keys to my knowledge has not been rescinded.

Maybe they think it's a trunk-or-treat.

Generally speaking, I recognize Judah from general observation throughout my life and Joseph from the Book of Mormon prophecies. But there are many of ways of looking at who-is-what, and many traditions and stories about it. I do not know exactly when saints' lineages began to be identified as one of the Ten Tribes in their patriarchal blessings, but there have been threads on this addressing the increase in variation as a declaration of lineage became a standard requirement and converts began joining from a greater variety of nations.

I also noticed how the paragraphs in the General Conference talk transcripts are now numbered.

Assuming the explaining means answering your questions: the literal gathering of Israel entails all the tribes (the exact number is contextual); the Ten Tribes would be those not commonly recognized or identified in latter-day scripture as Judah (“Jews”), Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) and Levi (supported by the other tribes). I think the Ten Tribes will be restored in the sense of recognizing them as organized entities (“home” in that sense), as has begun in their inclusion in patriarchal blessings as time rolls on, and in the sense of gathering to Zion (“home” in that sense) or their ancestral promised land (“home” in that sense). I think restoring, gathering and “home” carry both figurative/spiritual and literal/geographical implications. It seems D&C 57 applies to the saints of that day irrespective of lineage, but could be extended to saints of any lineage (genealogical or adoptive) living in our time awaiting the Second Coming, or to those living in the Millennium. I think “all” 18M+ saints is impractical and unlikely, but a representative body akin to SLC is possible.

you are still not answering my questions

As Moroni put it, "these things," which are His father's abridgements, words and inserts, the small plates of Nephi, and his own words. See Moroni 10.

Now that it's been percolating for a couple of days, I would say "gentle" is the closest one-word description I can come up with for the Christlike attribute I offered in my first reply ("meek and lowly in heart"). Being gentle in a Christlike way toward those with sin, weakness and even mere differences entails intentional self-control and humility towards God, putting the needs of others and His timing and expectations first, while relying on His power to use whatever advantage we have to help them find a reason for faith and hope in something better for themselves and look to Christ. That said, I think charity is the fundamental attribute of all others, even an exalted body since He would not have that without charity first.

And Jesus of course never did that!

I think it is a synthesis of many attributes of Christ and one of the hallmarks of a disciple of Christ growing in grace. For example, can it be said that Christ "can't blame him for acting and believing the way that he does even if He don't personally agree with all of his choices ..."? I think not. While an Advocate in our behalf by buying us time and opportunity to repent and access His grace by virtue of His atonement (mercy), Christ is also an Officer of His Father's court (justice). We are neither. We cannot atone for the sins of another like Christ did, so we cannot be advocates and officers as He is. But we can be meek and lowly in heart, which Christ certainly is, and which leads to innumerable other godly attributes or graces. This is what I would call the attribute enabling you to treat your cousin as you described. He would cease to be God once He acts against His knowledge of the full picture He possesses in the same way we undermine our opportunities to become like Him when we presumptuously advocate and judge, divine functions He reserves for Himself.

Yes, they are clear but you are still not answering my questions, so this is not a productive critical, comparative exchange of beliefs between individuals as you indicated it was some 10+ weeks ago, and for which you "thanked" me. Posted August 5

Thank you. I also asked that you provide those links (the scriptures and to these churches' hermeneutics, exegesis and eisegesis) and explain where your own hermeneutics, exegesis and eisegesis might differ from those portrayed on the links.

The knowledge given is the conscience. Yes, God gives His children the quality of agency suitable for each estate.

Very good point!