Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

InCognitus

Members
  • Posts

    2,445
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by InCognitus

  1. In the context of what I understand of LDS theology, this is only applicable to the realm of God the Father of our Earth. How he compares in greatness with all the current and future Heavenly Fathers or Mothers of other realms is unknown. Actually, he says he only gives us an account of this earth, but he also tells us, "worlds without number have I created" (Moses 1:33). That's impossible, because God's creations and his "work" and his "glory" increase eternally. Nobody can catch up to that.
  2. This is answered in Doctrine and Covenants 113:1–2: “Who is the Stem of Jesse spoken of in the 1st, 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th verses of the 11th chapter of Isaiah? Verily thus saith the Lord: It is Christ.” Do you think my answer to that question will change simply because you emphasize the words “who”, “him”, and “his” in this and the other verses in the chapter? And you do realize that there’s a new paragraph beginning with verse 10 that introduces a new subject matter there, right? So whoever the “him” is in the preceding paragraphs may have no bearing on the new subject whatsoever. And the new paragraph isn’t just a feature of the translation, it’s in the Hebrew scrolls as well. Look at Isaiah 11:10 in the Great Isaiah Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls, it is the start of a completely new paragraph (and keep in mind that Hebrew reads from right to left instead of from left to right): As for who that is, my answer is the same as it was from my post on December 15, and as answered in Doctrine and Covenants 113:3–6: “What is the rod spoken of in the first verse of the 11th chapter of Isaiah, that should come of the Stem of Jesse? Behold, thus saith the Lord: It is a servant in the hands of Christ, who is partly a descendant of Jesse as well as of Ephraim, or of the house of Joseph, on whom there is laid much power. What is the root of Jesse spoken of in the 10th verse of the 11th chapter? Behold, thus saith the Lord, it is a descendant of Jesse, as well as of Joseph, unto whom rightly belongs the priesthood, and the keys of the kingdom, for an ensign, and for the gathering of my people in the last days.” Same as answered above. I will add that it is the Lord doing this (raising the standard, signal, or ensign – all the same word) through his servant (the root of Jesse), as a “servant in the hands of Christ”. The servant is called of God and stands as a witness of him, and what the Lord does through him is the signal that begins the full gathering of Israel in the latter days. I don’t think the northern ten tribes (as a group) were ever designated as the “firstborn” of Israel. Furthermore, the kingdom of the ten tribes was called Ephraim only because their first king Jeroboam was of that tribe (1 Kings 11:26). The “firstborn” designation goes to Joseph through Ephraim. See Genesis 48:17-20 (where Jacob “set Ephraim before Manasseh”), and also as it says in 1 Chronicles 5:1-2: “Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, (for he was the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel: and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright. For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph’s: )” In Isaiah 49:3-6 (the verse I had quoted that you are responding to), it is discussing the Lord’s “servant” that is to “raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel”. That is Ephraim’s role, as designated by the blessing given to him in Deuteronomy 33:13-17, although as I mentioned others could also participate in that role. And in Jeremiah 31, the Lord is also talking about recovering the “remnant of Israel” from the “north country, and gather them from the coasts of the earth” (v 7-8). Ephraim, as a people, has that same role. Ephraim is the Lord’s “firstborn”. You acknowledge the further scattering of Israel (as prophesied by Jesus) after New Testament times, and also acknowledge that the gathering event initiated in Isaiah 11:10 could not have taken place during Christ’s three year ministry, but you never have answered my question. This was my original question and it still stands: “Since Israel is being gathered now and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now, how does Christ fit as the individual spoken of in Isaiah 11:10, since the person spoken of in that verse shows up just prior to the gathering of Israel?” Can you explain how Christ could be the person described in Isaiah 11:10? Has Christ appeared to someone to start the gathering of Israel? (Actually, he did appear to Joseph Smith a few times. I think the servant is likely Joseph Smith.) Or how else could that person in Isaiah 11:10 be Christ? Can you explain how your interpretation fits the timeline I gave in my post on January 27, and the prophecies and statements from Jesus and Paul noted in the same post? I addressed Romans 15:10-12 in my last post (here). Can you at least interact with my response to your claim that Paul was referring to Christ in those verses? As for who this person is, it’s the same as I said on December 15 in response to the question on Isaiah 11:10, and from Doctrine and Covenants 113:5–6: “What is the root of Jesse spoken of in the 10th verse of the 11th chapter? Behold, thus saith the Lord, it is a descendant of Jesse, as well as of Joseph, unto whom rightly belongs the priesthood, and the keys of the kingdom, for an ensign, and for the gathering of my people in the last days.” Paul never says the person in Isaiah 11:10 is Christ, and that interpretation doesn’t really fit for the reasons described in my prior post. Regarding your point “a”, I don’t consider literal Jews being gathered into the church of Jesus Christ as “spiritual” Israel (I explained this in my post on December 7). They are literally Israel and are literally being gathered. They just haven’t all returned to their own soil (wherever that may be) as of yet. As for your point “b”, in my post on December 12 I already did provide several verses from the Old Testament that explain how your original idea that they would return to "the land of their inheritance, like it was at their zenith in the Old Testament” doesn’t work (for several reasons). As for whether or not those lands could include Canada, the United States, or Mexico, you can definitely rule out Canada . But I don’t know how you can say for certainty whether or not those lands would be excluded, especially given how I answered this at the end of my post on December 7: The inheritance given to Joseph and his sons is quite extensive. I already answered this question in my post on November 24: “[T]he two wooden writing tablets represent the two nations, and bringing the two wooden writing tablets together again represents them becoming one again. The nations of "Joseph, the leaf of Ephriaim and all his associates of Israel" were scattered throughout the world, and this is a prophetic symbol of the beginning of their gathering.” I also said: "Ezekiel states that the two wooden writing tablets come together in the hand of a prophet just as the Lord begins the gathering again: ‘These are the words of the Lord GOD: I am gathering up the Israelites from their places of exile among the nations’. Has Israel started gathering? If so, then the two writing tablets have come together. “ My response to you on December 7 (part of which I just quoted above) dealt with this question. The "mountains of Israel" would be all the lands that the tribes would inherit, wherever they may be.
  3. Some have speculated that Joseph Smith was referring to an infinite regression of Gods, but others see what Joseph Smith taught differently. It is more in line with what the book of Abraham teaches (and other scriptures) to understand that Joseph Smith was teaching that God the Father is the greatest of all spirits and always has been, but others have become like him through his assistance.
  4. Earwax, now that might explain how they were able to secure the sealed portion of the plates. It had to be the sticky version.
  5. You had me going for a minute, I was wondering if there was an age specific version of Preach My Gospel that I had missed out on. (i.e. Preach My Gospel for 8 to 10 years old?)
  6. Not to mention using the Liahona for navigation, that would drive the AI crazy.
  7. If only I could upvote your post ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 👍
  8. Isaiah 11:10 is about one key figure, and that key figure receives a glorious “rest”, which is in Christ, as in “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” (Matthew 11:28) Both Doctrine and Covenants 101:28-31 and Isaiah 11:10 are speaking about individuals who receive rest in Christ. You are totally missing the point of the timing in the context of Isaiah 11:10-14. When the person shows up as described in verse 10, what immediately follows is important, because the person stands as “ensign” to the people and the gathering of Israel begins right after that event: “And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.” (Isaiah 11:11–13) Above you said that this gathering of Israel started with Christ in his ministry. That interpretation is impossible because of what Jesus said in Luke’s account of Christ’s sermon where he foretells of the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem. Speaking of the Jews, he said: “And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. Then let them which are in Judæa flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” (Luke 21:20-24) So as you can see, when Christ came he didn’t “start” the gathering, rather he foretold that after his departure the scattering would be even greater than it was before (i.e. those at Judaea, “shall be led away captive into all nations”), because the two remaining tribes would also be scattered (not just the northern ten tribes) as part of the “days of vengeance” that must be fulfilled. Furthermore, Jesus says in these verses that they will remain in this scattered state “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”. Therefore, it is impossible that Christ, during his mortal ministry, would be the one that would “start” the gathering. The apostle Paul also affirmed this same timing of events in his epistle to the Romans, stating that Israel’s time for receiving the gospel was essentially postponed until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled: “For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.” (Romans 11:25) Regarding Romans 15:12 where Paul quotes from Isaiah 11:10, your reasoning that Paul is referring to Christ in that verse also doesn’t make sense within the context. In verse 8 of that chapter, Paul made it clear that Christ’s mission was to the “circumcision”, which was Paul’s way of designating the Jews. Paul is saying that Jesus ministered to the Jews so that he could confirm God’s promises to the “fathers” (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob). Paul’s intent here and in the next few verses is to explain that even though Christ’s mission was to the House of Israel, the scriptures also foretold that the time would come when the Gentiles would have the gospel preached to them as well. As Paul continues in Romans 15, he quotes from Psalms 18:49 or 2 Samuel 22:50 (verse 9, “For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name”), Deuteronomy 32:43 (verse 10, “Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people”), Psalm 117:1 (verse 11, “Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people”), and finally he quotes Isaiah 11:10 (verse 12). And in quoting all of these verses (including Isaiah 11:10) he does not identify Christ as the subject. Rather, he simply quotes them to establish that the Gentiles have a place in God’s plan and have a right to rejoice in the grace of God. You quoted from Luke 2:32 where Simeon declared, upon seeing the Christ child, that he had seen the Lord’s “salvation” which he had prepared before the face of all people, as “a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel”. You presume (incorrectly) that this lends support to your interpretation of Isaiah 11:10. The verses in Isaiah 11:10-14 are about setting up an ensign to the nations that signals the gathering of Israel, and there is no mention of giving “light” to the Gentiles in that context. But there are many other prophecies about the Gentiles benefiting from the “light” that comes through Christ and his servants and his people, but these are all in a totally different set of circumstances than what is being discussed in Isaiah 11:10. Obviously, Jesus is truly the “light of the world” (John 8:12), but others are described as providing light as well (i.e. Jesus taught us, “Ye are the light of the world…”, Matthew 5:14). And Isaiah, speaking of Israel says “the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of they rising” (Isaiah 60:3). Also, in chapter 49, Isaiah quotes the Lord as saying: “Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified… And now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him, Though Israel be not gathered, yet shall I be glorious in the eyes of the Lord, and my God shall be my strength. And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.” (Isaiah 49:3-6) The “servant” of the Lord in this context can have many applications. It may be Christ. It may be Isaiah himself. It may be Israel as a people (as verse 3 says). It may be Ephraim (the Lord’s firstborn – Jeremiah 31:9). Or it may be any other servant that the Lord may send out (including Joseph Smith). And all of these may be correct. The fact that this could be applied to any of the Lord’s servants is born out by the fact that Paul and Barnabas considered these verses to be applicable to them: “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.” (Acts 13:46–47) As you can see, appealing to Luke 2:32 to try to claim that Isaiah 11:10 is speaking about Jesus doesn’t really work. There is no connection between the two passages, and the prophecies about those who are a light unto the Gentiles are applicable to many individuals, and not only Jesus. Now I’d like to summarize a few things and explain why my question is still an important one. All of Israel was scattered, either because of their unrighteousness and rebellion, or for directly rejecting their Messiah: Israel was split into the northern and southern kingdoms, and in approximately 721 BC the northern tribes were carried captive into Assyria and were scattered and lost. In 605 BC and 597 BC, the remaining Israelites were carried captive into Babylon. They were permitted to return to Jerusalem in approximately 537 BC after Babylon was conquered by the Persians. In 70 AD and 135 AD, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, and the remaining tribes of the House of Israel were scattered among all nations. Jesus and Paul both testified that Israel would remain in this scattered and blinded state until the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled (Luke 21:24, Romans 11:25) During his ministry Jesus was sent only to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt 15:24), and never to the Gentiles directly. Later, after his rejection by the Jews he declared to them that “The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof” (Matt 21:43), and the kingdom of God was left to another people (Daniel 2:44). After his resurrection, Jesus sent his apostles to the Gentiles. This marked the beginning of the time of the Gentiles. Isaiah 11:10-14 prophesies that an individual will show up on the scene and shall stand as an “ensign of the people”, and this signals the point in time where the “Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people” from all over the earth (verse 11), and the ensign for the nations “shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth (verse 12). Isaiah 49:22-23 has a similar prophecy that reaffirms the meaning of Isaiah 11:10-14: “Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I will lift up mine hand to the Gentiles, and set up my standard to the people: and they shall bring thy sons in their arms, and thy daughters shall be carried upon their shoulders. And kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers: they shall bow down to thee with their face toward the earth, and lick up the dust of thy feet; and thou shalt know that I am the Lord: for they shall not be ashamed that wait for me.” This brings me back to the question I asked, which I will restate here: “Since Israel is being gathered now and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now, how does Christ fit as the individual spoken of in Isaiah 11:10, since the person spoken of in that verse shows up just prior to the gathering of Israel?” You answered this by saying that the gathering of Israel “started” with Christ’s ministry, which has been shown to be impossible because of what Jesus said in Luke 21:24 (quoted above). And both Jesus (Luke 21:24) and Paul (Romans 11:25) said that Israel would be in their blinded and scattered state “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”, so this process could not have begun until relatively recently. But you also said that Isaiah 11:10 “is a future prophecy about Christ”, and you said, when the gospel began to be taught to the Gentiles, "From that point on, the gathering of both Israelites and Gentiles into his church has been going on." Can you explain how your interpretation fits the timeline given above, and the prophecies and statements from Jesus and Paul noted above? The issue is not of what Ezekiel literally did (writing on tablets and putting them together - using the New English Bible translation of the verse) but what the writing tables coming together represented (the records of the two nations) and that this would immediately precede the gathering of Israel: "Thus I shall make them one tablet, and they shall be one in my hand. The leaves on which you write shall be visible in your hand for all to see". And, it is stated as a prophecy of what will happen to signal the beginning of the gathering of Israel (i.e. "I am gathering up the Israelites from their places of exile among the nations"). As for what is "their own land", we did already discuss that (here) where you assumed that they would be returning to "the land of their inheritance, like it was at their zenith in the Old Testament." And, I already explained why that is not the case.
  9. It's based on internal evidence in the text, and it's good evidence For the same reason anyone might (or might not) say such a thing in casual conversation. They also likely knew it was already a matter of record, since they were the ones keeping the plates.
  10. I realize you read it that way, but that's not how it should be read in context (as explained before). They settled in the "Americas" or "the American Continent" somewhere, and they were scattered and mixed with the people that were already on the continent. The Book of Mormon makes a big deal about those who are "pure" descendants of Lehi (3 Nephi 5:20) or Nephi (3 Nephi book header), which seems like an odd thing to do if everyone came over on the boat with Lehi. And the text mentions others already in the land (some by name, like the Jaredites) and it's also evident based on the numbers of people involved that there were others already on the continent as well. For more information, see: Book of Mormon Central / KnoWhys - Did “Others” Influence Book of Mormon Peoples?
  11. Ok- thanks for your opinion Remember, your claim was "There were explicit instructions in the teachers manual not to discuss polygamy." The actual statement said no such thing, and in fact the manual provided several resources on how to address questions on polygamy. Your retelling of what you remember in this situation is not reliable. Could you possibly consider revisiting some of the things that bug you about the church from the past and see if your memory has betrayed you in other ways? You might be surprised what you find.
  12. So your memory is actually horrible. You took something positive from the manual, which included good resources for discussion on polygamy and put a negative spin on it.
  13. Where does the manual from the early 2000s say "not to discuss polygamy"? The manual saying that plural marriage "should not be the focus of the lesson" is FAR different than saying it should not be discussed at all. In fact, The Doctrine and Covenants and Church History: Gospel Doctrine Teacher’s Manual (1999), which was used for the decade of 2000 to 2010 (at least), included a lot of information on polygamy and plural marriage (also starting on page 181 of the PDF version) : CFR for where there were "explicit instructions in the teachers manual not to discuss polygamy".
  14. [sarcasm mode on]: No, I'm just saying you missed another opportunity to criticize the church for purposely scheduling the Section 132 lesson on a second Sunday to ensure that polygamy wouldn't be discussed in a classroom setting. [sarcasm mode off] * In our ward we just discussed section 132 and polygamy in Elder's quorum that Sunday . * I have a key on my keyboard to enable sarcasm mode, but it never shows up that way when I'm typing it in a post for some reason.
  15. Two main questions first: "Last year" we were supposed to be studying the New Testament, not the Doctrine and Covenants. Why were you discussing the Doctrine and Covenants "last year"? If you meant the 2021 lessons (when we were actually studying the Doctrine and Covenants), then Section 132 was scheduled for November 8–14, which would have fallen on the second Sunday of the month. I remember being disappointed that the Section 132 lesson didn't fall on a first or third Sunday when Sunday School is being held (Elders Quorum and Relief Society are supposed to be held on the second and fourth Sunday). So how did you manage to have a Sunday School lesson on Section 132 "last year" or even in 2021?
  16. This reminds me of a poem titled, "An Owed to the Spelling Checker", by Jerrold H. Zar. I won't quote the entire poem, but the first part goes like this: I have a spelling checker. It came with my PC. It plane lee marks four my revue Miss steaks aye can knot sea. Eye ran this poem threw it, Your sure reel glad two no. Its vary polished in it's weigh, My checker tolled me sew.
  17. I explained that already in the post where I first brought up Doctrine and Covenants 101:31 (here). The Doctrine and Covenants verse is talking about the glorious “’rest’ that will come to righteous individuals during the Millennium”, and the Isaiah 11:10 verse is talking about a specific individual that will have a glorious rest (in Christ). There are various ways to define the word “God”. Some define God as anything that is eternal. Of course we believe that God the Father and Jesus Christ have existed eternally. But “God” is also defined as the being who is the creator of worlds and has individuals and creations that are subject to him. In our beliefs, God has created “worlds without number” (Moses 1:33). And I think it is in this sense that God the Father and Jesus Christ “became Gods” to us, because they created our world and we became subject to them and reliant upon them. Do you believe God has been a creator of worlds eternally? Or do you believe this earth is the first time God ever created anything (i.e. he’s a beginner at the whole creator role)? There is one question I asked you in my last post that relates to Isaiah 11 that you didn't answer. I said: So I ask again: Since Israel is being gathered now and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now, how does Christ fit as the individual spoken of in Isaiah 11:10, since the person spoken of in that verse shows up just prior to the gathering of Israel?
  18. I completely disagree. What was a “far off land” in New Testament times is different than we think of distances today. For example, Jesus told the apostle Paul, while he was in Jerusalem, to “Go! For I will send you far away to the Gentiles” (Acts 22:21). Paul went to some of those places that were “far away” compared to Jerusalem (including Cyprus). According to the Bible Hub definition, the Hebrews considered the “isles of the sea” to “denote distant regions beyond the sea”. So it would be those areas that would normally require travel by sea in order to arrive at those locations. Consequently, if that is an accurate understanding of the phrase, Russia and Assyria wouldn’t really qualify in that respect, since there are no sea routes from Israel to get those places. Not really, the context tells us that. Back on this post (here), I mentioned that “We don't have the full context for the prophecy of Zenos which was quoted by Nephi, but Nephi was recognizing the parts of the prophecy that he knew applied to his people.” We can discern this from the context because in that chapter Nephi described various signs that would be given to some parts of the tribes of Israel, aside from those that applied to his people. Nephi begins by alluding to (but not quoting) prophecies given by Zenos as follows: “And the God of our fathers, who were led out of Egypt, out of bondage, and also were preserved in the wilderness by him, yea, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, yieldeth himself, according to the words of the angel, as a man, into the hands of wicked men, to be lifted up, according to the words of Zenock, and to be crucified, according to the words of Neum, and to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, which he spake concerning the three days of darkness, which should be a sign given of his death unto those who should inhabit the isles of the sea, more especially given unto those who are of the house of Israel.” (1 Nephi 19:10) But then in the next verse, Nephi appears to quote Zenos directly: “For thus spake the prophet: The Lord God surely shall visit all the house of Israel at that day, (1) some with his voice, because of their righteousness, unto their great joy and salvation, and (2) others with the thunderings and the lightnings of his power, by tempest, by fire, and by smoke, and vapor of darkness, and by the opening of the earth, and by mountains which shall be carried up.” (1 Nephi 19:11) Note that the prophet Zenos says “all” the house of Israel shall be visited (in some way) at that day. And then he gives at least two distinct ways that will happen: The righteous will be visited with his voice, and others will have other things happen to them. And those additional signs may not be all together for all areas as is evident from his next statement: “And all these things must surely come, saith the prophet Zenos. And the rocks of the earth must rend; and because of the groanings of the earth, many of the kings of the isles of the sea shall be wrought upon by the Spirit of God, to exclaim: The God of nature suffers.” (1 Nephi 19:12) So the quaking of the earth is broken out (pun intended) separately. This was even fulfilled to some degree at Jerusalem, as recorded by Matthew: “Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent… Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.” (Matthew 27:50-51, 54) Then Nephi continues to quote Zenos, describing what would happen to those at Jerusalem: “And as for those who are at Jerusalem, saith the prophet, they shall be scourged by all people, because they crucify the God of Israel, and turn their hearts aside, rejecting signs and wonders, and the power and glory of the God of Israel. And because they turn their hearts aside, saith the prophet, and have despised the Holy One of Israel, they shall wander in the flesh, and perish, and become a hiss and a byword, and be hated among all nations.” (1 Nephi 19:13-14) In Matthew 23:34-24:2, Jesus also foretold of these events, telling those at Jerusalem that “your house is left unto you desolate”, and that the temple would be completely destroyed, and “all these things shall come upon this generation”. So as you can see, the signs and events that would occur among the tribes of Israel would vary, although all of them would receive some kind of sign. Therefore, it is incorrect to assume that they all would see the three days of darkness that came upon the Nephite people, although it's quite possible that other areas experienced similar events. They are the nations that occupy the lands that were previously inhabited by the Book of Mormon people.
  19. I don't believe it only refers to these people as well. You expressed this same view earlier in the thread. And I already explained my view here. Do you believe that everywhere that the House of Israel has been scattered could be called an "isle of the sea"? By what you say above, it sounds like it. Would Russia and Assyria be considered "an isle of the sea" using the biblical usage of the phrase? The difference between what I think you are saying and what I'm saying is that the house of Israel has been scattered, and only some of those that have been scattered are on "isles of the sea", at least by the definition of the term that I provided in my prior post here, which is: "Isles of the sea" is a phrase in the Hebrew scriptures that indicates far off lands, or coasts and continents, habitable spots (see verses like Genesis 10:5, Isaiah 11:11 and 24:15)." This Bible Hub definition says the following: "The plural of this word, usually translated islands, was employed by the Hebrews to denote distant regions beyond the sea, whether coasts or islands; and especially the islands and maritime countries of the west, which had become indistinctly known to the Hebrews, through the voyages of the Phoenicians, Isaiah 24:15 40:15 42:4,10,12 Psalm 72:10. In Ezekiel 27:15, the East Indian Archipelago would seem to be intended." I really don't think all the House of Israel could be considered to be on the "isles of the sea" by the definition given above. Did you not read in my prior post where I said there are two distinct contexts for the usage of the word "kings" in those two verses? If you read it, then why are you ignoring what I said? The President of the United States is a leader from within the nations on the American continent, and does not fit the definition of "king" as given in the context of verse 11, which had to do with having liberty (and thus freedom from captivity) from the nations of their mother lands. They are independent countries.
  20. Uh, wake up! We are studying the Book of MORMON this year. Woops, why did that strikethrough happen?? Oh no!
  21. Except you are just trolling this board with photos you've pulled from the internet, fully knowing it would cause a commotion on a board such as this. Tell us who you really are.
  22. CV75 answered this same question adequately, and I concur with everything he said about the scope of the three days of darkness. There are two different contexts for the "kings" in 2 Nephi 10:9 and 2 Nephi 10:11. As I already mentioned, 2 Nephi 10:9 is a paraphrase of Isaiah 49:22-23, which Nephi had previously quoted in 1 Nephi 21, and it refers to the generic leaders around the world that would be of assistance to the house of Israel in the latter days. Isaiah is emphasizing that great and notable rulers will come to their light and assist them, and this emphasizes the profound influence that God's people will have in that day in contrast to their prior state of affliction that was dealt out by the LORD. Isaiah says similar things elsewhere, such as: Isaiah 49:7, "Kings shall see and arise, and princes also shall worship" Isaiah 60:3, "the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising" Isaiah 60:10, "their kings shall minister unto thee, for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee" Isaiah 60:11, "men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be brought" Isaiah 60:16, "Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings" Isaiah 62:2, "the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory" I don't see why Presidents and Prime Ministers should be excluded from any of the verses listed above. The point is that high ranking dignitaries will take notice of God's people and they will be treated well. As for 2 Nephi 10:11, it has to do with the promised land being a "land of liberty" to the Gentiles, and that "liberty" is contrasted with the "captivity" they had in their mother lands (see for example 1 Nephi 13:16-19 and 2 Nephi 1:7). So the "kings" in 2 Nephi 10:11 are associated with that captivity, and the promised land will be free from that form of captivity. The promise is explained further in the verses that follow: "And I will fortify this land against all other nations. And he that fighteth against Zion shall perish, saith God. For he that raiseth up a king against me shall perish, for I, the Lord, the king of heaven, will be their king, and I will be a light unto them forever, that hear my words." (2 Nephi 10:12–14)
  23. I highly doubt that, given that the blessings of the temple are central to the teaching about exaltation. And the church certainly hasn't stopped building temples. The entire mission of the church is centered around a restoration of the everlasting covenant. Why do you think the church has any interest in being "accepted in the larger Christian faith"? That has never been the goal. The only interest the church has in this regard is that people outside the church understand that Jesus Christ and his atonement and following him are central to our teachings. That makes us "Christians" by the basic definition of the term. The inclusive or exclusive nature of the CoJCoLDS seems to be hashed out a lot on this board lately for some reason, so what you say above sounds very familiar (you sound familiar). But "Christians" in the broader sense are an exclusive group. I'm often told by Christians outside of my faith that I'm going to hell because I'm a "Mormon". I either need to be part of their group, or I'm going to hell. And when Latter-day Saints preach that the gospel has been restored along with the covenants that have been lost, it's an affront to their exclusivity, it rubs them the wrong way, and it offends them. So I get it. But a careful reader of the Bible will find that exaltation is at the heart of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Those who "overcome" will sit with God in his throne in the very same way that Jesus sits in the throne of his Father (Rev 3:21). Why don't all Christians believe this? For the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, this is one of the main reasons we exist. It is at the core of the restoration. It's not going to go away.
  24. Doctrine and Covenants 113:1-2 says Isaiah 11:1-5 refers to Christ. So on that point you are correct. Nobody said it is a reference to multiple people. Rather, it is a reference to the person who is the "root of Jesse" spoken of in Isaiah 11:10. That person will have a glorious rest, in Christ, as the verse says. You forget that the whole reason this was brought up is because this was a sign that would begin the gathering of Israel, just exactly like the two writing tablets coming together in the hand of the prophet that would signal the beginning of the gathering of Israel, as spoken about by Ezekiel. Because this is when the Lord shall "set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people". Israel is being gathered now, and has been in the process of being gathered for many years now. How exactly does Christ fit that timing? This is why the "rest" spoken of in Isaiah 11:10 is the "rest" that comes in Christ, for the individual spoken of in that verse. No, in simple terms Joseph Smith taught that God himself was once a man exactly the same way Jesus Christ is God and was once a man. Joseph explained, in the same sermon, that Jesus said he did what his Father did before him. God the Father had the power to lay down his life and to take it up again. And Jesus taught, “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do; for what things soever he [the Father] doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” (John 5:19). So if Jesus did what his Father did, then you can't really draw the conclusion that you are making above about God the Father, since Jesus was God in the beginning and created the world that he was born on, and so on.
  25. Or, more relevant to this thread topic, using equivalent phrases for "plan of salvation" we get: The 2020 version uses the phrase "the plan of our God": 1 time the phrase "plan of redemption": 6 times the phrase "plan of happiness": 2 times the phrase "Heavenly Father's plan": 4 times the phrase "God's plan": 7 times the phrase "plan of salvation": 9 times Total: 29 times The 2024 version uses the phrase "the plan of our God": 2 times the phrase "plan of redemption": 5 times the phrase "plan of happiness": 4 times the phrase "Heavenly Father's plan": 7 times the phrase "God's plan": 11 times the phrase "plan of salvation": 0 times Total: 29 times It works out to be the same when including phrases that refer to the same plan of God.
×
×
  • Create New...