Communal Sin in the Bible

[mfbukowski]

Gag me with an arc welder.

Let me change that from an arc welder back to the traditional pitchfork.

Interesting suggestions!

[David Bokovoy]

So what? Many others witnessed, and were the victims of, the very same things, and they didn't become gang members and supporters of a genocidal totalitarian ideology and of nations seeking the destruction of her own country and the very constitution and founding principles that were the very principles that defeated slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation. What's amazing here is that you've utterly missed the irony of an American black person being angry at injustice and the use of unaccountable power against black people joining and supporting a movement and ideology that is responsible for more injustice, bigotry, and human carnage than any ideology in human history.

So, supporting a genocidal, totalitarian ideology of oppression and slavery (another sweet irony don't your think, that the Soviet Union, Cuba, and other countries she so staunchly defended, were, in all salient points, slave societies), and becoming a subversive traitor to the freest, most liberty and opportunity oriented society (the same society who, based on its highest values and its constitution, ended slavery, ended Jim Crow and segregation, and crushed the Klan) on earth is a understandable response to the criminal actions she witnessed. Why didn't all Mormons join become Bolsheviks after 1917 then?

Ahh, the inevitable postmodern relativism. The final shirking of intellectual responsibility. All evil is relative and in the eye of the beholder. Forgive me mfb, if I chuckle again at the Irony of a person who was a member of a viscous inner city street gang and would have sent me to Siberia (or worse) had she had the power and opportunity, for disagreeing with what she sees as "evil" being lauded as a moral hero.

Gag me with an arc welder.

Did she? What did she think about the invasion of Hungary, Czechoslovakia, the Berlin Wall, The Great Leap Forward, The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, and Che's torture dungeons at La Cabana? If she saw so much blood and sin, and was so repulsed and angered by it, why did she embrace it on a scale the Klan could never have imagined, even in their most moonshine drenched fantasies?

Yes. Its a good thing Corrie Ten Boom didn't become a KGB agent after her experiences in Hitler's camps.

I

You're defending her as if she were your kid sister that had been accused of losing control of herself at a frat party. You roll the dice and take what comes up I guess.

Let me change that from an arc welder back to the traditional pitchfork.

Loran if you can't express Christ-like empathy, you at least need to feign a bit of kindness in your posts. More importantly, your efforts to derail this thread need to cease. I suggest you start your own thread entitled "Why I Hate Angela Davies."

Thank you.

[Loran Howard Blood]

I know you haven't. This is why your claims that you have shown Bokovoy to be wrong are nonsensical.

Except that what he's claiming is not taught by the Church as a part of the plan of salvation, the Atonement, redemption, and the requirements of exaltation.

I don't care. The OP is about ancient Israel.

But David claims the metaphysical communalism he asserts existed in the ancient Israelite understanding of sin, guilt, and redemption are a part of the restored gospel, which they patently are not.

Quote Loran:

Let me ask you this W. Do you believe that Acts 4: 34-35 represents a clear doctrinal mandate for all contemporary Latter Day Saints and Christians generally, to divest themselves completely of all their material goods, including money and personal property, and distribute it to the poor?

I believe it alludes to an ancient form of consecration, though it may be similar to the voluntary poverty of the Qumran community.

Is voluntary poverty a requirement of the gospel?

Quote Loran:

Do you further believe that Jesus' specific call to the rich young ruler in Matthew 19 to "go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor" is a broad general mandate to all Christians and Latter day Saints to do exactly this, regardless of the consequences or effects of such action?

Regardless of consequences or effects? I think it is a general mandate to follow the very instructions put forth by King Benjamin.

Answer the question. The rich young man was challenged to go and sell everything "he hath." Is that a general mandate and requirement to follow Christ as a disciple? If it is, why have the Brethren never mentioned this in nearly 200 years, and why are they not teaching it now? Can one be considered an authentic Christian without joining the poor in equal poverty?

Loran:

Well, David teaches and adduces arguments for exactly this, and he has defended this proposition clearly and assertively in this forum on various occasions.

Fan-freaking-tastic. Has nothing to do with communal sin in ancient Israel.

This is the problem. David has failed to do anything but provide support for anything but a speculative theory of communal sin in the OT. He has not demonstrated this concept with any degree of philosophical or doctrinal conclusiveness. The fact remains, however, that the idea of "communal sin" is not a part of the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. Its not even an conceptually intelligible or logically coherent concept, especially against the background of what we know the gospel teaches regarding the nature of sin, repentance, agency, and personal accountability before God for our own individual, unique spiritual status within our own personal, individual, unique world and self perception. That spiritual condition cannot be transferred, diffused, disbursed, shared, absorbed, or assimilated by anyone else, nor can we take upon ourselves and share in the spiritual or moral qualities of others.

Each of us is saved as, yes, a lone, independent individual "in spite of earth and Hell," as Brigham Young said. The fact that all of this takes place within the context of communities does not make it communal. That is the fatal mistake. Communal morality, communal sin, and communal righteousness takes responsibility for my spiritual state and condition before God out of my hands and puts me in a position of dependence upon a collective and a moral average inhering in the group. This sounds all well and good, doesn't it, when it appears that we could "make up" moral or spiritual lack within ourselves by aborning some from the group. It appears less palatable when it takes the form of sharing with the group punishment for the sins of the majority of the group which we have not committed.

The crux of the matter is that the gospel teaches that we cannot be saved in this manner. It is the grace of Christ that enables and empowers us to move beyond mortal limitations and "make up" what we lack as to personal righteousness and characteristics, not absorbtion of collective merit or collective guilt from an metaphysical organic communal mass.

Then start a thread about the practical application of the United Order in an industrial, globalized economy and stop derailing threads about ancient Israel. It isn't that hard.

Been there, done that. All that will do is bring the fringe on this board out of the woodwork.

Instead of learning about and discussing this subject, we all waste time combating your incredibly long-winded, soap-box preaching

Translation: I can't refute, rebut, or come up with a single rational, well constructed, coherent body of arguments against anything he's said, so I'll just call it "long winded soap box preaching" and walk away as if I've won the debate.

Typical.

[Nathair/|\]

Is it relevant to this thread that some Saints believe that if everyone affected is sealed in the temple, and a child goes astray but the parents stay faithful, the child will end up at least in the lowest degree of the CK?

Also, off topic, but as long as this thread has your attention; Maklellan and David: do we have an ANE name for Gaia? I know she is mentioned in Moses 7:10, but I've never heard a name other than the Greek one.

[Loran Howard Blood]

Loran if you can't express Christ-like empathy, you at least need to feign a bit of kindness in your posts. More importantly, your efforts to derail this thread need to cease. I suggest you start your own thread entitled "Why I Hate Angela Davies."

Thank you.

I suggest you ease back on the self righteous moral grandstanding and not worry too much about my perceptions of Comrade Davis.

Thanks.

[Loran Howard Blood]

I'd be willing to bet every last dime I had to my name (if I was a betting man) that if, instead of Angela Davis, we were discussing George Lincoln Rockwell or Josef Goebbels, my identical criticism of Davis would have elicited from mfb and David...nothing whatsoever.

[WalkerW]

Except that what he's claiming is not taught by the Church as a part of the plan of salvation, the Atonement, redemption, and the requirements of exaltation.

I suggest you look at the thread title: "Communal Sin in the Bible."

But David claims the metaphysical communalism he asserts existed in the ancient Israelite understanding of sin, guilt, and redemption are a part of the restored gospel, which they patently are not.

And it has been demonstrated through a number of D&C texts that the communal aspect of the covenant is found in the restored principle of Zion.

Is voluntary poverty a requirement of the gospel?

I don't think so. But that isn't what you asked. You asked about what Acts describes, not about what the modern church does.

Answer the question.

I did. King Benjamin taught that we should give of our substance freely. That seems to be what Christ is teaching.

Is that a general mandate and requirement to follow Christ as a disciple?

To care for the poor? Most definitely.

If it is, why have the Brethren never mentioned this in nearly 200 years, and why are they not teaching it now?

They just recently added taking care of the poor and needy to the mission of the church.

Can one be considered an authentic Christian without joining the poor in equal poverty?

I don't think that is what is implied. Everyone being poor doesn't alleviate the poor.

This is the problem. David has failed to do anything but provide support for anything but a speculative theory of communal sin in the OT.

All history is to some degree speculative.

He has not demonstrated this concept with any degree of philosophical or doctrinal conclusiveness.

I don't even know what you mean by that.

The fact remains, however, that the idea of "communal sin" is not a part of the restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The Church is addressed collectively many times in the D&C. You're forgetting that the ancient Israelites would have had no idea what you were talking about when it comes to Western individualism.

Communal morality, communal sin, and communal righteousness takes responsibility for my spiritual state and condition before God out of my hands and puts me in a position of dependence upon a collective and a moral average inhering in the group.

Perhaps I missed it, but I've yet to see anyone reject the individual aspect of salvation.

Been there, done that. Al that will do is bring the fringe on this board out of the woodwork.

Then quit whining and go away if you aren't going to discuss communal sin in ancient Israel.

Translation: I can't refute, rebut, or come up with a single rational, well constructed, coherent body of arguments against anything he's said, so I'll just call it "long winded soap box preaching" and walk away as if I've won the debate.

You haven't provided a single rational, well constructed, coherent body of arguments that rebut the ancient Israelite concept of communal sin. You just keep saying it doesn't make sense to you and how you don't like it. You even admitted that you haven't addressed the ancient concept. You just keep ranting and raving about the evils of Volgadon and Bokovoy.

You haven't provided anything to debate that stays within the context of the OP.

Typical.

EDIT: Unnecessary.

I really wish you'd tone it down and stop talking to everyone as if they are blind and stupid.

[Loran Howard Blood]

Loran, in your efforts to understand issues, you would do well to interpret words in context. Contextually, President Romney used the term "communal" as a description of economic orders that completely suppress all forms of "individualism," and he's absolutely correct.

The United Order was not "communal" like the "Family" living on Isaac Morley's farm that attempted to have "all things in common." Modern revelation specifically countered these communal practices:"Thou shalt stand in the place of thy stewardship. Thou shalt not take thy brother

[Loran Howard Blood]

One long series of evasions, diversions, and polemical bluster.

I'm done with you.

[WalkerW]

One long series of evasions, diversions, and polemical bluster.

I'm done with you.

Hopefully, you are done with the thread.

[Nemesis]

One long series of evasions, diversions, and polemical bluster.

I'm done with you.

You know I have an inbox filled with reports from various posters about your posting habit, however I wish they were from the posters that you continue to misrepresent and pretty much have disdain for. You came back to the site after being banned and we thought maybe a second chance was in order. Looks like we were wrong and need to ban you again.

Nemesis

[mercyngrace]

I suggest you ease back on the self righteous moral grandstanding.....

Thanks.

in

[mercyngrace]

You know I have an inbox filled with reports from various posters about your posting habit, however I wish they were from the posters that you continue to misrepresent and pretty much have disdain for. You came back to the site after being banned and we thought maybe a second chance was in order. Looks like we were wrong and need to ban you again.

Nemesis

Thanks for clarifyng that the complaints did not come from those being attacked.

[LeSellers]

Louis XIV famously said,

[volgadon]

Serious question: do you take seriously the sociological and philosophical implications of this statement, bukowski?

I know D is banned, but what about the sociological and philosophical implications of this statement?

[volgadon]

Perfect! In reality, the higher we ascend in the ordinances of the gospel, the more communal the nature of the covenants.

Once one begins to understand these concepts, the law of adoption practiced in Latter Day Saint temples between 1843 and 1894 doesn't seem so strange.

Or patriarchal blessings. Covenants were an integral part of community, of belonging, and as FMC pointed out, one was adopted into a kinship group through covenants. The ancient Hebrews saw things in terms of families. So does God.

Why do we have to belong to Israel if only individual salvation is the essence of the celestial kingdom?

[mfbukowski]

I know D is banned, but what about the sociological and philosophical implications of this statement?

LOL!

[zerinus]

I don't mean to be offensive, but this reading provides an excellent example of what occurs when the scriptures are stripped from their proper historical context. Neither Jacob, nor the righteous king Benjamin, nor Moroni, for that matter, were suggesting that by failing to teach their people the ways of righteousness, they would have symbolically committed murder.

Note that the scriptural expression originates from Jacob, the man who had been consecrated as a priest to perform Old Testament temple rituals for the Nephites (see 2 Nephi 5:26; Jacob 1:18). As a temple priest, Jacob wore sacred garments that signified his stewardship (for a description of these garments see Exodus 28:1-43). From Jacob

[zerinus]

Well things can be "scriptural" without being in the Standard Works- I am still not sure you are understanding me completely.

But it an informative post, and I appreciate your take on these issues.

So your interpretation of an individual being clean from the "sins of this generation" means that he fulfilled his responsibility for telling them of their mistakes?

I think something is missing here. I don't know if we can ever discuss it fully in this context, online. It seems odd that we would have a whole ordinance to praise us for doing our member missionary work.

You obviously did not read my post very carefully, or if you did you did not understand it. The expressions you are using do not occur in the scriptures in such contextual settings that would enable you to put the kind of interpretations you like to put on them. That is why I insist that you do not pull expressions out of thin air, but give specific scriptural references so that your mistakes can be properly explained and pointed out to you. I don't know what you are referring to by "sins of this generation" unless you give me the exact scriptural references, and tell me what you understand by them and why you are interpreting them in the way you do. Then I can comment, otherwise I can't.

[zerinus]

You know I have an inbox filled with reports from various posters about your posting habit, however I wish they were from the posters that you continue to misrepresent and pretty much have disdain for. You came back to the site after being banned and we thought maybe a second chance was in order. Looks like we were wrong and need to ban you again.

Nemesis

Just for the record, I would like to make it clear that no complaints against Loran came from me. I have learned a lot from his posts, and have found his contributions informative and useful, and I hope that he will be able to continue.

[Calm]

Or patriarchal blessings. Covenants were an integral part of community, of belonging, and as FMC pointed out, one was adopted into a kinship group through covenants. The ancient Hebrews saw things in terms of families. So does God.

Why do we have to belong to Israel if only individual salvation is the essence of the celestial kingdom?

What has been revealed and what we are taught about our eternal lives is framed within a context of community to a great extent. We are first seen as active participants in our lives in the context of the Council in Heaven, we are taught in this life that the greatest success (and thus a very important part of our lives) takes place within the family and we are commanded to redeem our dead without which we may not be made perfect in the next life, that exaltation occurs to couples, not individuals and that eternal life is this exaltation being one with the Father, being one with our eternal families, etc. Even if it is only our individual actions on which our salvation and exaltation is dependent, that salvation and exaltation is to a great extent a communal state.

[Senator]

Just for the record, I would like to make it clear that no complaints against Loran came from me. I have learned a lot from his posts, and have found his contributions informative and useful, and I hope that he will be able to continue.

I guess you were never privileged to be at the receiving end of his "informative and useful contributions".

[zerinus]

I guess you were never privileged to be at the receiving end of his "informative and useful contributions".

If I had been I am sure it would have been an educational experience. And I am sure I would have had the intellectual clout to be able to meet the challenge without winging and whining or running to the mods.

[Deborah]

If I had been I am sure it would have been an educational experience. And I am sure I would have had the intellectual clout to be able to meet the challenge without winging and whining or running to the mods.

If you read Nemesis' remarks the complaints were not from the people he attacked.

[Nathair/|\]

Is it relevant to this thread that some Saints believe that if everyone affected is sealed in the temple, and a child goes astray but the parents stay faithful, the child will end up at least in the lowest degree of the CK?

Also, off topic, but as long as this thread has your attention; Maklellan and David: do we have an ANE name for Gaia? I know she is mentioned in Moses 7:10, but I've never heard a name other than the Greek one.

OK, I get it. Those were stupid questions.