inquiringmind Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) Before I could get around to posting this question, I found what I think is the answer.(And in case any one else had the same question, I thought I'd post Q&A here.)Q. Why is the BOM called the stick of Ephraim if Lehi was of the tribe of Manasseh?A. Though Lehi's sons may have been direct descendants of Manasseh, their wives were of Ephraim (and thus their children shared both bloodlines.)Alma 10:3 Lehi…who was a descendant of ManassehLehi and Nephi never mentioned which tribe they were from other than to say that they were of Joseph (1 Ne 5:14). It is only through Amulek that we learn that they were through Manasseh. Not all the Nephite blood was through Manasseh. Joseph Smith taught that in the 116 lost pages, the genealogy of Ishmael was given to be through Ephraim. Also, we know that Mulek was of Judah. Therefore, among the Nephites and Lamanites, there were descendants of Ephraim, Manasseh, and Judah.Erastus Snow“The Prophet Joseph Smith informed us that the record of Lehi was contained on the one hundred sixteen pages that were first translated and subsequently stolen, and of which an abridgment is given us in the First Book of Nephi, which is the record of Nephi individually, he himself being of the lineage of Manasseh; but that Ishmael was of the lineage of Ephraim, and that his sons married into Lehi's family, and Lehi's sons married Ishmael's daughters, thus fulfilling the words of Jacob upon Ephraim and Manasseh in the 48th chapter of Genesis [verse 16] which says: 'And let my name be named on them, and the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac; and let them grow into a multitude in the midst of the earth.' Thus these descendants of Manasseh and Ephraim grew together upon this American continent, with a sprinkling from the house of Judah, from Mulek descended, who left Jerusalem eleven years after Lehi, and founded the colony afterwards known as Zarahemla found by Mosiah -- thus making a combination, an intermixture of Ephraim and Manasseh with the remnants of Judah, and for aught we know, the remnants of some other tribes that might have accompanied Mulek. And such have grown up upon the American continent.” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 23, pp. 184, 185) http://www.gospeldoc....com/Alma10.htm Edited January 19, 2012 by inquiringmind
Freedom Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 An interesting question. I wonder if there is more to it than that.
inquiringmind Posted January 19, 2012 Author Posted January 19, 2012 (edited) An interesting question. I wonder if there is more to it than that.I don't know.But if I overlooked anything please tell me. Edited January 19, 2012 by inquiringmind
ExAntiMormon Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 I believe the "Ephraim" designation refers more to the Natives of the America's, not specifically Lehi's lineage.For example, Judah in reference to the Bible refers to those peoples of the Biblical lands and story's.While the Book of Mormon refers to the American continent lands and peoples.Other "sticks" if there are others would be a different land and peoples.I believe also that most Patriarchal Blessings of Natives of the America's and the Islands are also of Ephraim.
TAO Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 Well, supposedly it refers to "For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:"... so I think ExAnti would be right.In addition, this verse in D&C might prove helpful: http://lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/27.5?lang=eng#4Here is the Bible Dictionary section, and though not scripture, it's pretty useful =). http://lds.org/scriptures/bd/ephraim-stick-of?lang=eng
Robert F. Smith Posted January 19, 2012 Posted January 19, 2012 An interesting question. I wonder if there is more to it than that.Yes, there is more to it than that. Ezekiel 37:16-20 is referring to the sticks of Joseph and Judah as the records of the ancient northern and southern biblical kingdoms. Ephraim gets mentioned because of primogeniture (first born of Joseph). Laban was apparently the caretaker of part of that northern kingdom record in Jerusalem (the brass plates) -- his and Lehi's Manassite ancestors likely having been elite refugees from the conquest of the northern kingdom by Assyria a little over a century before Nephi's record takes up the cause: the beginning of the record of Manasseh.The ten lost tribes are another matter entirely (and a key part of Ephraim writ large), and they will no doubt have their own contribution to make to such records at some future time -- when the gathering of Israel has been completed. Then and only then will we be able to speak of the two sticks being as one.
Whiskeypete Posted January 20, 2012 Posted January 20, 2012 (edited) It may be worth considering that Doctrine and Covenants refers to the Book of Mormon as the "record of the stick of Ephraim." Not the stick itself.I know numerous leaders/teachers/etc have referred to the Book of Mormon as the Stick of Joseph, and have various explanations to contradict most non-LDS scholars who say that the Sticks in Ezekiel refer to people or ruling authority, not books.I find it much easier to recognize that the Book of Mormon is the Record, not the stick itself. No need to have wooden tablets, filled with wax, etc. Edited January 20, 2012 by Whiskeypete
orion88 Posted January 23, 2012 Posted January 23, 2012 Ezekiel 37:16-20 is referring to the sticks of Joseph and Judah as the records of the ancient northern and southern biblical kingdoms.Your position is not in line with the scripture.The Bible says the two sticks are representative of two nations, not records: “And join themone to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. And I will make themone nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel [not in America]; and one king shall beking to them all:and they shall be no more two nations [not two records], neither shall they bedivided into two kingdoms [not two records] any more at all” (Ezekiel 37:17, 22).
Robert F. Smith Posted January 24, 2012 Posted January 24, 2012 Your position is not in line with the scripture.The Bible says the two sticks are representative of two nations, not records: “And join themone to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. And I will make themone nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel [not in America]; and one king shall beking to them all:and they shall be no more two nations [not two records], neither shall they bedivided into two kingdoms [not two records] any more at all” (Ezekiel 37:17, 22).It is probably not wise to insert your own words into the midst of a Scriptural quotation. You should allow the Scripture to speak for itself, and to add any commentary only afterward. You should not exclude parts of a quotation which do not fit your a priori interpretation -- here for example you carefully excluded the parts in which the sticks are written upon and the nature of the inscriptions. Such sticks were used then and are still today among the Jews as the centerpiece around which the Torah scroll is rolled.That said, it is true that this pericope does refer to the return and reuniting of the 12 Tribes (the Ten of the North and the Two of the South). If you go back and reread my brief comments, you will find that is part of what I said. However, I said nothing about America (that was apparently your erroneous assumption). You need to read more carefully.Hugh Nibley long ago dealt with this pericope, and you may want to examine chapter 24 of his An Approach to the Book of Mormon. There he observes that both Eusebius and Jerome interpreted the Hebrew word for "sticks" there to mean books of scripture. Carl Keil's old commentary saw them as writing tablets or books. James Freeman long ago also compared the sticks of Ezk 37 to the sticks and tablets upon which the ancient Greek and Roman laws were recorded. Nibley also cited Donald Wiseman on Assyrian writing boards, along with Geo Widengren on sticks as similar to the Akkadian tablets of destiny. Nibley also cites Zechariah 11:10,14 on the covenant staff between Judah and Israel which is broken asunder.Don't allow your failure to understand the symbolism to mislead you into narrow rejection of the truth. 1
orion88 Posted January 25, 2012 Posted January 25, 2012 Hugh Nibley long ago dealt with this pericope, and you may want to examine chapter 24 of his An Approach to the Book of Mormon. There he observes that both Eusebius and Jerome interpreted the Hebrew word for "sticks" there to mean books of scripture ... Carl Keil's old commentary ...Trust in Ezekiel's use of the word "nations" rather than the opinions of Eusebius or Jerome ... orCarl Keil for that matter.I'll requote a portion of my last post - "And I will make them one nation in the land upon themountains of Israel." This is referring to the northern and southern tribes, not the Book ofMormon or the Bible.Changing the meaning of what the biblical prophet meant is a clear sign of false teaching.
volgadon Posted January 25, 2012 Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) Trust in Ezekiel's use of the word "nations" rather than the opinions of Eusebius or Jerome ... orCarl Keil for that matter.Robert hasn't rejected the understanding of nations, rather, he has asked the question why use sticks to symbolise these two nations. Changing the meaning of what the biblical prophet meant is a clear sign of false teaching.Then by all means please excise the Books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel from your Bible. Edited January 25, 2012 by volgadon
Recommended Posts