Stick Of Joseph......?

[mfbukowski]

I think it interesting that of the pro-mormon responses so far, not one has addressed the issue of where I am wrong regarding the interpretation of Ezekiel's prophecy.

If this is the best you can do I'm very sorry for you...........

My goodness.

I think there may be some problems with the bible too, since it was written by humans who incorporate legends, linguistic oddities and personal prejudice and fallible conceptions of the nature of the world into their writings. Yes it is inspired- spiritually speaking, but to get a prophecy right in detail which is told in terms of parables and will not come to pass until thousands of years have passed- to get that "right" would be - let's just say remarkable. All scripture is of this nature.

As far as your interpretation, suppose you are right. What then? The most it would show is that Ezekial got it wrong. Oh my! An interpretive tie between one book of scripture- already acknowledged by everyone to be fallible- would not point to another work of scripture, also regarded as fallible.

For your thesis to work and for this to somehow harm the "foundational claims" - whatever that means- of the church, one would have to assume that both works were inerrant, "God breathed", AND interpreted literally.

That's at least three assumptions I have have never made.

I'm not disillusioned, because I was never illusioned- Sterling McMurrin said that, and I agree.

Interesting speculation, but of no consequence that I can see.

Edited June 17, 2013 by mfbukowski

[Kenngo1969]

I think you are absolutely correct. None of Nibley's words will stand up to close scrutiny and he knows it now, better than he ever did while among the living.......

...

Really? I'm sure that'll come as news to him. By the way, it's interesting you should mention Nibley: http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/books/?bookid=60&chapid=607

[mfbukowski]

You need to read the entire prophecy.

Seen in the true context of being a beaten and downtrodden people I would think that a prophecy proclaiming the day when Israel would eventually come off as conqueror and be re-united as a people and truly inherit the land promised to them and that the two writings were signs and testimonies of that great day.........might be a source of great comfort to those who had ears to hear.

The interpretation works just fine......

Exactlyi it does.

But my question - EVEN GRANTING THAT, WHICH I AM NOT- my question is "so what?"

You really think this is important and destroys the Restoration? Come on dude!

[mfbukowski]

Great statement as long as one realizes that the sword cuts both ways........It's just Joseph's interpretation and nothing more.....

The interpretation of a prophet in my opinion who was greater than Ezekial?

Fine with me!

[mfbukowski]

If one chooses to respond, my expectation is that of a well reasoned response to the topic at hand. Not a dodging of the argument by siteing BofM witnesses and hiding behind one's testimony because that is all you have to offer up.

Did you really say that?

"....all you have to offer up...?

That is all there is in spiritual matters, my frend- that is all there is.

Do you really want to get into flaws in the Bible? Do you really think that someone came back from the dead? That this same individual could somehow in an unexplained way, take his sins upon you, and by dying, make them go away?

Go ahead and explain all that to me logically! You are going by your testimony as sure as everyone else.

[Kenngo1969]

The bottom line is, anyone who wants to can complain that we members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are "playing tennis with the net down" by interpreting earlier revelation in light of later revelation, but that seems, to [most of] us, to be the equivalent of what a spoil-sport does right before he takes his ball and goes home!

[tyler90az]

16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one ^astick, and ^bwrite upon it, For ^cJudah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and ^dwrite upon it, For ^eJoseph, the ^fstick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:

This verse is obviously referring to when the sticks were written. That means, when the Bible was written, it was for the children of Israel. The Bible was written primarily for the Jews, Jesus came among the Jews, one scripture by Paul does not change that.

The stick of Ephraim was written for all the house of Israel. As you know being a former Latter-day Saint the Book of Mormon was compiled for everyone, for all.

You are making a very silly mistake if you ask me. It seems like you are actually thinking this verse is referring to our present day. When in fact, it is referring to when the sticks were written.

Can you prove the following?

That when the Bible was written it was for everyone, for all.

That the Book of Mormon was not translated for everyone.

it is the news of the covenant of salvation being made available to all the world.

You are making an impossible jump in your reasoning. In the verse it talks about the stick being written and yet you manage to think it means the news being available to all the world. It really does mean the intention of the stick was for all the world. Not that it is the "news of the covenant of salvation."

---

Another problem I see is that you think the Gentiles in the Bible couple with the Jews comprised the whole world. God had more people then those you hang so tightly on. You do know that right?

Note the use of the term “house” when speaking of Ephraim. In ancient times all members of the household were considered “family”. Even the latin term “familia” (family) is defined as the “household” including relatives and servants.

What how does this matter to your argument?

Here’s where it gets quite interesting.

You are right sir because nothing below that made much sense.

[mfbukowski]

You need to read the entire prophecy.

Seen in the true context of being a beaten and downtrodden people I would think that a prophecy proclaiming the day when Israel would eventually come off as conqueror and be re-united as a people and truly inherit the land promised to them and that the two writings were signs and testimonies of that great day.........might be a source of great comfort to those who had ears to hear.

The interpretation works just fine......

I just have to comment on this again.

So Ezekial made it all up to make his people feel better- is that what you are saying?

I don't think that helps your case.....

[mfbukowski]

I absolutely agree that the thread should focus on interpreting that passage of scripture. The wtinesses are irrelevant here.

OK I will shut up as well out of respect for your request.

But I would like to be shown at some point why interpreting this passage is actually important.

[Thinking]

Verse 16: "Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:"

If we accept that this stick is a book, or a record, it would be the book or record of Ephraim.

Alma 2:3 "And Aminadi was a descendant of Nephi, who was the son of Lehi, who came out of the land of Jerusalem, who was a descendant of Manasseh, who was the son of Joseph who was sold into Egypt by the hands of his brethren."

If Lehi was a descendant of Manasseh, how can the Book of Mormon be the stick of Ephraim?

[volgadon]

On the 2nd of Tebeth, the eighth and last day of Hannukah, the Torah portion (parashat hashavua) for that week is Va-Yigash, (Genesis 44:18-47:27). This is the climax of Joseph in Egypt's story, when he reveals his identity and is reconciled with his brothers.

The haftarah (additional scriptural portion) for all Jewish communities is Ezekiel 37:15-28.

That is, the eighth day of the celebrations occasioned by Judah Maccabee's rededication of the Jerusalem temple. There is usual a logic to the choice of the haftaroth, and they can prove very helpful in deciphering the context and concers of both sets of texts.

Genesis 44:18-47:27 relates a family drama, at the end of which the principal actors become one family again, and prosper. The central characters here are the brothers Joseph and Judah. Thanks to their respective acts of leadership, the family becomes one, is saved from a terrible famine, and becomes greater than ever before.

In Ezekiel 37:15-28, God promises to reunite the divided house of Israel (symbolized by Judah and Joseph), making them one; give them their own ruler; restore the temple; and renew his covenant of peace (or friendship) with them for ever. In other words, the children of Israel will be as one- a near-divine status- and will be able to

As Genesis 47 marks the beginning of the exile in Egypt, Ezekiel 37 prophesies of exile's end.

In other words, what happened to the brothers in Egypt is a type of things to come. Tagriffy is correct in noting that the prophecy must relate to the concerns of its contemporary audience. In my mind, LDS interpretations of the scripture as the Bible and the Book of Mormon are a tad simplistic. It is not so much about books. It is about the restoration of covenants and the kingdom of God. The Book of Mormon represents one phase of that process of restoring Israel to its proper position.

[volgadon]

OK I will shut up as well out of respect for your request.

But I would like to be shown at some point why interpreting this passage is actually important.

Why is anything here ever important enough for a response?

[Palerider]

Exactlyi it does.

But my question - EVEN GRANTING THAT, WHICH I AM NOT- my question is "so what?"

You really think this is important and destroys the Restoration? Come on dude!

As many here have a tendency to over-simplify, you have shown yourself to be in good company.

If this passage in Ezekiel were the only issue one has to deal with in Mormonism it probably wouldn't be a deal breaker. But the Mormonism problem is better defined as "death by a thousand cuts", which is why you find yourself running from one topic to the next on this site attempting to rationalize away the inconsistencies that trouble all of us dim-lights who just can't see the big picture.

Just remember the "devil is in the details"..........

[Palerider]

The interpretation of a prophet in my opinion who was greater than Ezekial?

Fine with me!

Hold on to that opinion tightly. Don't let go. It might be scary "out there".

[volgadon]

Hold on to that opinion tightly. Don't let go. It might be scary "out there".

He has been "out there." His isn't a blind faith.

[Palerider]

Did you really say that?

"....all you have to offer up...?

That is all there is in spiritual matters, my frend- that is all there is.

Do you really want to get into flaws in the Bible? Do you really think that someone came back from the dead? That this same individual could somehow in an unexplained way, take his sins upon you, and by dying, make them go away?

Go ahead and explain all that to me logically! You are going by your testimony as sure as everyone else.

Of course I have a testimony of the Savior and His mission. However there is also an important place for reasoned consistency and "dividing the word rightly", as well as empirical adequacy.......which I see a lack of in Mormonism generally.....

Mormons think they have a corner on the interpretation of this particular scripture in Ezekiel. That no one else has ever been able to give them a plausible explanation. It must be speaking of the Bof M! They are the ones who throw down the gauntlet here.

Well, I just happen to know of an interpretation that is every bit as plausible and acceptable.....if you have a problem with that please tell me why the New Testament couldn't be the Stick of Joseph.Where does it say that the Stick of Joseph has to be written by his decendants rather than to or "For" his decendents?

Edited June 17, 2013 by Palerider

[Palerider]

The bottom line is, anyone who wants to can complain that we members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are "playing tennis with the net down" by interpreting earlier revelation in light of later revelation, but that seems, to [most of] us, to be the equivalent of what a spoil-sport does right before he takes his ball and goes home!

This makes no sense at all regarding Ezekiel.........care to try again?

[Robert F. Smith]

I think you are absolutely correct. None of Nibley's words will stand up to close scrutiny and he knows it now, better than he ever did while among the living.......

And now for your devastating commentary correcting my analysis of Ezekiel???????

Still waiting........

You're going to stick to the satirical schtick you've got going here then?

[Robert F. Smith]

I think it interesting that of the pro-mormon responses so far, not one has addressed the issue of where I am wrong regarding the interpretation of Ezekiel's prophecy.

If this is the best you can do I'm very sorry for you...........

This is a test, it is only a test. If it were real, well . . .

[Robert F. Smith]

The discussion in a different thread posed the question of whether the church's doctrine contradicted the Bible's. Some there asked for specifics.

I felt my topic didn't allow for the space to address it properly in that thread.

If one chooses to respond, my expectation is that of a well reasoned response to the topic at hand. Not a dodging of the argument by siteing BofM witnesses and hiding behind one's testimony because that is all you have to offer up.

The church has long quoted Ezekiel 37 as one of it's proof texts of the B of M. I'm well aware that there are others the church uses to try to bolster the veracity of the B of M. My reason for writing is to discuss this one.

I was just taken aback by how quickly it was thrown under the bus as being totally unneccesary as one of the proofs of the BofM's validity, since the church has used it so often and relied on it quite heavily in my estimation.

I admire your determination to stay in character, Palerider, but, come on, your eisegesis was all too transparent -- I just know that you are putting us on!

[Storm Rider]

Some people never get off a high horse, but whatever gets people through the day. The reality of scripture is that there is seldom, if ever, a single interpretation or application. I can easily appreciate Vol's comments and they make sense to me. LDS teachers and members have long used this set of scripture to support the melding together of the two people's relationship with God through books of scripture and that interpretation still works for me, but it is only a single application of the verse. Why would any disciple of Christ limit scripture to a single perspective when we each so often find diverse application for scripture. As far as being "out there", my poor friend, I have been out there for more years than you will ever know. You judge us all from your ignorant perspective of most of us. It is not helpful to paint with such broad brush strokes. I have been a student of truth for decades. I can appreciate your desire to seek and find truth, but I do not appreciate your smug attitude, but who does like that characteristic in ourselves or others. I appreciate that you have abandoned any faith in the teachings of the Church; I get it. Conversely, I don't understand why you want to so blithely condemn those who retain faith in the LDS Church's teachings. Do you really think your snide condemnations build your argument or gain you more respect from any of us? The vast majority of us here have struggled with the trials and tribulations of faith. I spend time with those that seek and ask without already making a final judgment. Your glass is full and there is no need for discussion or response. Your interpretation is just that; if it works for you, great. I find it narrow and based on several assumptions that I don't make. After saying that what else is there to talk about? I don't get much enjoyment out of proclaiming that those who have already passed from this life have a lot to learn or have found out the truth and regretting their days on earth. I have an exercise from which you may find profit; there is a short prayer that enlightens one when repeated a thousand times a day, "Oh my Father and my God, have mercy on me a sinner. I pray in the name of thy Son Jesus. Amen." I have learned a lot from practicing this prayerful discipline.

[Robert F. Smith]

The problem is that your interpretation does not work either. It does not account for the historical and social context in which Ezekiel delivered his oracle. Imagine yourself as a Jewish captive forcibly removed to Babylon after Nebuchanezzar destroyed Jerusalem. Not only have you been through a brutal experience, but you were also forcibly marched away from your homeland. So now you have this prophet telling you that some 700 hundred years in the future, there will be both an Old and New Testaments. I don't know about you, but my response would be something like, "Who gives a flying so-and-so?"

He's playing us, Tim. He knows very well that his dog won't hunt.

[Palerider]

This verse is obviously referring to when the sticks were written. That means, when the Bible was written, it was for the children of Israel. The Bible was written primarily for the Jews, Jesus came among the Jews, one scripture by Paul does not change that.

Obviously? O.k. show me how that is true......you might be in over your head here. And after you read carefully the intro to this topic you want to insist that the Bible was written primarily for the Jews? That's a non-starter.......

The stick of Ephraim was written for all the house of Israel. As you know being a former Latter-day Saint the Book of Mormon was compiled for everyone, for all.

You are making a very silly mistake if you ask me. It seems like you are actually thinking this verse is referring to our present day. When in fact, it is referring to when the sticks were written.

Can you prove the following?

That when the Bible was written it was for everyone, for all.

It's a historical given that there were many who were interested in the Israelite traditions and worship. I think that's one of the reasons the septuagint was translated. Do you really think that God would restrict someone from finding the true path in ancient Israel simply because they were a gentile? Every time there was a diaspora the gospel was taken to the ancient world to have it's influence there.

Now concerning the New Testament, I would suggest you take a little course in Institute and find out who it was really written to before you embarass yourself further.........

That the Book of Mormon was not translated for everyone.

Prove to me that it was "translated" in the first place and then I'll do your thing, o.k.?

You are making an impossible jump in your reasoning. In the verse it talks about the stick being written and yet you manage to think it means the news being available to all the world. It really does mean the intention of the stick was for all the world. Not that it is the "news of the covenant of salvation."

---

Another problem I see is that you think the Gentiles in the Bible couple with the Jews comprised the whole world. God had more people then those you hang so tightly on. You do know that right?

I don't understand your question but from the Jewish point of view if you weren't "jewish" the rest of the world were gentiles, save the few decendants of Esau......not sure on that....maybe Volgadon could help you there.

What how does this matter to your argument?

How does the above statement matter to yours?

You are right sir because nothing below that made much sense.

Neither did much of what you wrote above, so are we even?

I wish I had this 10 minutes back.........

[Palerider]

I just have to comment on this again.

So Ezekial made it all up to make his people feel better- is that what you are saying?

I don't think that helps your case.....

I'm not saying that is all but, if it helps you to think so go ahead.........

Edited June 17, 2013 by Palerider

[tagriffy]

You need to read the entire prophecy.

Seen in the true context of being a beaten and downtrodden people I would think that a prophecy proclaiming the day when Israel would eventually come off as conqueror and be re-united as a people and truly inherit the land promised to them and that the two writings were signs and testimonies of that great day.........might be a source of great comfort to those who had ears to hear.

The interpretation works just fine......

But Ezekiel went on to say exactly what he meant by the sticks, and they have nothing to do with books. "I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from every quarter, and bring them to their own land. I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king over them all. Never again shall they be two nations, and never again shall they be divided into two kingdoms" (37:21-22). That would have been a message of hope. That someday there would be two books would be meaningless, even laughable to the newly exiled community.

Edited June 17, 2013 by tagriffy