Stick Of Joseph......?

[mfbukowski]

Gee, I'm losing it, Bro. Me and Neil Young been searching for a heart of gold, and we're getting old.

[Palerider]

Earlier in this thread, I believe Palerider mentioned something about "first shall be last and the last shall be first." Lets see if we can apply it to Ezekiel . . .

The first is obviously the House of Israel beginning with Abraham and developing (degrading) to the "Law of Moses" (carnal commandments and schoolmaster for the Hebrews). Then came the birth of Christ and His mission to "fulfil" the law and present the higher law (Beatitudes). The teachings and commandments of Christ and the discourses of the Apostles of the Lamb are recorded in the NT.

At the time of Christ's mission, He took pains to confine His service to the children of Israel which consisted mostly of Judeaens with a very few exceptions (crumbs for the "dogs"). Therefore the NT is also the record of the Jews (Judaeans). Even the Apostles of the Lamb were all Judaeans.

As mentioned in a previous post the average person has a difficult time separating the actual ACT of Christ's preaching (which He did to the Jews) from the writings and letters that were composed some years AFTER his ascencion. Therefore one has to look at intended audience rather than ethnicity of authorship.

Imagine it this way:

Christ:

"Hello Mr. Jew, I'm Jesus Christ and I'm your Savior. If you don't believe me, believe the works that I have done for they are one of the witnesses of me, etc. etc....."

Jews:

"I'm sorry Jesus, but nothing you could do could convince me that you are the Messiah, therefore I'm going to see to it that you are put to death on the cross and we won't have to worry about you any more..."

Christ:

"Well that didn't go over very well. Maybe if I go and have this all copied down as a group of letters and accounts and THEN have it given to the Jews AGAIN in the form of literature (without them actually being eye witnesses to the miracles).....maybe they'll believe it then? Nahhhh....."

So the Jews had they're chance as primary audience (as was promised) and they rejected Christ's direct preaching to them. So with the gradual formation of the New Testament (if one reads the writings carefully) it becomes obvious that it is being written PRIMARILY for the gentiles (Ephraim) and secondarily to the Jews who might also want to believe. You don't write a book in GREEK to convince the aramaic and hebrew literate Jews they were wrong......

Also as Ezekiel states, The New Testament is in the hands of Ephraim (gentiles). The present day Jews still consider only the Old Testament as canonized.

So I believe my approach to Ezekiel has every bit as much (more in my estimation) validity than the LDS view of the BofM.

As to Joseph's claim of being a decendant of Ephraim, that is self-referencing and carries no validity with me whatsoever.....

Who were the "last" in this era? Of course it were the Gentiles. After the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, He commissioned His Apostles to go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature. Peter had his amazing vision that caused him to understand the need for missionary work among non-Jews. We have no scriptures that we know of that were written by Gentiles in the "Old World" since the days of the "primitive church". Therefore the BIBLE (both OT and NT) represents the First Stick.

It is only in the "Last Days" that the Gentiles ("the last") have come up with the Second Stick. The LDS Church is considered a gentile church. Even though Joseph Smith is of the Tribe of Joseph and a pure Ephraimite, he is of European heritage and thus a gentile. The BoM is the Second Witness of Christ and is very important to cutting confusion and misunderstandings resulting from incorrect transmission of Bible scriptures. The BoM was translated by Joseph Smith, a descendant of Ephraim and Joseph of Egypt. The BoM is compiled (abridged) from the records of Lehi and Nephi and their descendents. They came from Manasseh and Joseph of Egypt.

We are now waiting to see the events unfold for the Jews who are to be "last", such as the building of the Temple in Old Jerusalem, expansion of LDS missionary work among the Jews, etc. But at this time the prophecy is fulfilled where both the Bible and the BoM (plus other standard works) are "ONE" in our hands in the present Kingdom of God (the Latter Days).

[Palerider]

What you are persistently not getting is that "empirical adequacy" is irrelevant and actually antithetical to religious belief. You can look forever for an "empirically adequate" evidence that Jesus rose from the dead forever and not find it.

Seriously- what are you thinking?

There are people who are called "atheists" who know perfectly well what I am saying. Imagine you making your argument to an atheist!

"You should believe the bible because it has some empirical adequacy"

According to their positivist standards, you can't get more "rational" than atheism. I of course disagree that we should limit ourselves to positivist standards of justification, but that is beyond this thread, unless you really want to get into it.

When you can prove the resurrection to every atheist in the world- with empirical evidence- (ok- I will accept a simple majority! ) THEN you may have something approaching "empirical adequacy

Good luck on that.

I have no interest in the Ezekiel discussion because to me, it is like worrying about where your car keys are when the wings have just fallen off the plane you are flying in. For those who want to discuss car keys, let them do so- I certainly do not want to stand in their way.

There is no such thing as "empirical adequacy" in a non-empirical question. What I am trying to combat is the view that one's faith hangs on or is in some way relevant to empirical questions. There can be, nor will there ever be, adequate understanding of matters of faith as long as this mistaken notion persists.

I had to lose my faith to find it. Maybe everyone does. Hopefully we all will grow up someday.

And what you are not seeming to understand is that the issues regarding Biblical canon have been satisfactorily addressed in my mind and heart and I refuse to be dragged into a debate on the Bible and the athiest view in this thread.

They are irrelevant here!

I understand better than you think the issues involved there and would highly recommend you to a Christian apologist by the name of Ravi Zacharias who was one of the few evangelical speakers ever invited by the LDS church to address an audience in the Mormon Tabernacle at Salt Lake City.

Good luck to you.

Edited June 22, 2013 by Palerider

[Palerider]

Hm, well first the Roman Empire, then the Roman Church and the the competition between the Roman Church and the Protestants, then European conquest and subjection of native cultures, then...

Sorry but the Roman catholic faith would not have existed without the New Testament to begin with. What were they going to work with, the oral tradition........?

Without the New Testament, nothing flys.........

Through the New Testament and the Spirit, more people have been brought to Christ than most likely the BofM ever will bring.

[longview]

. . . As mentioned in a previous post the average person has a difficult time separating the actual ACT of Christ's preaching (which He did to the Jews) from the writings and letters that were composed some years AFTER his ascencion. Therefore one has to look at intended audience rather than ethnicity of authorship. . . .

You and I have a vastly different perspective on the purpose of the New Testament record. I simply believe the NT to be a truly inspired scripture intended by God to testify of the mortal ministry of Christ and the subsequent proselyting by His authorized servants the Apostles. Jesus was not lacking in Jewish converts. Most likely they numbered in the hundreds or thousands. Then the church underwent tremendous growth in the days of the Apostles with both Jews and Gentiles working together in the unity of the faith and resolving issues such as the need for circumcision and proper procedures and authority for performing various ordinances such as baptism.

As for the NT being written in Greek, it may have been because of the destruction of Jerusalem and the resulting Diaspora of the Jews in 70 A.D. that it was decided to use the most convenient language of "diplomacy". The displaced Jews likely would have had to learn Greek as their second language in order to get by in their various places of exile.

[Palerider]

. . . As mentioned in a previous post the average person has a difficult time separating the actual ACT of Christ's preaching (which He did to the Jews) from the writings and letters that were composed some years AFTER his ascencion. Therefore one has to look at intended audience rather than ethnicity of authorship. . . .

You and I have a vastly different perspective on the purpose of the New Testament record. I simply believe the NT to be a truly inspired scripture intended by God to testify of the mortal ministry of Christ and the subsequent proselyting by His authorized servants the Apostles. Jesus was not lacking in Jewish converts. Most likely they numbered in the hundreds or thousands. Then the church underwent tremendous growth in the days of the Apostles with both Jews and Gentiles working together in the unity of the faith and resolving issues such as the need for circumcision and proper procedures and authority for performing various ordinances such as baptism.

Undoubtedly there were some Jewish converts but by and large the Jewish nation rejected Christ. The vast majority of the "tremendous growth" you speak of, was among the gentiles.

Rather than "working together in the unity of the faith" to solve the problems that arose between the Jewish coverts and gentile converts, I would say that this was one of the most divisive problems that plagued the early Church and probably contributed greatly to the Apostacy from the truth.

Regarding the audience the New Testament was aimed at, as I said in my initial post:

"This is important to note because even Paul acknowledged himself to be the apostle to the Gentiles (which come under Ephraim). In First Peter 1:1, Peter specifically denotes his audience as “the strangers (gentiles) scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia…etc.”

James 1:1 declares that his writing is addressed to “the 12 tribes which are scattered abroad”. That’s Ephraim among the gentiles!

The authors know to whom they are writing and as a general rule, it is to the Jews only secondarily. That's why Paul and the rest are writing in Greek. Because greek is a language understood by the gentiles. Think about it, was Rome a Jewish city? How about Galatia or Corinth?

They all had small Jewish populations of diasporate Jews but why write to them in Greek.....? unless the Greek speaking gentiles are your primary audience.

As for the NT being written in Greek, it may have been because of the destruction of Jerusalem and the resulting Diaspora of the Jews in 70 A.D. that it was decided to use the most convenient language of "diplomacy". The displaced Jews likely would have had to learn Greek as their second language in order to get by in their various places of exile.

Edited June 22, 2013 by Palerider

[longview]

. . . The authors know to whom they are writing and as a general rule, it is to the Jews only secondarily. That's why Paul and the rest are writing in Greek. Because greek is a language understood by the gentiles. Think about it, was Rome a Jewish city? How about Galatia or Corinth? . . .

It appears you are trying very hard to avoid conceding the plain fact that the Bible (both OT and NT) represents the record of the Jews centered in the Middle East (Judea) from the time of Abraham to the martyrdom of the Apostles of the Lamb. Very high percentage of people (both LDS and non LDS) understand this to be the case. Therefore, the Bible is the FIRST stick.

To cop out by claiming the Apostles had "given up" on the Jews and were focusing on the Gentiles is pretty lame. To suggest that the Apostles were targeting their "audience" is a flimsy attempt to credit the Gentiles with the New Testament. It is also illogical because at the time the NT were "canonized" the Gentiles were the "last". It should be plain to you that at least some period of time need to have elapsed before the Gentiles have the opportunity to become the "first" and for the Jews to become the "last". That did NOT happen in 100 A.D. or in the many centuries following.

To re-emphasize the point, there has been no major scriptural work since the days of the primitive church. Therefore the Book of Mormon is the ONLY candidate for being the SECOND stick.

[Palerider]

It appears you are trying very hard to avoid conceding the plain fact that the Bible (both OT and NT) represents the record of the Jews centered in the Middle East (Judea) from the time of Abraham to the martyrdom of the Apostles of the Lamb. Very high percentage of people (both LDS and non LDS) understand this to be the case. Therefore, the Bible is the FIRST stick.

To cop out by claiming the Apostles had "given up" on the Jews and were focusing on the Gentiles is pretty lame. To suggest that the Apostles were targeting their "audience" is a flimsy attempt to credit the Gentiles with the New Testament. It is also illogical because at the time the NT were "canonized" the Gentiles were the "last". It should be plain to you that at least some period of time need to have elapsed before the Gentiles have the opportunity to become the "first" and for the Jews to become the "last". That did NOT happen in 100 A.D. or in the many centuries following.

To re-emphasize the point, there has been no major scriptural work since the days of the primitive church. Therefore the Book of Mormon is the ONLY candidate for being the SECOND stick.

Wow....

Have you ever thought of taking some classes in New Testament studies? Even something from BYU would be a step in the right direction. At least it would give you a starting point. Even they acknowledge that the letters of Paul and some of the apostles are directed primarily towards the gentiles.

Until that happens I think we're done here.........

[Robert F. Smith]

Wow....

.................................

................... I think we're done here.........

I agree. The slobbering contest needs to come to an end.

[Palerider]

Hmmmm.....

Looks like the Mods are right on top of things as usual.......

[Stone holm]

Wow....

Have you ever thought of taking some classes in New Testament studies? Even something from BYU would be a step in the right direction. At least it would give you a starting point. Even they acknowledge that the letters of Paul and some of the apostles are directed primarily towards the gentiles.

Until that happens I think we're done here.........

See a lot of emphasis on audience rather than the group associated with the authorship. Doesn't seem a sufficient nail to hang the argument on.

[Calm]

Hmmmm.....

Looks like the Mods are right on top of things as usual.......

Six minutes to respond after a report...that's reasonable...you did report it as soon as it was posted, right?

[Robert F. Smith]

Six minutes to respond after a report...that's reasonable...you did report it as soon as it was posted, right?

Maybe asleep at the wheel?

[Palerider]

See a lot of emphasis on audience rather than the group associated with the authorship. Doesn't seem a sufficient nail to hang the argument on.

I agree. And that emphasis (on authorship) has been a creation of the LDS church leadership. It is a false synthesis. If one can remove the "mormon lens" and read Ezekiel for what it really says, the authorship really isn't even mentioned. It is the audience that is critical. When the Lord says to take a stick and write on it "For Judah" or "For Joseph" you will notice that these phrases are bracketed in apostrophes.

They are titular. Signifying this writing is "For Judah" and this writing is "For Joseph"

God is the author.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Palerider

[Palerider]

Six minutes to respond after a report...that's reasonable...you did report it as soon as it was posted, right?

Ahhh...

I didn't realize we were dealing with a tattle-tale system from the third grade.........only a few characters with third grade mentality.

[Calm]

Ahhh...

I didn't realize we were dealing with a tattle-tale system from the third grade.........only a few characters with third grade mentality.

So instead you think that moderators should be on the board 24/7 reading all the posts just in case a few of them break the board rules?

Even though they get no reimbursement for their time and energy, it is too much in your view to ask the posters who are disturbed by what is written to put up a red flag to draw the attention of a moderator to a possible offense?

Do you refuse to watch crime reenactments or to pass on information to police to help them do their job? Or if you saw a kid beating up another kid would you just walk on by and not notify a parent or teacher so that could the beating be stopped?

I don't get people who somehow think they are important enough to merit a watchdog to protect them from others but do not feel the watchdog itself has any inherent value save to be of service to them so that they can't even be bothered to participate in the process of holding people accountable in order to make the watchdog's job a little easier....that is except to spend time complaining about the horrible job the watchdogs are doing.

How is complaining publicly and repeatedly about not getting instant protective treatment by the moderators somehow not of a third grade mentality and yet the so-called tittle tattle report system of the board is one? What is the difference between whining to the public that someone has 'hit' you and whining to a moderator? In fact, I would say the latter is the more mature one as it is private and doesn't turn one into such a drama queen.

PS: You really need to read the Board Guidelines again. If you are not willing to abide by them and instead are going to continue your public complaints about the lack of moderation (due to the lack of your reporting any issues), then perhaps you should reconsider whether it is appropriate for you to take advantage of the service the moderators are supplying for you and others (and only asking in return that one abides by the guidelines including using the report function to notify moderators of problems rather than making a public scene:

2. Be respectful of each other. This should be a matter of common sense, but we have a detailed list below of the kind of behavior that won't be tolerated.......Telling others how to behave. Anything you find objectionable should be reported using the button located in each post.

http://www.mormondia...tion=boardrules

The whole point of having the report system is to avoid having complaint posts derailing threads...well, one of the major points of the report system....so I will not be responding to any more of this derail move either here or in other threads because while I do fail from time to time, I generally try to abide by the moderators' wishes in return for their generous donation of this board and the time and resources they give to keep it up and running relatively smoothly.

Edited June 24, 2013 by calmoriah

[Chronos]

Palerider, you'll have to forgive us. We (and by we, I mean just the one person who is actually all the mods) were on a coffee break. It's the only time we are let out of our cage.

On a side note, it seems this discussion is done.

~Chronos, Skylla, Ares, Minos, Hestia, Nemesis, and Chaos