Woody Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 These questions are good ones, but I request that you ask each new interesting question in a separate thread. Go for it. With related title. Consider future generations. Suppose someone's researching the 3 days of darkness and would like to dig into the points raised here... but they have to wind and wind thru miles of discussion on many topics. It's steganography, essentially. 1
CV75 Posted January 11, 2017 Posted January 11, 2017 On 1/6/2017 at 10:36 AM, bluebell said: Next question- Why did the Jews only suffer thru 3 hours of darkness after Jesus died and the BOM people had 3 days of intense darkness, huge destruction, and huge loss of life? I mean, the Jews had actually crucified Him. Why did they get off so easy? The darkness in the East could be explained by blocking the sun for 3 hours (storm, eclipse, etc.), and the 3 days of darkness in the West by the effects of volcanic activity. Both the Nephites (Helaman 14:27, fulfilled in 3 Nephi chapter 8:23) and the Jews (Amos 8:9, fulfilled in Matthew 27:45) were given a warning that these things would transpire as they did. As for why the Lord see things up that way, perhaps the Jews might not have been able to recover, possibly affecting the ability to deliver the apostles' message to the gentiles (the Nephites had no gentiles among them). The Lord had to return quickly to the Twelve, but he didn't visit the Nephites until a year later. 1
bluebell Posted January 11, 2017 Author Posted January 11, 2017 11 hours ago, Woody said: These questions are good ones, but I request that you ask each new interesting question in a separate thread. Go for it. With related title. Consider future generations. Suppose someone's researching the 3 days of darkness and would like to dig into the points raised here... but they have to wind and wind thru miles of discussion on many topics. It's steganography, essentially. You're probably right. It's just that starting to many threads in a row is frowned upon so that's why i decided not to do it.
bluebell Posted January 14, 2017 Author Posted January 14, 2017 Who thinks that the owner of the pigs would probably have been pretty angry and out a lot of money once Jesus cast demons into them and they all plummeted over a cliff?
Duncan Posted January 14, 2017 Posted January 14, 2017 (edited) Just now, bluebell said: Who thinks that the owner of the pigs would probably have been pretty angry and out a lot of money once Jesus cast demons into them and they all plummeted over a cliff? I think the word you're looking for is disgruntled.....!!!!!! That was a twist in the tale, wouldn't you say Edited January 14, 2017 by Duncan 2
cdowis Posted January 15, 2017 Posted January 15, 2017 On 1/11/2017 at 9:59 AM, CV75 said: The darkness in the East could be explained by blocking the sun for 3 hours (storm, eclipse, etc.), and the 3 days of darkness in the West by the effects of volcanic activity. The darkness in America wa so dense that it put out torches and lights, which hints at volcanic ash. 1
longview Posted January 15, 2017 Posted January 15, 2017 2 hours ago, cdowis said: The darkness in America wa so dense that it put out torches and lights, which hints at volcanic ash. If it was thick enough to put out torches and lights, it would have killed off the remaining survivors. Human lungs cannot tolerate the stuff.
cdowis Posted January 15, 2017 Posted January 15, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, longview said: If it was thick enough to put out torches and lights, it would have killed off the remaining survivors. Human lungs cannot tolerate the stuff. If they attempted to start a campfire, what would happen? It is not the lack of oxygen but everything would be covered in ash. Edited January 15, 2017 by cdowis
CV75 Posted January 15, 2017 Posted January 15, 2017 (edited) 20 hours ago, cdowis said: The darkness in America wa so dense that it put out torches and lights, which hints at volcanic ash. Absolutely. http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms/Three_days_of_darkness The gases produced in volcanic eruptions, and in my mind, any additional wet smog created from fog or other atmospheric moisture would make lighting fires impossible. 17 hours ago, longview said: If it was thick enough to put out torches and lights, it would have killed off the remaining survivors. Human lungs cannot tolerate the stuff. Death by suffocation or poisoning may well have occurred in some parts, but not in areas where the noxious vapors were less concentrated, yet enough to inhibit ignition (see above link). Edited January 15, 2017 by CV75 1
longview Posted January 15, 2017 Posted January 15, 2017 22 minutes ago, CV75 said: Absolutely. http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms/Three_days_of_darkness The gases produced in volcanic eruptions, and in my mind, any additional wet smog created from fog or other atmospheric moisture would make lighting fires impossible. Very interesting link. Such as intense lightnings without the rain, etc. I suppose the mineral content of the ashes could have been less toxic than usual. 25 minutes ago, CV75 said: yet enough to inhibit ignition (see above link). I would have to think some more about this.
CV75 Posted January 16, 2017 Posted January 16, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, longview said: Very interesting link. Such as intense lightnings without the rain, etc. I suppose the mineral content of the ashes could have been less toxic than usual. I would have to think some more about this. Some kinds of gasses would have a toxic component, not so much the ash. The ignition idea came to me from my brother's experience, who was camping when a forest fire broke loose (not in the immediate vicinity, but enough smoke to affect the atmosphere where he was. In the morning a heavy fog had mixed with the smoke, bringing it close to the ground and covering everything, affecting the kindling wood as well as blocking the appearance of the sunlight to a great extent. ETA: see "vog" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vog ETA 2... but I guess a heavy mist of any kind would affect kindling. Edited January 16, 2017 by CV75 1
bluebell Posted January 29, 2017 Author Posted January 29, 2017 Ok, new question. In John 12 (and also in John 8), Jesus proclaims that He judges no man and that He did not come to judge the world. In John 5, He proclaims that the Father judges no man but has committed all judgment unto the Son. How are those two statements no contradictory? I'm confused. Also, if the Father judges no man and instead all judgements belong to the Son, then why do we need an advocate? Who is Christ advocating to if the Father isn't a judge?
strappinglad Posted January 29, 2017 Posted January 29, 2017 1 hour ago, bluebell said: Ok, new question. In John 12 (and also in John 8), Jesus proclaims that He judges no man and that He did not come to judge the world. In John 5, He proclaims that the Father judges no man but has committed all judgment unto the Son. How are those two statements no contradictory? I'm confused. Also, if the Father judges no man and instead all judgements belong to the Son, then why do we need an advocate? Who is Christ advocating to if the Father isn't a judge? Maybe it has to do with before Christ's resurrection and after. 1
strappinglad Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 Were books about WWII written 50 years after the end of the war more accurate or less accurate than those written a year after the end of the war? At what point does time clarify or obscure an event? Were articles written 2 days after the Ferguson mess better than those written a month or even a year later? IMO , just because the gospels were supposedly written 50 + years after an event, it does not automatically make them suspect. 1
ksfisher Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, bluebell said: Ok, new question. In John 12 (and also in John 8), Jesus proclaims that He judges no man and that He did not come to judge the world. In John 5, He proclaims that the Father judges no man but has committed all judgment unto the Son. How are those two statements no contradictory? I'm confused. Also, if the Father judges no man and instead all judgements belong to the Son, then why do we need an advocate? Who is Christ advocating to if the Father isn't a judge? During Christ's earthly ministry he did not act in His role as judge. He was sent to call all to repentance so that they may one day stand spotless before Him. At that time, the final judgement, he will act in the role of judge. Christ will act as an advocate with the Father for those who He (Christ) judges to be worthy of exaltation. Edited January 30, 2017 by ksfisher 1
bluebell Posted January 30, 2017 Author Posted January 30, 2017 17 minutes ago, ksfisher said: During Christ's earthly ministry he did not act in His role as judge. He was sent to call all to repentance so that they may one day stand spotless before Him. At that time, the final judgement, he will act in the role of judge. Christ will act as an advocate with the Father for those who He (Christ) judges to be worthy of exaltation. Ok. Who do you believe will be advocate for those who He judges worthy of the terrestrial kingdom?
Johnnie Cake Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 On 1/3/2017 at 1:52 PM, bluebell said: As I've been listening to the scriptures, random questions occur to me that i'd like to get some thoughts on. For example, I was listening to the NT this morning about Judas' betrayal of Jesus and I wondered, why did the high priests need Judas to point out who Jesus was? Members of the council had had dealings with him in the past and surely they were aware of who he was. Why did Judas need to physically show them before they could arrest him? Keep in mind that all of the gospels were written decades after Jesus's death...that story probably didn't happen as told in the Bible 1
ksfisher Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 52 minutes ago, bluebell said: Ok. Who do you believe will be advocate for those who He judges worthy of the terrestrial kingdom? If there is one then it would be Christ as well. He is the only one worthy enough to stand and plead before the Father. Perhaps I need to go back and edit my earlier post. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 22 hours ago, bluebell said: Ok, new question. In John 12 (and also in John 8), Jesus proclaims that He judges no man and that He did not come to judge the world. In John 5, He proclaims that the Father judges no man but has committed all judgment unto the Son. How are those two statements no contradictory? I'm confused. Also, if the Father judges no man and instead all judgements belong to the Son, then why do we need an advocate? Who is Christ advocating to if the Father isn't a judge? I love your question. It is contradictory. There are also scriptures stating that judgment will be made by the 12 apostles and by the prophets of the dispensations. The whole judgment doctrine is quite discombobulated so you're right to be confused. Here's a recent thread on this exact topic. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/68526-advocate-with-the-father/#comment-1209690261 1
bluebell Posted January 30, 2017 Author Posted January 30, 2017 7 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: I love your question. It is contradictory. There are also scriptures stating that judgment will be made by the 12 apostles and by the prophets of the dispensations. The whole judgment doctrine is quite discombobulated so you're right to be confused. Here's a recent thread on this exact topic. http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/68526-advocate-with-the-father/#comment-1209690261 It seems like it's one of those subjects where trying to use the bible alone makes it more confusing instead of settling anything.
HappyJackWagon Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 24 minutes ago, bluebell said: It seems like it's one of those subjects where trying to use the bible alone makes it more confusing instead of settling anything. Maybe, but adding the BoM, D&C, and PoGP only makes it more confusing. Appeal to the scriptures doesn't answer this question. The only possible solution is modern revelation that explains the mess.
Gray Posted January 30, 2017 Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) 20 hours ago, strappinglad said: Were books about WWII written 50 years after the end of the war more accurate or less accurate than those written a year after the end of the war? At what point does time clarify or obscure an event? Were articles written 2 days after the Ferguson mess better than those written a month or even a year later? IMO , just because the gospels were supposedly written 50 + years after an event, it does not automatically make them suspect. Late sources are were a lot further removed from events in the first century than they are in the last 100 years or so. In the first century there was very low literacy rates, no such thing as photography or video, and no such thing as newpapers or media. Christians writing in 70 CE didn't have the luxury of going back and checking contemporary sources about Jesus from newspapers or twitter or what have you. Edited January 30, 2017 by Gray 1
bluebell Posted February 7, 2017 Author Posted February 7, 2017 On 1/30/2017 at 1:26 PM, HappyJackWagon said: Maybe, but adding the BoM, D&C, and PoGP only makes it more confusing. Appeal to the scriptures doesn't answer this question. The only possible solution is modern revelation that explains the mess. I'll have to look at what the other scriptures say about judging to see what they say. I haven't done that yet. You are right though in that the scriptures rarely make things explicitly clear on their own.
Recommended Posts