Prophets Before Adam

[Bobbieaware]

2 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

You are excused to believe as you wish - just thought I'd point out the distinction. Our whole church also believes physical sacrifice is done away too. I wonder why Yeshua told Peter "by what death he would glorify God."

As solemn, terrible and momentous as a martyrs death might be, there's a difference of overwhelming significance between the great and final infinite and eternal sacrifice of the sinless Lamb of God that atones for the sins of the world and makes a resurrection into the varying degrees of eternal glory available to all the repentant and the death of a mere fallen mortal whose sacraficial death may inspire admiration and faith but has no power to atone or redeem.

[RevTestament]

5 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

As solemn, terrible and momentous as a martyrs death might be, there's a difference of overwhelming significance between the great and final infinite and eternal sacrifice of the sinless Lamb of God that atones for the sins of the world and makes a resurrection into the varying degrees of eternal glory available to all the repentant and the death of a mere fallen mortal whose sacraficial death may inspire admiration and faith but has no power to atone or redeem.

I agree entirely. However there are several different type of sacrifice in the Mosaic law.

Lev 16:6 And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house.

7 And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat.

9 And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the Lord’s lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering.

[clarkgoble]

34 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Our whole church also believes physical sacrifice is done away too.

Umm what? We believe the sons of Levi will again offer physical sacrifice.

[Bobbieaware]

52 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I agree entirely. However there are several different type of sacrifice in the Mosaic law.

Lev 16:6 And Aaron shall offer his bullock of the sin offering, which is for himself, and make an atonement for himself, and for his house.

7 And he shall take the two goats, and present them before the Lord at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat.

9 And Aaron shall bring the goat upon which the Lord’s lot fell, and offer him for a sin offering.

Those animal sacrifices were only efficacious because the were performed as priesthood ordinances that symbolically looked forward to the very real great and last sacrifice of the Lamb of God. These animal sacrifices were efficacious only in the same way our Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is efficacious. In the case of the Holy Sacrament, it looks back rather than forward to the great and final blood sacrifice.

In holy places, we are repeatedly reminded that the atoning blood sacrifice of the Savior ended sacrifice by the shedding of actual blood. The sacrifices in righteousness that the sons of Lehi will yet perform in the temple are the same sacrificial ordinances performed in our temples today, even those sacrifices where blood is only a symbolically shed.

Think of it, if actual nails were to puncture the flesh of a living human beings real blood would be spilled all over the place. But since the sacrifice of Christ ended sacrifice by the shedding of real blood only symbolic nails are employed; the symbolic shedding of blood is all that takes place. Even though today no actual blood is shed in our temples, plenty of symbolic blood is shed. The Apostle Peter spoke of these priesthood ordinances of sacrifice where only symbolic blood is shed...

4 To whom (Christ) coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,

5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house (the temple of God), an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2)

People are incorrectly assuming the sacrifice in righteousness the sons of Levi will perform will be an animal sacrifices but they are almost certainly incorrect. Why? Because the sacrifices in righteousness they will perform are the sacrifices of today's temple endowment where only symbolic blood shed. Remember, the sacrifice of Christ ended the practice of sacrifice by the shedding of real blood, animal or otherwise.

Edited October 19, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[RevTestament]

1 minute ago, clarkgoble said:

Umm what? We believe the sons of Levi will again offer physical sacrifice.

Of what? Chickens? The Book of Mormon makes it clear that animal sacrifice is done away because that was a precursor of things to come, which were ushered in by John the Baptist and Yeshua.

Tithe? SS manuals of 2 decades ago come to mind, which don't agree with what you seem to be implying.

[RevTestament]

2 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Those animal sacrifices were only efficacious because the were performed as priesthood ordinances that symbolically looked forward to the very real great and last sacrifice of the Lamb of God. These animal sacrifices were efficacious only in the same way our Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is efficacious. In the case of the Holy Sacrament, it looks back rather than forward to the great and final blood sacrifice.

In holy places, we are repeatedly reminded that the atoning blood sacrifice of the Savior ended sacrifice by the shedding of actual blood. The sacrifices in righteousness that the sons of Lehi will yet perform in the temple are the same sacrificial ordinances  performed in our temples today, even those sacrifices where blood is only a symbolically shed.

Think of it, if actual nails were to puncture the flesh of a living human beings, real blood would be spilled all over the place. But since the sacrifice of Christ ended sacrifice by the shedding of real blood. Because only symbolic nails are employed, the symbolic shedding of blood is all that takes place. Even though today no actual blood is shed in our temples, plenty of symbolic blood is shed. The Apostle Peter spoke of these priesthood ordinances of sacrifice where only symbolic blood is shed...

4 To whom (Christ) coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,

5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house (the temple of God), an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2)

People are incorrectly assuming the sacrifice in righteousness the sons of Levi will perform will be animal sacrifices but they are almost certainly incorrect. Why? Because the sacrifices in righteousness they will perform are the sacrifices of today's temple endowment where only symbolic blood shed. Remember, the sacrifice of Christ ended the practice of sacrifice by the shedding of real blood, animal or otherwise.

There it is. That is the line.

So Peter was not giving a sacrifice for the glory of God. Yeshua told him to follow Him, but didn't mean to lay down his life to glorify God... How else am I supposed to understand what Yeshua told Peter?

In fact Peter was the goat on which the Lord's lot fell who gave a sin offering. I have pointed this out several times, but it is never heard. Goats are sinners. Repentant goats may be clean and perfect but they are still goats. Yeshua's sacrifice was the strong bullock which made an atonement for the house/congregation.

Perhaps a review of the Book of Mormon will clarify things...probably not:

"Behold, my servant shall deal prudently; he shall be exalted and extolled and be very high. As many were astonished at thee - his visage was so marred, more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men - so shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him, for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider. Verily, verily, I say unto you, all these things shall surely come, even as the Father hath commanded me. Then shall this covenant which the Father hath covenanted with his people be fulfilled; and then shall Jerusalem be inhabited again with my people, and it shall be the land of their inheritance." 3 Nephi 20:43-6. "And verily I say unto you, I give unto you a sign, that ye may know the time when these things shall be about to take place - that I shall gather in, from their long dispersion, my people, O house of Israel, and shall establish again among them my Zion;... Therefore, when these works and the works shall be wrought among you hereafter shall come forth from the Gentiles, unto your seed which shall dwindle in unbelief because of iniquity; For thus it behooveth the Father that it should come forth from the Gentiles, that he may show forth his power unto the Gentiles, for this cause that the Gentiles, if they will not harden their hearts, that they may repent and come unto me and be baptized in my name and know the true points of my doctrine, that they may be numbered among my people, O house of Israel; And when these things come to pass that thy seed shall begin to know these things - it shall be a sign unto them...." 3 Nephi 21:1-7. "For in that day, for my sake shall the Father work a work, which shall be a great and a marvelous work among them; and there shall be among them those who will not believe it, although a man shall declare it unto them. But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet, I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil. Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant." 3 Nephi 21:9-11.

[Benjamin Seeker]

1 hour ago, clarkgoble said:

Umm what? We believe the sons of Levi will again offer physical sacrifice.

 

23 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Those animal sacrifices were only efficacious because the were performed as priesthood ordinances that symbolically looked forward to the very real great and last sacrifice of the Lamb of God. These animal sacrifices were efficacious only in the same way our Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is efficacious. In the case of the Holy Sacrament, it looks back rather than forward to the great and final blood sacrifice.

In holy places, we are repeatedly reminded that the atoning blood sacrifice of the Savior ended sacrifice by the shedding of actual blood. The sacrifices in righteousness that the sons of Lehi will yet perform in the temple are the same sacrificial ordinances performed in our temples today, even those sacrifices where blood is only a symbolically shed.

Think of it, if actual nails were to puncture the flesh of a living human beings real blood would be spilled all over the place. But since the sacrifice of Christ ended sacrifice by the shedding of real blood only symbolic nails are employed; the symbolic shedding of blood is all that takes place. Even though today no actual blood is shed in our temples, plenty of symbolic blood is shed. The Apostle Peter spoke of these priesthood ordinances of sacrifice where only symbolic blood is shed...

4 To whom (Christ) coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,

5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house (the temple of God), an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. (1 Peter 2)

People are incorrectly assuming the sacrifice in righteousness the sons of Levi will perform will be an animal sacrifices but they are almost certainly incorrect. Why? Because the sacrifices in righteousness they will perform are the sacrifices of today's temple endowment where only symbolic blood shed. Remember, the sacrifice of Christ ended the practice of sacrifice by the shedding of real blood, animal or otherwise.

 

22 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Of what? Chickens? The Book of Mormon makes it clear that animal sacrifice is done away because that was a precursor of things to come, which were ushered in by John the Baptist and Yeshua.

Tithe? SS manuals of 2 decades ago come to mind, which don't agree with what you seem to be implying.

I'm not going to take the time to look up either of these right now, but it is worth mentioning: 1. JS told Brigham or another apostle to go sacrifice an animal (I believe in preparation for his calling). 2. There was a sacrificial alter included in the plans for the Salt Lake Temple (or St. George Temple? It was one of these early Utah temples).

Edited October 19, 2017 by Benjamin Seeker

[RevTestament]

12 minutes ago, Benjamin Seeker said:

I'm not going to take the time to look up either of these right now, but it is worth mentioning: 1. JS told Brigham or another apostle to go sacrifice an animal (I believe in preparation for his calling). 2. There was a sacrificial alter included in the plans for the Salt Lake Temple (or St. George Temple? It was one of these early Utah temples).

Animal sacrifice wasn't the point under the Mosaic law. The point was to sacrifice their best - it wasn't to appease God like in the pagan religions. It was instituted to try to give a simple lesson - to make them feel they were giving up a part of themselves. It was for their benefit rather than to please God. In fact God said on several occasions He was full of their feasts and sacrifices, because He was looking for the contrite heart. So when Yeshua ran across people selling animals to be sacrificed in the temple, He was upset. The buyers were just going through the motions, but didn't understand the purpose at all.

Will God reinstitute animal sacrifice? Nope. I will not respond to an undocumented allegation of some recollection. You'll have to quote JS if you want any additional response. Yeshua came to fulfill the law - not to reinstitute it.

[JAHS]

I believe both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young taught that Adam  came from another planet and brought Eve with him

Perhaps he was talking about prophets on that other planet or any other planet that God created and populated before this one. 

Brigham Young:
"Where the gods dwell mankind are here because they are the offspring of parents who were first brought here from another planet and power was given them to propagate their species and they were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth." (Journal of Discourses 7:285-286)

Joseph Smith:
"Now regarding Adam: He came here from another planet, an immortalized Being, and brought his wife Eve with him, and by eating of the fruit of this earth, became subject to death and decay. . . was made mortal and subject to death." - (Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., as recorded by Anson Call and copied by Patriarch John Whitmer)

 

[Benjamin Seeker]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

I believe both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young taught that Adam  came from another planet and brought Eve with him

Perhaps he was talking about prophets on that other planet or any other planet that God created and populated before this one. 

Brigham Young:
"Where the gods dwell mankind are here because they are the offspring of parents who were first brought here from another planet and power was given them to propagate their species and they were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth." (Journal of Discourses 7:285-286)

Joseph Smith:
"Now regarding Adam: He came here from another planet, an immortalized Being, and brought his wife Eve with him, and by eating of the fruit of this earth, became subject to death and decay. . . was made mortal and subject to death." - (Prophet Joseph Smith, Jr., as recorded by Anson Call and copied by Patriarch John Whitmer)

 

Unfortunately, that Anson Call recollection is super late and sounds like whatever Anson is recalling is being filtered through Anson's memory of Brigham's 1852 address.

[Benjamin Seeker]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

Animal sacrifice wasn't the point under the Mosaic law. The point was to sacrifice their best - it wasn't to appease God like in the pagan religions. It was instituted to try to give a simple lesson - to make them feel they were giving up a part of themselves. It was for their benefit rather than to please God. In fact God said on several occasions He was full of their feasts and sacrifices, because He was looking for the contrite heart. So when Yeshua ran across people selling animals to be sacrificed in the temple, He was upset. The buyers were just going through the motions, but didn't understand the purpose at all.

Will God reinstitute animal sacrifice? Nope. I will not respond to an undocumented allegation of some recollection. You'll have to quote JS if you want any additional response. Yeshua came to fulfill the law - not to reinstitute it.

Your wish is my command! From an early saint, Wandle Mace's journal:

"The Quorum of the Twelve had been filled, but of the number selected one--Willard Richards--was in England and Joseph was instructing those present of that Quorum how they must proceed to prepare themselves, that they might ordain Willard Richards to the Apostleship when they should reach that country. Joseph told them to go to Kirtland and cleanse and purify a certain room in the temple, that they must kill a lamb and offer asacrifice unto the Lord which should prepare them to ordain Willard Richard a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

Sidney made some remarks, when Joseph spoke with great power and spirit, said he, "I know the law." To a remark made by Heber C. Kimball he said, "It will be the sweetest smelling savor you ever smelled."

http://www.boap.org/LDS/Early-Saints/WMace.html

And from Wilford Woodruff:

"Under the pulpit in the west end will be a place to offer sacrifices. There will be an altar prepared for that purpose so that when any sacrifices are to be offered they should be offered there." --Brigham Young, Dec 18, 1857 quoted in Wilford Woodruff's Journal: 1833-1898, Scott Kenney, ed., Midvale UT: Signature 1984, Vol. 5 pg. 140

 

[clarkgoble]

On 10/19/2017 at 2:24 PM, RevTestament said:

Animal sacrifice wasn't the point under the Mosaic law. The point was to sacrifice their best - it wasn't to appease God like in the pagan religions. It was instituted to try to give a simple lesson - to make them feel they were giving up a part of themselves. It was for their benefit rather than to please God. In fact God said on several occasions He was full of their feasts and sacrifices, because He was looking for the contrite heart. So when Yeshua ran across people selling animals to be sacrificed in the temple, He was upset. The buyers were just going through the motions, but didn't understand the purpose at all.

Will God reinstitute animal sacrifice? Nope. I will not respond to an undocumented allegation of some recollection. You'll have to quote JS if you want any additional response. Yeshua came to fulfill the law - not to reinstitute it.

D&C 13 isn't undocumented allegation. Also sacrifice wasn't just under the Mosaic Law but predated it. This was repeated by Joseph on Oct 5, 1840. He saw it as the fulfillment of Mal 3:3-4. Speaking of this Joseph said,

We frequently have mention made of the offering of Sacrifice by the servants of the most high in antient days prior to the law of moses, which ordinances will be continued when the priesthood is restored with all its authority power and blessings. Elijah was the last prophet that held the keys of this priesthood, and who will, before the last dispensation, restore the authority and delive the Keys of this priesthood in order that all the ordinances may be attended to in righteousness. 

It is true that the Savior had authority and power to bestow this blessing but the Sons of Levi were too predjudi 

And I will send Elijah the Prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord &c &c. 

Why send Elijah because he holds the Keys of the Authority to administer in all the ordinances of the priesthood and without the authority is given the ordinances could not be administered in righteousness. 

It is a very prevalent opinion that in the sacrifices of -sacrifices which were offered were entirely consumed, this was not the case if you read Leviticus [2] Chap [2-3] verses you will observe that the priests took a part as a memorial and offered it up before the Lord, while the remainder was kept for the benefit maintenance of the priests. So that the offerings and sacrifices are not all consumed upon the Alter, but the blood is sprinkled and the fat and certain other portions are consumed These sacrifices as well as every ordinance belonging to the priesthood will when the temple of the Lord shall be built and the Sons Levi be purified be fully restored and attended to then all their powers, ramifications ramifications and blessings-- this the Sons of Levi shall be purified. ever was and will exist when the powers of the Melchisid Priesthood are sufficiently manifest. Else how can the restitution of all things spoken of by all the Holy Prophets be brought to pass be brought to pass It is not to be understood that, the law of moses will be established again with all it rights and variety of ceremonies, ceremonies, this had never been spoken off by the prophets but those things which existed prior Mose's day viz Sacrifice will be continued--It may be asked by some what necessity for Sacrifice since the great Sacrifice was offered? In answer to which if Repentance Baptism and faith were necessary to Salvation existed prior to the days of Christ what necessity for them since that time--

There are lots of third hand accounts as well. 20th century figures also believed there would be a restoration of sacrifice. Joseph Fielding Smith did for instance although it was his interpretation it would be temporary.

RESTORATION OF BLOOD SACRIFICES. We are living in the dispensation of the fulness of times into which all things are to be gathered, and all things are to be restored since the beginning. Even this earth is to be restored to the condition which prevailed before Adam's transgression. Now in the nature of things, the law of sacrifice will have to be restored, or all things which were decreed by the Lord would not be restored. It will be necessary, therefore, for the sons of Levi, who offered the blood sacrifices anciently in Israel, to offer such a sacrifice again to round out and complete this ordinance in this dispensation. Sacrifice by the shedding of blood was instituted in the days of Adam and of necessity will have to be restored.

The sacrifice of animals will be done to complete the restoration when the temple spoken of is built; at the beginning of the millennium, or in the restoration, blood sacrifices will be performed long enough to complete the fulness of the restoration in this dispensation. Afterwards sacrifice will be of some other character. (Doctrines of Salvation, 3:94)

McConkie also believed in this

It was during this American ministry that our Lord instituted in the New World, as he had done in Jerusalem and the Old World, the sacramental ordinance in which broken bread was eaten in remembrance of his body, and wine was drunk in remembrance of his blood. From that blessed day onward the sacrament replaced sacrifices except that as part of the restitution of all things and then on a limited basis only blood sacrifices will be offered again. It was of these future sacrificial ordinances that Malachi prophesied, in a setting descriptive of the Second Coming of the Son of Man, that the returning Lord would “purify the sons of Levi,… that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness.” Of this offering, to be made in “Judah and Jerusalem,” the prophecy says it shall be “pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old, and as in former years.” (Mal. 3:1-5.) It was to these sacrifices that Ezekiel alluded when he set forth the nature and use of the temple yet to be built in Jerusalem. And so that they might be performed by Levites who once again were legal administrators, John the Baptist, a Levite whose right it was to offer sacrifices anciently, and who was in fact the last Levitical priest to hold the keys of the ministry brought back the ancient order of Aaron, saying to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, as he did so, that “this shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness.” (D&C 13.) (The Mortal Messiah, 1:128

 

[RevTestament]

On 10/22/2017 at 6:31 PM, clarkgoble said:

The sacrifice of animals will be done to complete the restoration when the temple spoken of is built; at the beginning of the millennium, or in the restoration, blood sacrifices will be performed long enough to complete the fulness of the restoration in this dispensation. Afterwards sacrifice will be of some other character. (Doctrines of Salvation, 3:94)

I don't know why LDS have such a hard time with what scripture says.

Read what D&C 13 comes from Clark:

Malachi 3:3

3 And he shall sit as a ^arefiner and purifier of silver: and he shall ^bpurify the ^csons of ^dLevi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an ^eoffering in righteousness.

Zechariah 12:8

8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.

What do these scriptures mean to you? Try reading them in conjunction with the passage from 3 Nephi I quoted.

[clarkgoble]

On 10/23/2017 at 8:41 PM, RevTestament said:

I don't know why LDS have such a hard time with what scripture says.

Read what D&C 13 comes from Clark:

Malachi 3:3

3 And he shall sit as a ^arefiner and purifier of silver: and he shall ^bpurify the ^csons of ^dLevi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an ^eoffering in righteousness.

Zechariah 12:8

8 In that day shall the Lord defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the Lord before them.

What do these scriptures mean to you? Try reading them in conjunction with the passage from 3 Nephi I quoted.

You're going to have to spell out your reading and explain why that invalidates what Joseph and other prophets said. I'm sure you think the scriptures are so obvious that everyone will read them the way you do, but I'll confess it's not at all clear to me what you're saying. I'm assuming you think it's spiritual sacrifices not physical ones. But I don't think that entails what you think it does.

 

[RevTestament]

On 10/24/2017 at 10:43 PM, clarkgoble said:

You're going to have to spell out your reading and explain why that invalidates what Joseph and other prophets said. I'm sure you think the scriptures are so obvious that everyone will read them the way you do, but I'll confess it's not at all clear to me what you're saying. I'm assuming you think it's spiritual sacrifices not physical ones. But I don't think that entails what you think it does.

 

I've been through this before Clark - not with you specifically, but yes, I think I do read the scriptures differently - obviously. I'm not sure what you mean that my interpretations is "spiritual sacrifices not physical ones." A physical self-sacrifice necessarily includes a spiritual one - a sacrifice of the spirit and the will. I'm just saying the Mosaic sacrifices are symbolic of spiritual sacrifices as well as actual physical ones.

Here, is another:

Isaiah 60:6 The multitude of camels shall cover thee, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah; all they from Sheba shall come: they shall bring gold and incense; and they shall shew forth the praises of the Lord.

7 All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee: they shall come up with acceptance on mine altar, and I will glorify the house of my glory.

I read this scripture as not yet occurring. It involves the conversions of vast portions of Islam to Yeshua our Savior. Does it involve the reinstitution of animal sacrifice? Will the rams of Nebaioth minister to a man? Will rams come and lay themselves on an altar and wait to be sacrificed to fulfill this scripture? Or will the righteous converts who are descendants of Nabioth, son of Ishmael, make sacrifice of their lives to lead other Muslims out of darkness into light? Will this involve them laying down their very lives as Islam demands of those leaving its clutches? Which do you think? 

[clarkgoble]

On 10/27/2017 at 2:36 PM, RevTestament said:

I've been through this before Clark - not with you specifically, but yes, I think I do read the scriptures differently - obviously. I'm not sure what you mean that my interpretations is "spiritual sacrifices not physical ones." A physical self-sacrifice necessarily includes a spiritual one - a sacrifice of the spirit and the will. I'm just saying the Mosaic sacrifices are symbolic of spiritual sacrifices as well as actual physical ones.

Which is fine. I'm certainly not going to force an interpretation. It's just that the way some presented their readings was as if it were unambiguous and everyone ought read it the way they do. Referring to passages without even an explanation as if they were so clear as to resolve the issue was rather unhelpful. Especially when the passages in question were pretty ambiguous relative to the sons of levi.

I can but say regardless of how people might choose to read it today, in Joseph's time it was read as implying the restitution of sacrifice for at least a period. Likewise that reading has continued to be the mainstream reading of those passages. I'm certainly not saying it's the only reading. A more symbolic reading of a sacrifice of ones heart certainly is possible. But that's a minority reading in terms of the history of commentary by church leadership.

[RevTestament]

6 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Which is fine. I'm certainly not going to force an interpretation. It's just that the way some presented their readings was as if it were unambiguous and everyone ought read it the way they do. Referring to passages without even an explanation as if they were so clear as to resolve the issue was rather unhelpful. Especially when the passages in question were pretty ambiguous relative to the sons of levi.

I can but say regardless of how people might choose to read it today, in Joseph's time it was read as implying the restitution of sacrifice for at least a period. Likewise that reading has continued to be the mainstream reading of those passages. I'm certainly not saying it's the only reading. A more symbolic reading of a sacrifice of ones heart certainly is possible. But that's a minority reading in terms of the history of commentary by church leadership.

I think you are still not understanding me. It is not a restitution of sacrifice. Sacrifice was never done away. Animal sacrifice was done away, and will never be restored because its purpose has been fulfilled with the coming of our Savior. I can't force my interpretation either - it comes from a totality of the scriptures - so to me the "mainstream reading of those passages" is irrelevant. That is not where their meaning and true import are found.

[clarkgoble]

52 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I think you are still not understanding me. It is not a restitution of sacrifice. Sacrifice was never done away. Animal sacrifice was done away, and will never be restored because its purpose has been fulfilled with the coming of our Savior. I can't force my interpretation either - it comes from a totality of the scriptures - so to me the "mainstream reading of those passages" is irrelevant. That is not where their meaning and true import are found.

That's what I meant. I'm treating the sacrifice of a heart as a symbolic sacrifice and the sacrifice of an animal as an actual sacrifice. But you can of course describe that in other ways.

I'm skeptical the totality of scriptures entails there's a full cessation of animal sacrifice although I can understand those who interpret things that way. I think the text is open to multiple interpretations. Again though I think it clear that Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and most other leaders have read it as a restitution of animal sacrifice.

[nuclearfuels]

Seems like Hyrum may have been referencing callings certain people had premortally