"Heaviest of all cursings"

[bluebell]

In Doctrine and Covenants 41:1 it says:

"Hearken and hear, O ye my people, saith the Lord and your God, ye whom I delight to bless with the greatest of all blessings, ye that hear me; and ye that hear me not will I curse, that have professed my name, with the heaviest of all cursings."

Does anyone have an idea of what the "heaviest of all cursings" is?

[rongo]

I think it's "where much is given, much is required/expected." "Ye that hear me not . . . that have professed my name" are cursed with the heaviest of all cursings. 

I think all of us know people well who have willfully turned against the teachings and authority of the Church, and with rare exceptions, I think their lot (their demeanor, their attitude, how their life is going, etc.) can be seen as the "heaviest of all cursings." There are exceptions, but they "prove the rule," I think (original meaning: test the rule, as an exception). Many of us know people who have lost light, knowledge (even basic knowledge), and happiness.

The exceptions I know aren't bitter. They've left the Church or the Church lifestyle, but are well-disposed towards the Church or Church members (or, at least, aren't ill-disposed). 

This is  

[JLHPROF]

27 minutes ago, bluebell said:

In Doctrine and Covenants 41:1 it says:

"Hearken and hear, O ye my people, saith the Lord and your God, ye whom I delight to bless with the greatest of all blessings, ye that hear me; and ye that hear me not will I curse, that have professed my name, with the heaviest of all cursings."

Does anyone have an idea of what the "heaviest of all cursings" is?

I agree with Rongo.

But in addition, it's the perdition principle.  The closer to God we get and then turn away and fall the greater the fall (cursing).
Like the scripture says those "that have professed my name" and "hear me not" will get the heaviest of cursings.  We have a rough idea (although incomplete) of the severity of cursing on perdition.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

I agree with Rongo.

But in addition, it's the perdition principle.  The closer to God we get and then turn away and fall the greater the fall (cursing).
Like the scripture says those "that have professed my name" and "hear me not" will get the heaviest of cursings.  We have a rough idea (although incomplete) of the severity of cursing on perdition.

This was actually my confusion, because right now we teach that there will be very very very very few sons of perdition.  That most people will never have a relationship with Christ to the level where they can fall so far they can't come back from it.  But the scripture makes it sound like everyone who has started on the pathway to exaltation, who leaves it, will become a son of perdition.  

[rongo]

20 minutes ago, bluebell said:

This was actually my confusion, because right now we teach that there will be very very very very few sons of perdition.  That most people will never have a relationship with Christ to the level where they can fall so far they can't come back from it.  But the scripture makes it sound like everyone who has started on the pathway to exaltation, who leaves it, will become a son of perdition.  

I don't think this D&C warning is aimed at potential sons of perdition. I think it's a warning to those who may stray. The sons of perdition are very few in number (most of us won't qualify for it). 

[JLHPROF]

21 minutes ago, bluebell said:

This was actually my confusion, because right now we teach that there will be very very very very few sons of perdition.  That most people will never have a relationship with Christ to the level where they can fall so far they can't come back from it.  But the scripture makes it sound like everyone who has started on the pathway to exaltation, who leaves it, will become a son of perdition.  

I think that's poetic wording.  I don't think that scripture's heaviest cursing refers to perdition level.

Perhaps to the buffeting of Satan.  I think breaking temple covenants is a bit more serious than your average worldly sin for example.  Sometimes I think we downplay the severity in ex-members violating those covenants.  We are so forgiving, as we should be.  But it's not just "choosing a different path" or some similar phrase.

Leaving the Church IS a serious heavy sin, especially for the endowed member.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

In Doctrine and Covenants 41:1 it says:

"Hearken and hear, O ye my people, saith the Lord and your God, ye whom I delight to bless with the greatest of all blessings, ye that hear me; and ye that hear me not will I curse, that have professed my name, with the heaviest of all cursings."

Does anyone have an idea of what the "heaviest of all cursings" is?

Sounds like hyperbole, exaggeration for effect.  Scripture is replete with that.

[Tacenda]

36 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I think that's poetic wording.  I don't think that scripture's heaviest cursing refers to perdition level.

Perhaps to the buffeting of Satan.  I think breaking temple covenants is a bit more serious than your average worldly sin for example.  Sometimes I think we downplay the severity in ex-members violating those covenants.  We are so forgiving, as we should be.  But it's not just "choosing a different path" or some similar phrase.

Leaving the Church IS a serious heavy sin, especially for the endowed member.

That is if the church is true.

[teddyaware]

50 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Sounds like hyperbole, exaggeration for effect.  Scripture is replete with that.

Since we’re told God is a God of truth and cannot lie (because lying is against his very nature as the eternal enemy of the father of lies), you’ve got me wondering where exaggerations, fish stories, embellishments and strategic misleading end and punishable lies begin? Your claim of divine exaggeration is especially perplexing in light of the seriousness of the subject of the revelation. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but it seems really weird if God could end up being be like a mortal father who makes empty threats he has no intention of carrying out — “Now you listen to me, Johnny, if you don’t rake that lawn right now I’m grounding you for six months!”

[The Nehor]

In scriptures curses are the opposite of blessings. It is horrible but probably also one of those warped attempts at leading people to repentance.

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, teddyaware said:

Since we’re told God is a God of truth and cannot lie (because lying is against his very nature as the eternal enemy of the father of lies), you’ve got me wondering where exaggerations, fish stories, embellishments and strategic misleading end and punishable lies begin? Your claim of divine exaggeration is especially perplexing in light of the seriousness of the subject of the revelation. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but it seems really weird if God could end up being be like a mortal father who makes empty threats he has no intention of carrying out — “Now you listen to me, Johnny, if you don’t rake that lawn right now I’m grounding you for six months!”

Have you seen the revelation where God explains what “endless hell” is and basically said that it was said that way for effect and not because a lot of people would end up in an endless hell. If there is an admission of divine hyperbole than we can hypothesize that there are others.

[bluebell]

45 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Have you seen the revelation where God explains what “endless hell” is and basically said that it was said that way for effect and not because a lot of people would end up in an endless hell. If there is an admission of divine hyperbole than we can hypothesize that there are others.

Christ says in the D&C that endless doesn’t refer to a length of time but to the type. 

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

Since we’re told God is a God of truth and cannot lie (because lying is against his very nature as the eternal enemy of the father of lies), you’ve got me wondering where exaggerations, fish stories, embellishments and strategic misleading end and punishable lies begin? Your claim of divine exaggeration is especially perplexing in light of the seriousness of the subject of the revelation. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but it seems really weird if God could end up being be like a mortal father who makes empty threats he has no intention of carrying out — “Now you listen to me, Johnny, if you don’t rake that lawn right now I’m grounding you for six months!”

Maybe that depends on whether the humans God is dealing with are actually behaving like adults or like kids who need to be scared straight. 

As I said, however, "Scripture is replete with it," whether we are considering Jona as a parabolic fish story, Job another such literary parable, or the Song of Songs as ritual poem (hieros gamos) masquerading as an encounter between two lovers speaking exaggeratedly about each other.  What should we do with the dragons which inhabit the palaces of a deserted Babylon (Isaiah 13:22, 2 Nephi 23:22; cf. Isa  27:1, Mosiah 20:11, Alma 43:44).  And why does Ezekiel 29:3 make the Pharaoh out to be a great dragon who claims to have created the Nile River?  Then there is Rahab, another mythical dragon (2 Nephi 8:9, Isaiah 51:9), that twisting serpent Leviathan (Pss 74:13-14, 89:9-10, Job 9:13, 26:12-13).  According to the LDS Holy Bible, 892 n, Isa 27:1 refers to “a legendary sea-monster representing the forces of chaos that opposed the Creator.”  Can Holy Scripture include legendary, figurative, and metaphorical sections?  Does all that make God a liar?

If we are going to speak of curses, then observe Alma 3:6, "the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren"  This harks back to 2 Nephi 5:21, “and he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.”

However, if we closely examine Alma 3:13-16, which on the one hand has the Amlicites marking themselves, but on the other has God doing the marking, both due to the curse.  Does that make God a liar?

How does that curse get attenuated?

2 Nephi 30:6, “their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white [pure] and delightsome people.”
Acts 9:18, “And  immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith”

Near the time of Christ those Lamanites "who had united with the Nephites" had the curse "taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites" (3 Nephi 2:15).  Sounds quite magical.

-------------  

Lamentations 4:7–8 “Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire:  Their visage is blacker than a coal; they are not known in the streets: their skin cleaveth to their bones; it is withered, it is become like a stick.”

Song of Songs 1:5-6 “I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.  Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother’s children were angry with me;”  5:10 “Our skin was black like an oven because of the terrible famine,”

Daniel 12:10 "Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried"; 11:35, “And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white,“
Psalm 51:2,7 “Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. . . . Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.”

Mormon 9:6, "perhaps ye may be found spotless, pure, fair, and white, having been cleansed by the blood of the Lamb, at that great and last day."  How does blood make robes white?

Hearts “like unto a flint,..a skin of blackness” (2 Ne 5:21)

[rodheadlee]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

That is if the church is true.

Yeah but if it is a whole bunch of people are in big, big trouble.

[teddyaware]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Maybe that depends on whether the humans God is dealing with are actually behaving like adults or like kids who need to be scared straight. 

As I said, however, "Scripture is replete with it," whether we are considering Jona as a parabolic fish story, Job another such literary parable, or the Song of Songs as ritual poem (hieros gamos) masquerading as an encounter between two lovers speaking exaggeratedly about each other.  What should we do with the dragons which inhabit the palaces of a deserted Babylon (Isaiah 13:22, 2 Nephi 23:22; cf. Isa  27:1, Mosiah 20:11, Alma 43:44).  And why does Ezekiel 29:3 make the Pharaoh out to be a great dragon who claims to have created the Nile River?  Then there is Rahab, another mythical dragon (2 Nephi 8:9, Isaiah 51:9), that twisting serpent Leviathan (Pss 74:13-14, 89:9-10, Job 9:13, 26:12-13).  According to the LDS Holy Bible, 892 n, Isa 27:1 refers to “a legendary sea-monster representing the forces of chaos that opposed the Creator.”  Can Holy Scripture include legendary, figurative, and metaphorical sections?  Does all that make God a liar?

If we are going to speak of curses, then observe Alma 3:6, "the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren"  This harks back to 2 Nephi 5:21, “and he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.”

However, if we closely examine Alma 3:13-16, which on the one hand has the Amlicites marking themselves, but on the other has God doing the marking, both due to the curse.  Does that make God a liar?

How does that curse get attenuated?

2 Nephi 30:6, “their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white [pure] and delightsome people.”
Acts 9:18, “And  immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith”

Near the time of Christ those Lamanites "who had united with the Nephites" had the curse "taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites" (3 Nephi 2:15).  Sounds quite magical.

-------------  

Lamentations 4:7–8 “Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire:  Their visage is blacker than a coal; they are not known in the streets: their skin cleaveth to their bones; it is withered, it is become like a stick.”

Song of Songs 1:5-6 “I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.  Look not upon me, because I am black, because the sun hath looked upon me: my mother’s children were angry with me;”  5:10 “Our skin was black like an oven because of the terrible famine,”

Daniel 12:10 "Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried"; 11:35, “And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white,“
Psalm 51:2,7 “Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. . . . Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.”

Mormon 9:6, "perhaps ye may be found spotless, pure, fair, and white, having been cleansed by the blood of the Lamb, at that great and last day."  How does blood make robes white?

Hearts “like unto a flint,..a skin of blackness” (2 Ne 5:21)

I’m flattered, Robert, that you would expend a fair amount of thought and effort to help me understand your point of view, and I do appreciate it. But the problem I have with your otherwise seemingly effective examples is that none of the verses you quote begin with “thus saith the Lord” (or it’s equivalent), and the only way the examples you provide would be able to convincingly illustrate your point is if they were targeted at someone who believes in radical scriptural inerrancy, I.e. someone who believes every word in the scriptures, quite literally, issues forth from the mouth of God himself.

Meanwhile, the original post of this thread focuses on a section of the Doctrine and Covenants in which God is clearly commanding the members of his Church in the first person. We’re not talking here about some fallen man writing or speaking in the scriptures about God and his dealings with the human race; rather, we’re talking about the very God of heaven himself speaking for himself.

So the question at hand boils down to this simple proposition: when God speaks in the first person will he deliberately mislead people if there’s a good reason for him to do it? Or do I dare go even further and rephrase my question by asking, is God excused from the dictum that the ends, no matter how good and worthy, never justify less than perfect means?

Edited February 9, 2021 by teddyaware

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

6 hours ago, bluebell said:

In Doctrine and Covenants 41:1 it says:

"Hearken and hear, O ye my people, saith the Lord and your God, ye whom I delight to bless with the greatest of all blessings, ye that hear me; and ye that hear me not will I curse, that have professed my name, with the heaviest of all cursings."

Does anyone have an idea of what the "heaviest of all cursings" is?

My guess is the curse of never ending outer darkness, with no chance of it ending. In short becoming a “son or daughter of perdition”. As such a person could never be delivered from this eternal damnation. This is a curse for those who know the truth, but deny it in an attempt to mislead believers. 

[InCognitus]

8 hours ago, bluebell said:

In Doctrine and Covenants 41:1 it says:

"Hearken and hear, O ye my people, saith the Lord and your God, ye whom I delight to bless with the greatest of all blessings, ye that hear me; and ye that hear me not will I curse, that have professed my name, with the heaviest of all cursings."

Does anyone have an idea of what the "heaviest of all cursings" is?

Covenant promises are sometimes contrasted with covenant curses (as in Deuteronomy chapter 28).  This verse is no different in discussing the "greatest of all blessings" and the "heaviest of all cursings".   These are the extremes, like those expressed in the parable of the sheep and the goats or the wheat and the tares, or in the reality of heaven and hell, even though there are degrees of blessings or cursings in between.  

I see the "heaviest of all cursings" to be like what Jesus said to the Pharisees about them receiving "a greater damnation" for cheating widows out of their property and pretending to be pious by making long prayers in public (Mark 12:38-40 and also Luke 20:46-47).  It sounds to me like this is the worst you can get without being a son of perdition.

[Robert F. Smith]

13 hours ago, teddyaware said:

I’m flattered, Robert, that you would expend a fair amount of thought and effort to help me understand your point of view, and I do appreciate it. But the problem I have with your otherwise seemingly effective examples is that none of the verses you quote begin with “thus saith the Lord” (or it’s equivalent), and the only way the examples you provide would be able to convincingly illustrate your point is if they were targeted at someone who believes in radical scriptural inerrancy, I.e. someone who believes every word in the scriptures, quite literally, issues forth from the mouth of God himself.

Meanwhile, the original post of this thread focuses on a section of the Doctrine and Covenants in which God is clearly commanding the members of his Church in the first person. We’re not talking here about some fallen man writing or speaking in the scriptures about God and his dealings with the human race; rather, we’re talking about the very God of heaven himself speaking for himself.

So the question at hand boils down to this simple proposition: when God speaks in the first person will he deliberately mislead people if there’s a good reason for him to do it? Or do I dare go even further and rephrase my question by asking, is God excused from the dictum that the ends, no matter how good and worthy, never justify less than perfect means?

That reminds me of the section of the D&C which explains the nature of figurative language (D&C 77).  Or another section which explains that God speaks to man in man's language, to man's understanding - imperfect as it is (D&C 1:24, 2 Ne 31:3).  Indeed, even more importantly, God never speaks to us directly.  Even when it appears as direct speech in Scripture, it is always mediated by a fallible human agent in imperfect human language.  And it is precisely human fallibility in reflecting it correctly and in understanding it correctly which interposes likely misunderstanding -- a major source of rampant denominationalism.  We are often admonished to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good -- just another version of the classic fallacy of the Call to Perfection.

Most scholars are aware of deeply flawed Scriptural language, and of a great diversity and incompatibility of underlying theological notions throughout Scripture.  There is simply not one stable system of human expression or theology used in Scripture.  All of it must be interpreted, and we all have our individual preferences.  As for the preferences of God:  I think that he likes hyperbole and uses it wisely.

I'll also repeat my opening sentence: "depends on whether the humans God is dealing with are actually behaving like adults or like kids who need to be scared straight."  Or maybe even spoken to with "baby talk."

Edited February 9, 2021 by Robert F. Smith

[Tacenda]

5 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

Yeah but if it is a whole bunch of people are in big, big trouble.

Yes I am!

[teddyaware]

13 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That reminds me of the section of the D&C which explains the nature of figurative language (D&C 77).  Or another section which explains that God speaks to man in man's language, to man's understanding - imperfect as it is (D&C 1:24, 2 Ne 31:3).  Indeed, even more importantly, God never speaks to us directly.  Even when it appears as direct speech in Scripture, it is always mediated by a fallible human agent in imperfect human language.  And it is precisely human fallibility in reflecting it correctly and in understanding it correctly which interposes likely misunderstanding -- a major source of rampant denominationalism.  We are often admonished to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good -- just another version of the classic fallacy of the Call to Perfection.

Most scholars are aware of deeply flawed Scriptural language, and of a great diversity and incompatibility of underlying theological notions throughout Scripture.  There is simply not one stable system of human expression or theology used in Scripture.  All of it must be interpreted, and we all have our individual preferences.  As for the preferences of God:  I think that he likes hyperbole and uses it wisely.

I'll also repeat my opening sentence: "depends on whether the humans God is dealing with are actually behaving like adults or like kids who need to be scared straight."  Or maybe even spoken to with "baby talk."

Are you saying there’s a possibility that when the prophet Joseph Smith says “thus saith the Lord” we really can’t depend on what follows as being a true representation of what God wants us to know, and that it actually isn’t Jesus Christ who’s speaking to us but a mere fallen mortal who might very well be giving us the wrong information because he’s unaware of the fact that his revelatory wires are temporarily crossed?

I’ve always found the “deficiencies of human language” argument to be rather specious because the prophet Joseph Smith testified that the English language translation version of the Book of Mormon will bring a man closer to God, if he abides by it’s precepts, than any other book, and through my own experience I’ve learned what the prophet said is true. In other words, this oft mentioned language barrier that supposedly prevents us from knowing what God really wants us to know isn’t sufficient enough to keep us from making a glorious entry into the celestial kingdom, and after that what else matters? The English language combined with the inspiration of the Holy Ghost is more than enough to effectively compensate for any deficiencies the English language may have.

But in all fairness, I also must say it’s possible the reason why I don’t comprehend and appreciate the “woeful inadequacies of human language” is because my intellect isn’t developed enough to begin to grasp the subtleties and nuances of communication that are said to exist beyond the limits of human banter. I’m guessing that when God says “the heaviest of all cursings” in his language it likely means exactly the same thing but blasts of celestial light flash out of his mouth as he speaks making for far greater impact?

Edited February 9, 2021 by teddyaware

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, teddyaware said:

Are you saying there’s a possibility that when the prophet Joseph Smith says “thus saith the Lord” we really can’t depend on what follows as being a true representation of what God wants us to know, and that it actually isn’t Jesus Christ who’s speaking to us but a mere fallen mortal who might very well be giving us the wrong information because he’s unaware of the fact that his revelatory wires are temporarily crossed?

No, of course not, but you may recall that on this board we have sometimes heard from those who are not impressed with a supposed revelation unless it contains that key phrase "Thus sayeth the Lord."  To me that is rather silly, since God can bring his revelations to us in whatever form he likes, and even interlarded with poetry and hyperbole.  Doesn't bother me at all if he finds it necessary to throw some baby talk our way -- since we don't quite seem up to a celestial level of conversation.

Quote

I’ve always found the “deficiencies of human language” argument to be rather specious because the prophet Joseph Smith testified that the English language translation version of the Book of Mormon will bring a man closer to God, if he abides by it’s precepts, than any other book, and through my own experience I’ve learned what the prophet said is true. In other words, this oft mentioned language barrier that supposedly prevents us from knowing what God really wants us to know isn’t sufficient enough to keep us from making a glorious entry into the celestial kingdom, and after that what else matters? The English language combined with the inspiration of the Holy Ghost is more than enough to effectively compensate for any deficiencies the English language may have.

Certainly, but it is pretty clear that the Holy Spirit influences us about something which someone is doing or already done, something said or in print.  And there is quite a lot of stuff in print.  Since we are instructed that Scripture is to be interpreted by the same Spirit which gave it, that indicates that the silly Protestant notion that anyone reading a passage will come to the same conclusion and interpretation as everyone else is unproductive.  To say the least.  Moreover, sufficiency of a text (the Book of Mormon for example) does not mean that we necessarily agree on the meaning of certain passages.  Recently on this board, we had a discussion of 2 Ne 25:23, the meaning of which seems to escape so many of us.  We even had a PhD expert who has written on the subject provide his POV.  In the end, there was no single interpretation acceptable to all of us, and I disagreed with the PhD.  So you are right:  We do need to rely on the Holy Spirit "to effectively compensate for any deficiencies the English language may have."

Quote

But in all fairness, I also must say it’s possible the reason why I don’t comprehend and appreciate the “woeful inadequacies of human language” is because my intellect isn’t developed enough to begin to grasp the subtleties and nuances of communication that are said to exist beyond the limits of human banter. I’m guessing that when God says “the heaviest of all cursings” in his language it likely means exactly the same thing but blasts of celestial light flash out of his mouth as he speaks making for far greater impact?

The Holy Spirit of Truth is indeed the great leveler which cuts through all the opposing claims, and is the only means by which to bring true unity in the Body of Christ.  We don't need no "sounding brass and tinkling cymbals" for that.

Edited February 9, 2021 by Robert F. Smith

[JLHPROF]

14 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

That reminds me of the section of the D&C which explains the nature of figurative language (D&C 77).  Or another section which explains that God speaks to man in man's language, to man's understanding - imperfect as it is (D&C 1:24, 2 Ne 31:3).  Indeed, even more importantly, God never speaks to us directly.  Even when it appears as direct speech in Scripture, it is always mediated by a fallible human agent in imperfect human language. 

I'm going to disagree that God never speaks to us directly.  When he stood in the air the grove and said "This is my beloved Son, hear him", that was directly, literal not figurative, and I don't believe it was remotely influenced by Joseph's perceptions.

[Robert F. Smith]

36 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I'm going to disagree that God never speaks to us directly.  When he stood in the air the grove and said "This is my beloved Son, hear him", that was directly, literal not figurative, and I don't believe it was remotely influenced by Joseph's perceptions.

Two problems with that:

1. He (they) was speaking to Joseph, not to the rest of us -- so that we are already separated from the event, as we usually are with Scripture.

2. Deity was speaking to Joseph in his language, according to his understanding, not as one god speaking to another god.  Limitations in language and in human capacity to understand immediately intervene, not to mention imperfect recollections later.

These same problems come up with the Garden of Eden, with Moses on the mount at the burning bush, etc.  You and I are reading about these events many times removed from the first accounts, as translated into other languages.

[CV75]

On 2/8/2021 at 1:57 PM, bluebell said:

In Doctrine and Covenants 41:1 it says:

"Hearken and hear, O ye my people, saith the Lord and your God, ye whom I delight to bless with the greatest of all blessings, ye that hear me; and ye that hear me not will I curse, that have professed my name, with the heaviest of all cursings."

Does anyone have an idea of what the "heaviest of all cursings" is?

A very large anvil from a very great height!

[Kenngo1969]

I haven't been following the thread slavishly, so perhaps someone already has brought this up (or perhaps the discussion already has moved on from this point and there's no interest in revisiting it), but when I first saw the thread I thought of this scripture:
 

Quote

 

Alma 24:30

And thus we can plainly discern, that after a people has been once enlightened by the spirit of God, and hath had great knowledge of things pertaining to righteousness, and then have fallen away into sin and transgression, they become more hardened, and thus their estate becometh worse than as though they had never known these things.