Jump to content

During the last plague on Egypt, didn't YHWH come down and take the firstborn Egyptians to the Spirit World? I think He did


Recommended Posts

EXODUS 11

4 And Moses said, Thus saith the Lord, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt:

5 And all the afirstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the bfirstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts.

EXODUS 12

23 For the Lord will apass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, the Lord will bpass over the door, and will not csuffer the ddestroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, nuclearfuels said:

EXODUS 11

4 And Moses said, Thus saith the Lord, About midnight will I go out into the midst of Egypt:

5 And all the afirstborn in the land of Egypt shall die, from the bfirstborn of Pharaoh that sitteth upon his throne, even unto the firstborn of the maidservant that is behind the mill; and all the firstborn of beasts.

EXODUS 12

23 For the Lord will apass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side posts, the Lord will bpass over the door, and will not csuffer the ddestroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you.

And so the question of the day is this: what do progressive Latter-Day Saints find harder to swallow about God, the modern Priesthood Ban or the fact that thousands of innocent Egyptian children were caused to die due to the direct action of God?

Link to comment
11 minutes ago, teddyaware said:

And so the question of the day is this: what do progressive Latter-Day Saints find harder to swallow about God, the modern Priesthood Ban or the fact that thousands of innocent Egyptian children were caused to die due to the direct action of God?

It's hard to read the OT and come away not thinking its all made up.

Edited by sunstoned
Link to comment

I am inclined to think those verses are figurative.  Most likely Jehovah sent destroying angels to locate every firstborn of humans, animals and check if the requisite tokens are present and properly placed.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Another question of the day could be: Why do regressive Latter-Day Saints find racial requirements for the ordinances of exaltation or seemingly arbitrary divine acts of genocide so easy to swallow?

I can understand how someone can trust God knows what He is doing but acting like perceived injustice is self-evidently divine with a smug sense of superiority over the poor saps who want to find justice in God’s acts reminds me of the mindset of Job’s “friends”.

aren’t you being a bit harsh?

The priesthood has historically been limited to the Levitical tribe of which Aaron was apart of meaning there is a clear biblical precedent, and many saints have prayerfully sought to follow Gods will. Yes he instituted it, but Brigham Young and many after him have faithfully prophesied of the time that the priesthood limitation will be revoked, but revoking it of their own volition without Gods approval is not within their power. God will not let his prophets apostasize.

Likewise, the Israelites were in bondage and letting them go free was no easy task. The pharaoh had plenty of opportunities to let them go, if anything it is his fault. Furthermore, we learn through the gospel that how we live the gospel is much more important than how long. I am sure that those innocent children will live a God life in heaven.

Link to comment
10 hours ago, longview said:

Most likely Jehovah sent destroying angels to locate every firstborn of humans, animals and check if the requisite tokens are present and properly placed.

True. 

I just think it's endearing the way He said that He would be in thier midst - probably welcoming the Egyptian firstborn children into the Spirit World

Link to comment
1 hour ago, SwedishLDS said:

The pharaoh had plenty of opportunities to let them go, if anything it is his fault.

Correct.

Free agency

He'd been given many, many signs and opportunities

Link to comment
10 hours ago, teddyaware said:

what do progressive Latter-Day Saints find harder to swallow about God, the modern Priesthood Ban or the fact that thousands of innocent Egyptian children were caused to die due to the direct action of God?

*...due to direct consequences of Pharaoh's choices?

Link to comment
4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

or seemingly arbitrary divine acts of genocide so easy to swallow?

Consequence of Pharaoh's decisions, no?

Link to comment
3 hours ago, SwedishLDS said:

The priesthood has historically been limited to the Levitical tribe of which Aaron was apart of meaning there is a clear biblical precedent

The Israelite priests may have been the only ones to have performed ordinances, but they were performing them for others. So the precedent isn’t there if we are comparing temple restriction for example, because the priests are closer to temple workers that provided ordinances to the Israelites (patrons), all of whom had access to the blessings of the ordinances. 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Another question of the day could be: Why do regressive Latter-Day Saints find racial requirements for the ordinances of exaltation or seemingly arbitrary divine acts of genocide so easy to swallow?

I can understand how someone can trust God knows what He is doing but acting like perceived injustice is self-evidently divine with a smug sense of superiority over the poor saps who want to find justice in God’s acts reminds me of the mindset of Job’s “friends”.

That was the very point of my post. Why do so many Christians of all stripes, not just many Latter-Day Saints, find it easy to swallow the fact that God would end the lives of what were likely thousands of innocent human beings as a way to punish Pharaoh? My ultimate point is that the scriptures are so full of examples of God doing and commanding seemingly unrighteous things, that seem so contradictory to his perfect divine nature, that the priesthood ban should be one of the least difficult scriptural hurdles to have to cross when it comes to squaring God’s actions with his perfect love. There are so many examples in the scriptures of God doing things that seem out of harmony with his divine nature that sincere believers should give pause when it comes to jumping to the conclusion that the priesthood ban was not of God. As in all the instances that seemingly portray the perfect God in a harsh and negative light, my faith in his perfection tells me that in every instance, once the full backstories and ultimate outcomes are known, I will see that more good, to the benefit of maximized salvation for all, came out of these putative unrighteous actions of God.

Finally, you mischaracterize my attitude toward the ban. I simply believe the scriptures that most solemnly testify President Kimball and the Twelve received a most powerful revelation from God that the time had come for the ban lifted. and I have great faith that satisfactory answers as to why the ban was in place will come when the time is right. If there are people who want to believe President Kimball and the Quorum of the Twelve are cunning liars, that’s their business.

And by the way, I was never happy nor sanguine with the ban and was delighted beyond measure when it was lifted at God’s command. Even so, as in every instance found in scriptures where God seems to do things that appear contradictory to his perfect nature, I believe there will eventually be answers for all these things that will powerfully demonstrate the fact that God really is a God of love and that his decreed curses are mysteriously but wisely designed to maximize the salvation and redemption he fervently desires to pour out upon the children of men. At very least, just like God’s command to Abraham to sacrifice his beloved son Isaac, the ban is now a test of faith to see if men will put their trust in the revelations of God or in their own less than perfectly informed judgement.

Edited by teddyaware
Link to comment
4 hours ago, teddyaware said:

Why do so many Christians of all stripes, not just many Latter-Day Saints, find it easy to swallow the fact that God would end the lives of what were likely thousands of innocent human beings as a way to punish Pharaoh?

Wait until we start reading about what Joshua was commanded to do.

Link to comment
9 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Consequence of Pharaoh's decisions, no?

One would think God would punish Pharoah directly?

Don’t get me wrong. I accept that God does weird and convoluted things but this wasn’t a very straightforward punishment. Death to pharaoh’s house and all the way down to the lowliest servant’s family in Egypt. Was that servant complicit in pharaoh’s policy?

I suspect the Moses story has been distorted over time just as I suspect the God ordered us to genocide everyone policy was distorted. As a kid I remember reading the story in Exodus and realized that if it were all literally true everyone in Egypt would be dead within the year. All their herds died? All their crops destroyed? A bit of hyperbole there or Egypt would have been a graveyard within the year.

I suspect this kind of thing of a lot of the Old Testament. The writer of the Book of Judges seems to have been a monarchist thinking the judges were a mistake. In Kings and Chronicles the writers seem to be pretty glib in deciding that God likes and despises certain things that possibly coincide with their beliefs.

Edit: I also still can’t get my head around the demands Moses made. The first few times he goes to make his demands he asks that the Israelites only be allowed to go out and worship their God. Then later the demand switches to “we are leaving, let us go”

The Book of Mormon has similar escapes from oppressors that don’t include killing that many people. Also I see a lot of people saying that the children will go to heaven. Yeah, but I am a firstborn and in my 40s. You don’t stop being a firstborn at the age of 8.

Edited by The Nehor
Link to comment
11 hours ago, SwedishLDS said:

The priesthood has historically been limited to the Levitical tribe of which Aaron was apart of meaning there is a clear biblical precedent, and many saints have prayerfully sought to follow Gods will. Yes he instituted it, but Brigham Young and many after him have faithfully prophesied of the time that the priesthood limitation will be revoked, but revoking it of their own volition without Gods approval is not within their power. God will not let his prophets apostasize.

This assumes that the priesthood ban (which was announced in a legislative session which accompanied legalized slavery in Utah) was of God.  Seems like a strange setting to reveal a revelation from God.  None of Brigham's justifications for the ban included a claim of direct revelation.  His reasons were based on his faulty interpretations of the Bible, which the church has sense denounced. 

True, Brigham Young did indeed say that someday the limitation would be revoked...after the millennium (a point many forget to include). 

Quote

When all the other children of Adam have had the privilege of receiving the Priesthood, and . . . have received their resurrection from the dead, then it will be time enough to remove the curse from Cain and his posterity. . . . he is [p. 85] the last to share the joys of the kingdom of God (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 143).

Prophets messing things up is not the same as apostatizing. 

Edited by pogi
Link to comment
11 hours ago, SwedishLDS said:

aren’t you being a bit harsh?

The priesthood has historically been limited to the Levitical tribe of which Aaron was apart of meaning there is a clear biblical precedent, and many saints have prayerfully sought to follow Gods will. Yes he instituted it, but Brigham Young and many after him have faithfully prophesied of the time that the priesthood limitation will be revoked, but revoking it of their own volition without Gods approval is not within their power. God will not let his prophets apostasize.

Likewise, the Israelites were in bondage and letting them go free was no easy task. The pharaoh had plenty of opportunities to let them go, if anything it is his fault. Furthermore, we learn through the gospel that how we live the gospel is much more important than how long. I am sure that those innocent children will live a God life in heaven.

Why not put the Egyptians into a deep sleep like the Alma the Elder led escape? Why the theatrics? I also don’t think God is that into the theatrics. There are dramatic divine events but God doesn’t usually go with using what is clearly and obviously divine punishment to show his wrath. Joseph Smith said that God was in the storm that aided Zion’s camp but I doubt his enemies believed it came from God.

Link to comment

To make matters simple and in order to avoid unnecessary contentious debate, for convenience I post below Official Declaration 2, a portion of the official scriptures of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints found in the book of Doctrine and Covenants. Since I believe in maintaining a firm grip on the iron rod of the word of God (the scriptures), there is no amount of fervent persuasion from anyone on this board that will cause me to let go of this portion of the word of God, anymore than I would let go of any other portion of scripture.

If anyone here refuses to believe the truthfulness and verity of what is contained in this section of scripture, that’s your business. But as for me and my house, weI firmly believe President Kimball and the other 14 Elders who witnessed what occurred on that sacred occasion spoke the truth, to wit that a revelation from God was required to lift priesthood ban. If anyone wants to respond, in this particular instance my desire is that you focus your comments and critiques on what is contained in Official Declaration 1 and not on anything I have said. In other words, contend with the scripture, not with me. I will place in bold the portions of this scripture that point to the fact that the ban could only removed by an unmistakable manifestation of the will of God will conveyed through the power of the Holy Spirit. 

Dear Brethren: 

As we have witnessed the expansion of the work of the Lord over the earth, we have been grateful that people of many nations have responded to the message of the restored gospel, and have joined the Church in ever-increasing numbers. This, in turn, has inspired us with a desire to extend to every worthy member of the Church all of the privileges and blessings which the gospel affords. 

Aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church who have preceded us that at some time, in God’s eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood, and witnessing the faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld, we have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these, our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the Upper Room of the Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance. 

He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority, and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings of the temple. Accordingly, all worthy male members of the Church may be ordained to the priesthood without regard for race or color. Priesthood leaders are instructed to follow the policy of carefully interviewing all candidates for ordination to either the Aaronic or the Melchizedek Priesthood to insure that they meet the established standards for worthiness. 

We declare with soberness that the Lord has now made known his will for the blessing of all his children throughout the earth who will hearken to the voice of his authorized servants, and prepare themselves to receive every blessing of the gospel. 

Sincerely yours, 

SPENCER W. KIMBALL
N. ELDON TANNER 
MARION G. ROMNEY 
The First Presidency 


Recognizing Spencer W. Kimball as the prophet, seer, and revelator, and president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it is proposed that we as a constituent assembly accept this revelation as the word and will of the Lord. All in favor please signify by raising your right hand. Any opposed by the same sign. 

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous in the affirmative. 

Salt Lake City, Utah, September 30, 1978. 

 

Link to comment

I don’t disagree that a revelation was required to remove the ban, but that does not mean the ban was the result of revelation/commandment from God itself anymore than revelation being required to restore the Church means the apostasy that caused the loss of priesthood was due to God commanding it.

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
On 3/16/2022 at 3:43 PM, Calm said:

The Israelite priests may have been the only ones to have performed ordinances, but they were performing them for others. So the precedent isn’t there if we are comparing temple restriction for example, because the priests are closer to temple workers that provided ordinances to the Israelites (patrons), all of whom had access to the blessings of the ordinances. 

reading up on the issue some further has been interesting. I do think you have good points and It seems I may have been misled by false philosophies of man. It appears that the gospel was not quite as limited historically as I have previously understood. 

from the days of Moses until the coming of Christ in the meridian of time, the inhabitants of Israel were not generally given the Melchizedek Priesthood, and only the Levites held the Aaronic Priesthood and administered the obligations and duties of the law of Moses.
The Lord, however, did not leave his people, the Israelites, without the guidance of Melchizedek Priesthood leadership. All the prophets held the higher priesthood, having been ordained by the hand of God (see Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 180–81). It was by right of this higher priesthood that the Old Testament prophets performed their labors in the name of the God of Israel and could officiate in the ordinances of the Aaronic Priesthood, just as today bishops in the Church officiate in an Aaronic Priesthood office by right of the Melchizedek Priesthood.
About 600 B.C., Lehi was called as one of these prophets to preach repentance to the inhabitants of Israel, a people who generally did not hold the priesthood. When he left Jerusalem at God’s command, Lehi was aware that he and his family were forming a separate branch of the house of Israel (see 1 Ne. 15:12). Though the Book of Mormon does not explicitly state so, Lehi, like all other prophets in Old Testament times, held the Melchizedek Priesthood.
For this reason, the Nephites, without having Levites among them, could rightfully officiate in the ordinances of the law of Moses. Thus, in Book of Mormon lands, the Nephites administered the ordinances and blessings of the law of Moses before the coming of Christ and the law of the gospel after the coming of Christ by the authority of the Melchizedek Priesthood.” (By what authority did Lehi, a non-Levite priest, offer sacrifices? Paul Y. Hoskisson, professor of ancient scripture, Brigham Young University)

Also important to note is that the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1994/03/i-have-a-question/by-what-authority-did-lehi-offer-sacrifices?lang=eng

https://bycommonconsent.com/2021/02/11/whether-the-temple-and-priesthood-restriction-was-mistaken/amp/

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics-essays/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng

 

Edited by SwedishLDS
Link to comment
1 hour ago, SwedishLDS said:

I do think you have good points

It was something I came across recently on Ben Spackman’s blog, iirc.  I knew about Levites being there to serve others, but the analogy to temple workers was new to me and it really brings out the context much better imo.  Spackman is my go to OT scholar at the moment…Previously to that I felt the comparison was lacking because there is a huge difference imo between one group getting something and no one else getting it vs one group not getting something even if worthy and everyone else getting access if they want, sometimes even if not worthy (at least in the eyes of the community though God will know better).

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...