Lesson 21 - The Coming of Jesus Christ

[marineland]

On 1/15/2024 at 4:17 PM, CV75 said:

Before we consider a new question on a new topic and quotes (and I suggest you start a new thread for that anyway), please answer my last question to you concerning 1 Nephi 19:10. 

Posted Saturday at 05:58 PM

You mean this question - "What is the importance to you of believing as you? If it is helpful in
advancing our faith in Christ, I'd be happy to hear how that is."

That's the only one I saw in your previous reply.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, marineland said:

You mean this question - "What is the importance to you of believing as you? If it is helpful in
advancing our faith in Christ, I'd be happy to hear how that is."

That's the only one I saw in your previous reply.

Yes.

[InCognitus]

On 1/15/2024 at 2:19 PM, marineland said:

I saw that.  You mentioned that 1 Nephi 19:10 implies some of the house of Israel, not 
all.

Saying "isles of the sea" to someone in Israel would not mean that Cyprus is a "far off 
land". Neither would Greenland be a "far off land" to someone living in Canada or Iceland.

I completely disagree.  What was a “far off land” in New Testament times is different than we think of distances today.  For example, Jesus told the apostle Paul, while he was in Jerusalem, to “Go! For I will send you far away to the Gentiles” (Acts 22:21).  Paul went to some of those places that were “far away” compared to Jerusalem (including Cyprus).

On 1/15/2024 at 2:19 PM, marineland said:

That's the tricky part.  If "isles of the sea" means land masses adjacent to water, 
then the 3 days of darkness would have basically affected most areas of the world 
(Russia and Assyria too, especially Israel - but there we know it was only 3 hours 
of darkness and no massive destructions like is mentioned to have occurred in the 
Book of Mormon.

According to the Bible Hub definition, the Hebrews considered the “isles of the sea” to “denote distant regions beyond the sea”.   So it would be those areas that would normally require travel by sea in order to arrive at those locations.  Consequently, if that is an accurate understanding of the phrase, Russia and Assyria wouldn’t really qualify in that respect, since there are no sea routes from Israel to get those places.

On 1/15/2024 at 2:19 PM, marineland said:

That would put the 3 days of darkness all around the world since they all in some way 
satisfy what you mentioned.

Not really, the context tells us that.  Back on this post (here), I mentioned that “We don't have the full context for the prophecy of Zenos which was quoted by Nephi, but Nephi was recognizing the parts of the prophecy that he knew applied to his people.”  

We can discern this from the context because in that chapter Nephi described various signs that would be given to some parts of the tribes of Israel, aside from those that applied to his people.  Nephi begins by alluding to (but not quoting) prophecies given by Zenos as follows:

“And the God of our fathers, who were led out of Egypt, out of bondage, and also were preserved in the wilderness by him, yea, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, yieldeth himself, according to the words of the angel, as a man, into the hands of wicked men, to be lifted up, according to the words of Zenock, and to be crucified, according to the words of Neum, and to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, which he spake concerning the three days of darkness, which should be a sign given of his death unto those who should inhabit the isles of the sea, more especially given unto those who are of the house of Israel.”  (1 Nephi 19:10)

But then in the next verse, Nephi appears to quote Zenos directly:

“For thus spake the prophet: The Lord God surely shall visit all the house of Israel at that day, (1) some with his voice, because of their righteousness, unto their great joy and salvation, and (2) others with the thunderings and the lightnings of his power, by tempest, by fire, and by smoke, and vapor of darkness, and by the opening of the earth, and by mountains which shall be carried up.”  (1 Nephi 19:11)

Note that the prophet Zenos says “all” the house of Israel shall be visited (in some way) at that day.  And then he gives at least two distinct ways that will happen:  The righteous will be visited with his voice, and others will have other things happen to them.  And those additional signs may not be all together for all areas as is evident from his next statement:

“And all these things must surely come, saith the prophet Zenos. And the rocks of the earth must rend; and because of the groanings of the earth, many of the kings of the isles of the sea shall be wrought upon by the Spirit of God, to exclaim: The God of nature suffers.” (1 Nephi 19:12)

So the quaking of the earth is broken out (pun intended) separately.  This was even fulfilled to some degree at Jerusalem, as recorded by Matthew:

“Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.  And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent…  Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.” (Matthew 27:50-51, 54)

Then Nephi continues to quote Zenos, describing what would happen to those at Jerusalem:

“And as for those who are at Jerusalem, saith the prophet, they shall be scourged by all people, because they crucify the God of Israel, and turn their hearts aside, rejecting signs and wonders, and the power and glory of the God of Israel.  And because they turn their hearts aside, saith the prophet, and have despised the Holy One of Israel, they shall wander in the flesh, and perish, and become a hiss and a byword, and be hated among all nations.”  (1 Nephi 19:13-14)

In Matthew 23:34-24:2, Jesus also foretold of these events, telling those at Jerusalem that “your house is left unto you desolate”, and that the temple would be completely destroyed, and “all these things shall come upon this generation”.

So as you can see, the signs and events that would occur among the tribes of Israel would vary, although all of them would receive some kind of sign.  Therefore, it is incorrect to assume that they all would see the three days of darkness that came upon the Nephite people, although it's quite possible that other areas experienced similar events.

On 1/15/2024 at 2:19 PM, marineland said:

In the context of the verses we've been discussing (2 Nephi 10:9,11), what nations in the 
Americas are you referring to when you mention freedom of captivity from the nations of 
their mother lands?

They are the nations that occupy the lands that were previously inhabited by the Book of Mormon people.

[marineland]

On 1/18/2024 at 1:55 PM, CV75 said:

Yes.

You asked: What is the importance to you of believing as you? If it is helpful in
advancing our faith in Christ, I'd be happy to hear how that is."

It is not important to my faith if we agree or disagree on theology.

[marineland]

On 1/21/2024 at 12:31 AM, InCognitus said:

“And the God of our fathers, who were led out of Egypt, out of bondage, and also were preserved in the wilderness by him, yea, the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, yieldeth himself, according to the words of the angel, as a man, into the hands of wicked men, to be lifted up, according to the words of Zenock, and to be crucified, according to the words of Neum, and to be buried in a sepulchre, according to the words of Zenos, which he spake concerning the three days of darkness, which should be a sign given of his death unto those who should inhabit the isles of the sea, more especially given unto those who are of the house of Israel.”  (1 Nephi 19:10)

The way I read that quote is the 3 days of darkness would be given to the Gentiles who inhabit
the isles of the sea plus (more especially) those of all the tribes of Israel.

 

On 1/21/2024 at 12:31 AM, InCognitus said:

They are the nations that occupy the lands that were previously inhabited by the Book of Mormon people.

By lands, do you mean all the lands encompassing North, Central, and South America?  Is there
anything in the Book of Mormon which would indicate those who left Jerusalem and settled in 
America (as taught), and their population grew, met other people who did not originate or descend
from Israel?

[InCognitus]

11 minutes ago, marineland said:

The way I read that quote is the 3 days of darkness would be given to the Gentiles who inhabit
the isles of the sea plus (more especially) those of all the tribes of Israel.

I realize you read it that way, but that's not how it should be read in context (as explained before).

11 minutes ago, marineland said:

By lands, do you mean all the lands encompassing North, Central, and South America?  Is there
anything in the Book of Mormon which would indicate those who left Jerusalem and settled in 
America (as taught), and their population grew, met other people who did not originate or descend
from Israel?

They settled in the "Americas" or "the American Continent" somewhere, and they were scattered and mixed with the people that were already on the continent. 

The Book of Mormon makes a big deal about those who are "pure" descendants of Lehi (3 Nephi 5:20) or Nephi (3 Nephi book header), which seems like an odd thing to do if everyone came over on the boat with Lehi.  And the text mentions others already in the land (some by name, like the Jaredites) and it's also evident based on the numbers of people involved that there were others already on the continent as well.

For more information, see:  Book of Mormon Central / KnoWhys - Did “Others” Influence Book of Mormon Peoples? 

[CV75]

2 hours ago, marineland said:

You asked: What is the importance to you of believing as you? If it is helpful in
advancing our faith in Christ, I'd be happy to hear how that is."

It is not important to my faith if we agree or disagree on theology.

My question wasn't about agreeing or disagreeing on theology, and though you dodged my question, your bias is duly noted.

[marineland]

On 1/22/2024 at 3:13 PM, InCognitus said:

The Book of Mormon makes a big deal about those who are "pure" descendants of Lehi (3 Nephi 5:20) or Nephi (3 Nephi book header), which seems like an odd thing to do if everyone came over on the boat with Lehi.  And the text mentions others already in the land (some by name, like the Jaredites) and it's also evident based on the numbers of people involved that there were others already on the continent as well.

For more information, see:  Book of Mormon Central / KnoWhys - Did “Others” Influence Book of Mormon Peoples? 

I read that link about Book of Mormon Central.  One way to summarize it very briefly is to say
omission does not equal non-existence.  Most of it is speculation and conjecture.  That's ok
to do but I wouldn't advertise it as the truth.

Regarding 3 Nephi 5:20 (I am Mormon, and a pure descendant of Lehi), descendant refers to
Mormon 1:5; 8:13.

"And I, Mormon, being a descendant of Nephi, (and my father’s name was Mormon) I remembered 
the things which Ammaron commanded me".

"Behold, I make an end of speaking concerning this people. I am the son of Mormon, and my father 
was a descendant of Nephi".

Why wouldn't the two Mormons (father and son) also classify themselves as pure descendants of
Nephi?

[marineland]

On 1/22/2024 at 4:05 PM, CV75 said:

My question wasn't about agreeing or disagreeing on theology, and though you dodged my question, your bias is duly noted.

I didn't mean to dodge.  I might have misunderstood one or two of your replies. If you want to re-rephrase
it or ask it in some potential future reply to another post,   I'm ok either way.

Thanks.

[Pyreaux]

On 1/22/2024 at 12:30 PM, marineland said:

By lands, do you mean all the lands encompassing North, Central, and South America?  Is there anything in the Book of Mormon which would indicate those who left Jerusalem and settled in America (as taught), and their population grew, met other people who did not originate or descend from Israel?

Ever hear the interpretation about the first anti-Christ, Sherem, whom “came among” the Nephites looking for Jacob, i.e. before the first generation was ended. We commonly think he was a descendant of the original Lehite party, simply only now mentioned. The odd details, like having mastered their language and his unspoken background. His presence my represent evidence of early interaction between the Nephites and other civilizations in Nephite lands from the time of their first arrival.

The Bible seems to ignore the presence of other people, and sometimes don't refer to them as people at all. Aside the people, how did "beasts" (living creatures) of Nineveh repented with their "hands" in sack cloth and ashes? Its thought that real people are of a certain descent while some may not. The Pre-Adamite theory emerges from such verses, like how Cain swiftly founded an entire city of Nod and had children without a wife in his exile. Though be careful of your sources, they might have racial or racist components, from justifying the genocide of the Raphaim to the extremes of inferring discolored people, white or black, as not-people, half-demons or beasts. Beware that rabbit hole.

Edited January 24, 2024 by Pyreaux

[marineland]

On 1/24/2024 at 2:59 PM, Pyreaux said:

Ever hear the interpretation about the first anti-Christ, Sherem, whom “came among” the Nephites looking for Jacob, i.e. before the first generation was ended. We commonly think he was a descendant of the original Lehite party, simply only now mentioned. The odd details, like having mastered their language and his unspoken background. His presence my represent evidence of early interaction between the Nephites and other civilizations in Nephite lands from the time of their first arrival.

I found a few sites that try to identify who Sherem was. The first is from BookofMormonCentral.
The latter is non-LDS (from IRR).

Based on both, I would say he was either a descendant of Laman or one of those who came with
Mulek.

[InCognitus]

On 1/24/2024 at 10:51 AM, marineland said:

I read that link about Book of Mormon Central.  One way to summarize it very briefly is to say
omission does not equal non-existence.  Most of it is speculation and conjecture.  That's ok
to do but I wouldn't advertise it as the truth.

It's based on internal evidence in the text, and it's good evidence

On 1/24/2024 at 10:51 AM, marineland said:

Regarding 3 Nephi 5:20 (I am Mormon, and a pure descendant of Lehi), descendant refers to
Mormon 1:5; 8:13.

"And I, Mormon, being a descendant of Nephi, (and my father’s name was Mormon) I remembered 
the things which Ammaron commanded me".

"Behold, I make an end of speaking concerning this people. I am the son of Mormon, and my father 
was a descendant of Nephi".

Why wouldn't the two Mormons (father and son) also classify themselves as pure descendants of
Nephi?

For the same reason anyone might (or might not) say such a thing in casual conversation.  They also likely knew it was already a matter of record, since they were the ones keeping the plates.