Ephraim, the birthright, and the gathering

[ZealouslyStriving]

12 minutes ago, theplains said:

According to Gospel Principles (in chapter 14), "The offices of the Melchizedek Priesthood 
are elder, high priest, patriarch, Seventy, and Apostle".

If prophet is an office, then all female prophets of the Old and New Testaments are
Melchizedek priests.

Where does it list prophet as an office?

[ZealouslyStriving]

1 hour ago, theplains said:

His wealth 
would not have been stolen if Nephi had followed God's direction to his father. Nephi is never 
told by the Lord to return to Jerusalem to retrieve the family's wealth to barter for the 
plates.

Nephi & Co. were never given specific instructions on how to retrieve them, so to say that Nephi didn't follow God's direction is not true... IMHO.

Just like with many circumstances in our own lives God allows us to use the brain He gave us to solve our problems. Sometimes those plans work out, sometimes they don't and we have to "go back to the drawing board".

[Pyreaux]

11 hours ago, theplains said:

Yes. Thank you. I see that in 1 Nephi 2:11.  It is recorded that he was commanded by God to 
leave those riches behind.  He was not rich when he left Jerusalem (1 Nephi 3:16). His wealth 
would not have been stolen if Nephi had followed God's direction to his father. Nephi is never 
told by the Lord to return to Jerusalem to retrieve the family's wealth to barter for the 
plates.

There is no indication that his sons were tutored.

According to Gospel Principles (in chapter 14), "The offices of the Melchizedek Priesthood 
are elder, high priest, patriarch, Seventy, and Apostle".

If prophet is an office, then all female prophets of the Old and New Testaments are
Melchizedek priests.

Sounds like a theory, but to be clear, not I'm saying not possessing his precious things means Lehi is no longer a nobleman, it's just a good sign he was a noble, and still noble with or without it. I'm not sure they were poor exactly without precious things. They had enough funds for the gold used as a writing medium, likely purchased along the way at the gold mines of Timna, and no trouble paying the taxes at watering holes all the way to Sheba. 

Are you suggesting Nephi is a self-taught master? Without a miracle, this a chronoism to just assume that in 500 BC anyone can just know how to read and write in their own language (like Hebrew), or in another language (like Egyptian). Scribing was a Priestly art and reading a Kingly hobby. It's almost certain Nephi was tutored. Now, Lehi could have done it, but the question then becomes who taught Lehi, if Lehi's family is not from a priestly or noble family, Nephi was his youngest son. Then there is Nephi offer to Zoram to make him a "freeman".

Yes, the Prophetesses were believed to be widows, I assume married, being anointed with the priest's anointing myrrh oil that makes anything it touches holy, and people into holy messiahs, opening their eyes to prophetic visions. The Melchizedek priesthood did and does include women. LDS priestly anoints and priestly endows women with power. Not all who maybe a prophet, having prophecies via a gift of prophecy from the Holy Ghost are recognized by that word. All Apostles are recognizing as Prophets, having Jesus be revealed to them by prophecy. Thee Prophet is an old time designation of God's chosen leader in Biblical times when "prophets" were rather "scarce" (1 Samuel 3:1), for what is now more technically called the Chief Apostle, like the Apostle Peter. The leader of a body of prophets. Not a perfectly exact resurrection of the Melchizedek Priesthood, but it's the best I know in the past millennia. Maybe without the same royal clout of old like a widowed queen or judge, these Americanized prophetesses are without a platform to use their gifts and therefore wasted, though the potential to change that has always been here, and ongoing revelation means the anomalies of the old days can still come again, if not better than before. I get an impression prophetic dreams and divination seem to be more within women's wheelhouses, least in my light study of the matter.

Edited July 4, 2024 by Pyreaux

[Calm]

10 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

the Prophetesses were believed to be widows,

By whom?

[ZealouslyStriving]

44 minutes ago, Calm said:

By whom?

Good question. One clearly identified prophetess was Huldah (2 Kings 22):

"14 So Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam, and Achbor, and Shaphan, and Asahiah, went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in Jerusalem in the college;) and they communed with her."

[Pyreaux]

6 hours ago, Calm said:

By whom?

Basically, in Jewish lore Deborah was a widow and Anna was a widow for so long that she is identified by her father “Phanuel” (Luke 2:36). Though I forgot the outlier, Miriam. I think the prophetess were mostly all married. Though Miriam, I think, is said to have married Caleb, a man we read of later, later from where she's called a prophetess... Let's start over:

5 women in the Bible canon are called prophetesses. They are;

Miriam
Deborah
Huldah
Isaiah’s wife
Anna

Discounting the 4 daughters of Philip (Acts 21:9) and many women in the Bible who prophesied, they are not called prophetesses because not every person who prophesies is a prophet or a prophetess. There must be a reason some women are called prophetesses and others not though they have the gift of prophecy. I presume they all obtained the right through the priest's anointing oil of life which is a part of royal marriages. Or part of a royal court or a royal family. Not every woman married to a prophet is a prophetess, but simply many who are were. Or commonly when a widow rises to be the head in a family, or royal court like the queen, or simply after their widowhood do not remarry but commit themselves to God like Anna.

1. Miriam

Miriam was the older sister of Aaron and Moses, Moses the last known true Patriarch in Israel which Miriam is under.

Ex 15:20: "And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron"

She led the Israelite women in publicly dancing and singing the Song of the Sea after the Israelites cross the Red Sea (Ex 15: 20-21) – she did this under Moses.

2. Deborah

Deborah was the wife of Lapidoth. She was married.

Judges 4:4: "And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time"

3. Huldah

Huldah was the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah. She was married.

Kings 22:14 So Hilkiah the priest, Ahikam, Achbor, Shaphan, and Asaiah went to Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe

4. Isaiah’s Wife

Isaiah’s wife was a prophetess. She was married and birthed a royal Emmanuel.

Isaiah 8:3 "And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, ‘Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz’."

5. Anna

Luke 2:36-37 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity. And she was a widow of about eighty four years, who departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and day.

Some prophetesses maybe unaccounted for. Unofficially, Zipporah is a Prophetess, I think in Pseudo-Philo or Antiquities, married to Prophet Moses, but not a Biblical prophetess. Somehow these women in the Bible qualified to be called prophetesses because they were either married, widows or sister serving aside a Prophet and exposed to the anointing oil, such is typically applied at the royal wedding. While an LDS baptism, anointing, vestments and marriage are given separately, for a woman in ancient times it seems these were given all at once. So, the anointing of the Spirit and marriages simply go hand in hand. Though women married or single in the temple wore the covering symbolizing the betrothal.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Pyreaux said:

in Jewish lore

What books or websites are the broadest collections in your view?  I would like to deepen my knowledge in this area, but don’t have the ability to pick it up here and there these days.

Edited July 5, 2024 by Calm

[Pyreaux]

On 7/4/2024 at 7:12 PM, Calm said:

What books or websites are the broadest collections in your view?  I would like to deepen my knowledge in this area, but don’t have the ability to pick it up here and there these days.

Man and Temple: in Ancient Jewish Myth and Ritual by Raphael Patai

Well, I was surprised this is an out of print book, here it is from the Archive, about after page 88 it talks about the King's Temple Marriage to a priestess. Excuse the somewhat lewd integration of Rabbinical interpretations of the Song of Solomon as part of the temple rain/fertility rite after the death, resurrection and reintegration of the king. 

The Hebrew Goddess by Raphael Patai

About page 190, this contains the Kabbalistic Jewish lore of the King's sacred marriage to the divine Matronit.

I don't own this next one, among the over 20 books by Dr Patai, but looks to be the better start.

Sarah the Priestess: The First Matriarch of Genesis by Savina Teubal, Raphael Patai

In the patriarchal priesthood era and environment, Sarah and the other matriarchs acted within the established, traditional Mesopotamian role of priestess, a class of women who retained a highly privileged position vis-a-vis their husbands.

Tree of Souls - The Mythology of Judaism by Howard Schwartz

This isn't a book about priestesses, but it is a Treasure trove about the Jewish belief in the premortal existence, holy garments, seer stones, multiple heavens, the Messiah ben Joseph, many angels... Like the angel Yoda...

Edited July 6, 2024 by Pyreaux

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, Pyreaux said:

Excuse the somewhat lewd integration of Rabbinical interpretations of the Song of Solomon

Sounds like fun.  
 

Quote

This isn't a book about priestesses, but it is a Treasure trove about the Jewish belief in the premortal existence, holy garments, seer stones, multiple heavens, the Messiah ben Joseph, many angels... Like the angel Yoda...

Perfect….

Edited July 6, 2024 by Calm

[InCognitus]

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

I think you mentioned about 2 Nephi 1:5 being the land that Lehi and his descendants will inherit 
in the New World, which also goes with Lehi's land of inheritance in the Old World.

What is Lehi's land of inheritance in the Old World?

We already discussed that.  See the post on 02/25/2024.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

Yes. I understand from LDS church teachings that the root of Jesse which shows up is Joseph Smith.

On what basis does the church believe Joseph Smith could be the root of Jesse when he is not a 
descendant of Jesse but is rather taught to be a pure Ephraimite?

Isaiah 11 is a Messianic prophecy, referring to Christ.  Paul taught this too in Romans 15:12 
(And again Isaiah says, "The root of Jesse will come, even he who arises to rule the Gentiles; 
in him will the Gentiles hope").  Paul is not referring to Jesus in his first part and then 
switching to another person, Joseph Smith, in the next.

Please quit rebooting the same arguments that we’ve already discussed over and over and over again.  I am losing interest in this discussion because you don’t have anything new to offer.

We already discussed Romans 15:12, and I already explained how Paul, in that chapter, made it clear that Christ’s mission was to the “circumcision” (verse 8), which was Paul’s way of designating the Jews.  Paul was saying that Jesus ministered to the Jews so that he could confirm God’s promises to the “fathers” (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob).  Paul’s intent there and in the next few verses was to explain that even though Christ’s mission was to the House of Israel, the scriptures also foretold that the time would come when the Gentiles would have the gospel preached to them as well.

So no, Paul is not referring to Christ in Romans 15:12.

See our prior discussion where I already addressed your claims regarding Romans 15:12 in the posts on 01/27/2024, 02/03/2024, 02/11/2024, 02/17/2024, and 02/25/2024.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

But, let's proceed with your view.  How and when do you believe an ensign is raised and the 
gathering of Gentiles is kicked off?

The “ensign” represents Jesus Christ and symbolizes a “standard” that is raised up, which includes (among other things) the establishment of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Doctrine and Covenants 115:4-6).  And the keys for the gathering of Israel were restored on April 3, 1836.  

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

On 6/9/2024 at 12:56 PM, InCognitus said:

You say that the “gathering of the Gentiles into the church began later”, and I agree.  So this cannot possibly explain what’s going on in Isaiah 11:10-16 in coordination with what Jesus says in Luke 21:24, because Jesus said Israel would be “led away captive into all the nations… until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”

A similar phrase is found in Romans 11:25 ("A partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the 
fullness of the Gentiles has come in" - ESV). 

Yes, I brought up this verse several times before in our discussion.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

What do you believe is the time of the fulfillment of Luke 21:24, when the times of the Gentiles 
is fulfilled?   I see the events of Luke 21:20-33 as yet future, at the Second Coming.  I don't 
see it as Israel capturing East Jerusalem back in 1967 to have complete control of Jerusalem.

The passage in Luke 21:20-24 (with Jerusalem being encompassed with armies, etc.) is clearly talking about the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 A.D., culminating with Jesus saying (in verse 24) that those of Judea, would “fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”   There is no way in the world that verse 24 can be interpreted as happening at the second coming of Jesus.  And verse 25 starts a new paragraph and a new topic.

The times of the Gentiles is when the fulness of the gospel is restored unto the Gentiles, as it began when Christ’s church was restored to the earth in the early 1800’s.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

On 6/9/2024 at 12:56 PM, InCognitus said:

So how is it possible for Isaiah 11:10 to be referring to Christ during his mortal ministry when the “times of the Gentiles” came much later?

I don't recall specifically saying that Christ began gathering the Gentiles as a whole during his 
ministry in Israel (i.e. that Isaiah 11:10 specifically is during a three year period).  But I 
suppose there were some Gentiles who heard him preach in Israel; unless there were absolutely no 
Gentiles living throughout the entire land.

We have been discussing the identity of the “root of Jesse” in Isaiah 11:10 for months now, along with the timing of the arrival of that individual in connection with the ensign being raised to the Gentiles and the Lord setting “his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people”.  You and I both agree that this gathering of Israel has already begun to some degree.  You have claimed (in multiple posts) that the “root of Jesse” in Isaiah 11:10 is Christ, but I think you can see that that interpretation can’t possibly work in the timing specified in Luke 21:24 regarding the “times of the Gentiles” and the fulfillment of Isaiah 11:10-16.

But if you are still claiming that Christ is the “root of Jesse” in Isaiah 11:10 then you need some way to account for the fact that Israel was scattered (not gathered) even more so after Christ’s mortal ministry, and Jerusalem was trodden down by the Gentiles (as described in Luke 21:24 at 70 AD), which is totally opposite to what is described in Isaiah 11:10-16 with the Gentiles being drawn to the ensign that is raised up and Israel begins being gathered for the “second time” immediately thereafter. 

So you really have never answered my question, about how is it possible for Isaiah 11:10 to be referring to Christ during his mortal ministry when the “times of the Gentiles” came much later?  How can your interpretation possibly work given what these verses say about the timing?

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

It sounds like you believe that passage is a physical re-gathering back to a physical location.

What lands will the people of Ephraim and Manasseh, who were scattered all over the world, return 
back to? Will those scattered to China return to Russia, back to China, or somewhere else?  But 
before you answer that, where do you see non-Israelite lands as the destination in Isaiah 11:10-16?

The lands referred to in Isaiah 11:10-16 are those that are directly connected with the covenants that God made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  So, Israel being restored to those lands signifies their return to God’s covenants and their keeping of those covenants.  But God also promised them much more than those lands.

The lands they return to will be whatever lands God has promised to them at various points of their history, which will include the land promises given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

On 6/9/2024 at 12:56 PM, InCognitus said:

 So the Lord setting his hand again the “second time to recover the remnant of his people” follows the exact same pattern as the first:   Those who are of the tribes of Israel must first come unto Christ and enter into a covenant with him, by being baptized and making covenants in the temple, and in doing so they come out of their spiritual captivity and recognize who they are and are “gathered” and “assembled” as God’s people.  This is the same pattern as when Moses gathered Israel to Mount Sinai, which was the first temple of God.  Once they enter again into the covenant with God they are then eligible for the covenant promises given to their fathers, as symbolized by them being able to return to the lands of their inheritance.

And those lands of their inheritance you believe are lands spread all over the world?

See my response above.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

Which of the tribes of Israel will share this land of promise with the Gentiles (who are taught 
will assist the remnant of Jacob in building the city of New Jerusalem) in 3 Nephi 21:22-24)?

I don't know how you or the Book of Mormon identifies this "land of promise".

I think you could find out the answer to that in the Topical Guide under Promised Lands.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

I see.  I mentioned this in a previous post, referencing the Religion 430-431 Student Manual.

B6. Of the twelve tribes, the tribes of Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, will be gathered 
first and then direct the other tribes in their gathering (see JST, Genesis 48:5–11; Deuteronomy 
33:16–17; D&C 133:30–39).

Deuteronomy 33:16-17 says, "And for the precious things of the earth and fulness thereof, and for 
the good will of him that dwelt in the bush: let the blessing come upon the head of Joseph, and 
upon the top of the head of him that was separated from his brethren. His glory is like the firstling 
of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people 
together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the 
thousands of Manasseh".

I see Ephraim and Manasseh mentioned but where do you see a gathering of first the two tribes and 
then afterwards a gathering of the other ten tribes?  Do you believe all of Ephraim and Manasseh 
has already been gathered first?

Ephraim and Manasseh are the ones who “push the people together to the ends of the earth”.  They can’t do that unless they return to God’s covenant first and come to recognize who they are so that they can assist in getting God’s people together again.

Have “all” been gathered?  I don’t think so, but only God knows when it is “all”.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

Did both Ephraim and Manasseh have the birthright from Jacob through Joseph and the right to the
priesthood was one of the blessings of the birthright that they obtained?

Why does the Religion 430-431 Student Manual exclude Manasseh and teach ""It is Ephraim, today, 
who holds the priesthood. It is with Ephraim that the Lord has made covenant and has revealed the 
fulness of the everlasting gospel. It is Ephraim who is building temples and performing the 
ordinances in them for both the living and for the dead"?

The Religion 430-431 manual doesn’t exclude Manasseh, for in the paragraph just prior to the one you quoted it says:  “Ephraim must be gathered first to prepare the way, through the gospel and the priesthood, for the rest of the tribes of Israel when the time comes for them to be gathered to Zion. The great majority of those who have come into the Church are Ephraimites. It is the exception to find one of any other tribe, unless it is of Manasseh.”

And at the beginning of that same chapter (Chapter 24) it says:  “Of the twelve tribes, the tribes of Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, will be gathered first and then direct the other tribes in their gathering (see JST, Genesis 48:5–11; Deuteronomy 33:16–17; D&C 133:30–39).”

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

I asked you before in the post what the ensign was and I see you answered it here. 
 
Do you believe Isaiah 5:26 and 11:12 is only referring to literal Israelites or does it also 
include Gentiles who would be called to return to the covenant path?

The Ephraimites (and Manasseh) among the Gentile nations are gathered first (they are called Gentiles), and that's why according to Isaiah 11:10 the Gentiles will first seek the “ensign” that is raised up.  And Isaiah 11:11 is clearly talking about recovering the remnant of God’s people “the second time” that were dispersed among the nations.  So there is a mixture of literal Israel and the Gentiles being gathered to the ensign described in Isaiah 5:26 and 11:12. But ultimately, it doesn’t matter, because in Christ there is “no difference” between Jew and Gentile (Romans 3:22, 29-30, 10:12, Galatians 3:28, Colossians 3:11)

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

Yes, I saw that.  This is something Joseph Smith added that is not in the Hebrew manuscripts.

But let's proceed with your line of reasoning and look at JST, Genesis 48:10.

For thou hast prevailed, and thy father's house hath bowed down unto thee, even as it was shown 
unto thee, before thou wast sold into Egypt by the hands of thy brethren; wherefore thy brethren 
shall bow down unto thee, from generation to generation, unto the fruit of thy loins forever;

Joseph had prevailed in his being sold into slavery, then becoming prominent in Egypt, and saving 
many by his wisdom through the famine.  But how did all the remaining 11 sons bow down to Joseph 
from generation to generation and forever after that?

Regarding JST Genesis 48:11 ("For thou shalt be a light unto my people, to deliver them in the 
days of their captivity, from bondage; and to bring salvation unto them, when they are altogether 
bowed down under sin"). 

How did Ephraim and Manasseh deliver those Israelites from captivity under the rule of Babylon, 
the Medes and Persians, the Greeks, and the Romans?

The prophesy states that Joseph saw how his father’s house had bowed down unto him (as Joseph had foreseen in his dream), but there would also be a future fulfillment of the same situation lasting into the eternities: “wherefore thy brethren shall bow down unto thee, from generation to generation, unto the fruit of thy loins forever”.  

That they would bow down unto him, “from generation to generation, unto the fruit of thy loins forever” is prophetic language, very similar to what the Lord told Isaiah about the future judgement of the wicked in Isaiah 34:9-10 (“the land thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor day; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall pass through it for ever and ever”) and also of the righteous in Isaiah 34:16-17 (“his spirit it hath gathered them. And he hath cast the lot for them, and his hand hath divided it unto them by line: they shall possess it for ever, from generation to generation shall they dwell therein”), and in both cases it is said it shall be “from generation to generation” even though these events occur in the latter days or even after the second coming of Jesus.

So the prophecy given to Joseph was not that his brethren would always bow down to him, but at some future time those of the tribe of Joseph would deliver his brethren out of spiritual captivity and out of spiritual bondage (“when they are altogether bowed down under sin”) and bring salvation to them, and as a result Joseph’s brethren would bow down unto him again, but this time “from generation to generation” and forever.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

I figured some more rationale of what I wrote was that, with the exception of the book of Ether, 
I think all the writings in the Book of Mormon come from those who supposedly descended from 
Manasseh.  So it would be fitting that the "one among them" would be descriptive of a descendant 
of Manasseh.

Except that’s not what the text says.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

That might explain how some interpret the teaching of Journal of Discourse 2:268–69.

Would any LDS theology break if Joseph Smith was not a pure Ephraimite?

No.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

Thank you.  I had not read further so I missed that.

Let's proceed with your line of reasoning – being in the presence of God means someone has the 
role of high priest.

That’s not the line of reasoning I was using.  

The line of reasoning I was using was that in the context of the book of Exodus: (A) they were priests first and foremost (as it says in Exodus 19:22, 24), and (B) they went up into the presence of the Lord (Exodus 24:9-11).  That would be the role of the high priests. The high priests being spoken of in that context functioned in an earthly capacity.  All of your talk about the premortal life and Adam and Eve being in the presence of God was before the fall, and the redemption brought about by Jesus Christ enables us all to return to him in the hereafter.  None of that has to do with a high priest functioning in their earthly capacity given in the context of the book of Exodus prior to Israel breaking their covenant.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

Yes.  And what do the members of the royal priesthood do? They offer up spirit sacrifices.

You are just repeating yourself and rebooting the discussion again.  We’ve already discussed this, and I explained why that’s not evidence of a priesthood of all believers before.  As I said earlier in this post, this is getting monotonous with your repeating yourself over and over and bringing up the same things that I’ve already addressed.  I’m losing interest in this topic because you have nothing new to offer.

On 6/18/2024 at 9:07 AM, theplains said:

Let's draw a distinction between the literal seed of Abraham (by bloodline) and Abraham's spiritual 
seed (by adoption) for a moment.

Abraham 2:9-11 says

And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name 
great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their 
hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations;

And I will bless them through thy name; for as many as receive this Gospel shall be called after 
thy name, and shall be accounted thy seed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their father;

And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, in 
thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that 
this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, 
or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings 
of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal.

The key phrase is "literal seed".

Verse 11 says the right of the Priesthood would continue in Abraham and his literal seed. But 
Abraham did not hold a priesthood.  And all of Abraham's literal seed (through Ishmael and Isaac) 
did not bear the Priesthood unto all nations. 

Doctrine and Covenants 68:15-20 again focuses on the qualification of being a literal descendant
(a literal seed).

Doctrine and Covenants 107:40-41 also stresses the importance of being a literal descendant ("The 
order of this priesthood was confirmed to be handed down from father to son, and rightly belongs 
to the literal descendants of the chosen seed, to whom the promises were made. This order was 
instituted in the days of Adam, and came down by lineage in the following manner").

What is the point you are trying to make here?

[theplains]

On 7/3/2024 at 1:06 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

Where does it list prophet as an office?

It doesn't.  So I assume prophet is not an office of the priesthood.

[theplains]

On 7/3/2024 at 1:04 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

"1 I, Nephi, having been born of goodly parents, therefore I was taught somewhat in all the learning of my father...

2 Yea, I make a record in the language of my father, which consists of the learning of the Jews and the language of the Egyptians." (1 Nephi 1)

That would explain it.  Another option is home-schooling by the parents.

[theplains]

On 7/8/2024 at 12:04 AM, InCognitus said:

Paul’s intent there and in the next few verses was to explain that even though Christ’s mission was to the House of Israel, the scriptures also foretold that the time would come when the Gentiles would have the gospel preached to them as well.

The time when the Gentiles would have the gospel preached to them, as foretold in the Old Testament, 
had already come to pass in Paul's time. 
 
A few examples: 

• Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26).
• Peter preaching to Cornelius and the other Gentiles (Acts 11:1, 17-18).
• Paul's missionary trips to the Gentiles.
• Romans 10:19-21
   

On 7/8/2024 at 12:04 AM, InCognitus said:

The times of the Gentiles is when the fulness of the gospel is restored unto the Gentiles, as it began when Christ’s church was restored to the earth in the early 1800’s.

Luke 21:24 says, "...Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles 
be fulfilled".

Please clarify.  Are you saying Jerusalem was considered to be trodden down by the Gentiles until 
you believe the gospel was restored in the early 1800's?
 

On 7/8/2024 at 12:04 AM, InCognitus said:

So you really have never answered my question, about how is it possible for Isaiah 11:10 to be referring to Christ during his mortal ministry when the “times of the Gentiles” came much later?  How can your interpretation possibly work given what these verses say about the timing?

I don't see Isaiah 11 specifically referring to the mortal ministry of Christ to Gentiles unless 
some Gentiles heard and were converted by Christ's message before his death and resurrection.

Joseph Smith is not in the lineage of Jesse so he is not the root of Jesse or the rod out of the 
stem of Jesse as is taught.  After adding himself into the Book of Genesis (50:24-38), I figured 
he would also reword Isaiah 11 to "root of Joseph" or "stem of Joseph", or "Ephraim" to mean what 
the LDS Church teaches.

The Gentiles being drawn to the ensign (Christ) occurs primarily with Peter's visit to Cornelius 
and then later, and predominantly, with Paul (who refers to himself as the apostle to the Gentiles).
 

On 7/8/2024 at 12:04 AM, InCognitus said:

The Religion 430-431 manual doesn’t exclude Manasseh, for in the paragraph just prior to the one you quoted it says:  “Ephraim must be gathered first to prepare the way, through the gospel and the priesthood, for the rest of the tribes of Israel when the time comes for them to be gathered to Zion. The great majority of those who have come into the Church are Ephraimites. It is the exception to find one of any other tribe, unless it is of Manasseh.”

And at the beginning of that same chapter (Chapter 24) it says:  “Of the twelve tribes, the tribes of Joseph’s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, will be gathered first and then direct the other tribes in their gathering (see JST, Genesis 48:5–11; Deuteronomy 33:16–17; D&C 133:30–39).”

The manual has these points:

• "It is Ephraim, today, who holds the priesthood.
• "It is with Ephraim that the Lord has made covenant and has revealed the fulness of the everlasting gospel". 
• "It is Ephraim who is building temples and performing the ordinances in them for both the living and for the dead".

I'm assuming this was when there was zero representation by Manasseh's tribe in the church.

When was Manasseh first gathered by Ephraim so the above points could be said of that tribe?

The manual mentioned above provides three passages (JST Genesis 48:5-11; Deuteronomy 33:16-17; and 
D&C 133:30-39) in an attempt to show its teaching of there being a gathering first of the tribes 
of Ephraim and Manasseh followed by the direction by those two tribes for the other ten tribes.
  
I checked those three but they don't symbolize either a physical or spiritual gathering.
 

On 7/8/2024 at 12:04 AM, InCognitus said:

The Ephraimites (and Manasseh) among the Gentile nations are gathered first (they are called Gentiles),

It's peculiar to LDS theology to view it that way.  I think (maybe I could be wrong) even the Book 
of Mormon views Gentiles and Israelites as referring to the same people.
 

On 7/8/2024 at 12:04 AM, InCognitus said:

The prophesy states that Joseph saw how his father’s house had bowed down unto him (as Joseph had foreseen in his dream), but there would also be a future fulfillment of the same situation lasting into the eternities: “wherefore thy brethren shall bow down unto thee, from generation to generation, unto the fruit of thy loins forever”.

The account is recorded in Genesis 37:5-11.  This prophecy of Joseph's family bowing down to him 
foreshadows the future events where Joseph's brothers come to Egypt during a famine, bow down 
before him unknowingly, and fulfill the prophecy. 

But I see you are trying to connect JST Genesis 48:10-11 (which Joseph Smith added to the Bible) 
to some future fulfillment because it was never fulfilled in the Old Testament. No one ever bows 
down to the tribes of Ephraim or Manasseh.  If anything, the tribes bow down when King David 
becomes the monarch. The tribes of Ephraim or Manasseh did not deliver the other tribes from 
physical or spiritual captivity or bondage in their generation.

The Introduction notes for JST Genesis 48 says, "Just as ancient Joseph saved his family temporally, 
his descendants will save Israel spiritually in the latter days."

But there nothing in chapter 48 which speaks of the 1800's or later.  JST Genesis 48:10-11 tries 
to compare apples to potatoes, saving them from physical famine in one verse and then switching 
to saving them from spiritual famine.

As for bowing down, I would go with Genesis 49:8 - "Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall 
praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down 
before thee".  

This would explain why Ephraim is envious of Judah.  This envy should end in the future when the 
tribes of Israel are at peace, possibly in the Millennium (Isaiah 11:13).
 

On 7/8/2024 at 12:04 AM, InCognitus said:

None of that has to do with a high priest functioning in their earthly capacity given in the context of the book of Exodus prior to Israel breaking their covenant.

How do LDS high priests function in their earthly capacity in our day?
 

On 7/8/2024 at 12:04 AM, InCognitus said:

What is the point you are trying to make here?

A few scriptures speak of the blessings upon Abraham.

"And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all 
families of the earth be blessed" (Genesis 12:3).

"Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying 
unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed" (Acts 3:25).

Abraham's seed can be thought of in three ways:

The singular seed - Jesus Christ (Galatians 3:16).  This one is which I believe the scriptures 
teach of primary importance.

The physical seed - the Hebrew people who descended from Abraham through Isaac.

The spiritual seed - those adopted through faith (Romans 4:11-17; Galatians 3:29).

Abraham 2:9-11 introduces an object of being the seed - the Priesthood. In one moment, seed is 
equated to male priesthood holders. In another moment, women are included as the covenant people. 
The blessing and cursing seem to be applicable to only the priesthood holders as seen below.

And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name 
great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their 
hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations;

And I will bless them through thy name; for as many as receive this Gospel shall be called after 
thy name, and shall be accounted thy seed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their father;

And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, in 
thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that 
this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, 
or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings 
of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal.

Doctrine and Covenants 68:15-20, 107:40-41 together with Abraham 2:9-11 stresses the importance 
of being a descendant (of literal seed) as a requirement for holding the priesthood.

Nowadays, departing from anything mentioned in the Bible or Book of Mormon, the LDS Church declares 
someone to be of Abraham's seed (the Priesthood), the chosen seed, without regard to whether they 
are a literal descendant or not.  This is done via the Patriarchal blessing.

In the Old Testament, the priesthood belongs to Levi, the Lord's firstborn.  In the New Testament, 
Jesus (from Judah) becomes our high priest.  The royal priesthood of believers (1 Peter 2:5,9) is
 not associated with one's literal lineage or gender.
 
Elder David Bednar had some interesting teachings in a priesthood session back in 2005.  They 
could equally be applied to faithful women of the LDS Church.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2005/11/becoming-a-missionary?lang=eng

All of us who have received the holy priesthood bear the sacred obligation to bless the nations 
and families of the earth by proclaiming the gospel and inviting all to receive by proper 
authority the ordinances of salvation.

Rather, the obligation to proclaim the restored gospel of Jesus Christ is inherent in the oath 
and covenant of the priesthood into which we enter. Missionary work essentially is a priesthood 
responsibility, and all of us who hold the priesthood are the Lord's authorized servants on the 
earth and are missionaries at all times and in all places—and we always will be. Our very identity 
as holders of the priesthood and the seed of Abraham is in large measure defined by the 
responsibility to proclaim the gospel.

Brethren, you are preparing for a lifetime of missionary work. As holders of the priesthood, we 
are missionaries always. 

A priesthood holder is a missionary at all times and in all places. A missionary is who and what 
we are as bearers of the priesthood and as the seed of Abraham.

The heirs of all the promises and covenants made by God to Abraham are referred to as the seed 
of Abraham.

I declare my witness that Jesus is the Christ, our Savior and Redeemer. I know that He lives! And 
I witness that we, as holders of the priesthood, are His representatives in the glorious work of 
proclaiming His gospel, today and always. In the sacred name of Jesus Christ, amen.

[InCognitus]

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

The time when the Gentiles would have the gospel preached to them, as foretold in the Old Testament, 
had already come to pass in Paul's time. 
 
A few examples: 

• Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:26).
• Peter preaching to Cornelius and the other Gentiles (Acts 11:1, 17-18).
• Paul's missionary trips to the Gentiles.
• Romans 10:19-21

Yes, those verses describe the first time the gospel would be preached to the Gentiles, and that’s what Paul was talking about in Romans 15.

But obviously your examples above can’t possibly describe what Paul or Jesus had in mind in Romans 11:25 or Luke 21:24.  In Romans 11:25, Paul said that Israel’s “blindness in part” would continue “until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in”, which was obviously a “fulness” that would happen in the future from the time Paul wrote to the Romans, and all your examples occurred prior to that time.  And in Luke 21:24, Jesus said that Israel would be scattered until “the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”, and Jesus was talking about a time long after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.  

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

Luke 21:24 says, "...Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles 
be fulfilled".

Please clarify.  Are you saying Jerusalem was considered to be trodden down by the Gentiles until 
you believe the gospel was restored in the early 1800's?

I’m saying that the Jews “shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”, and the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the coming forth of the Book of Mormon and returning to the covenants represents the ensign being raised up just prior to the time when Israel would be gathered again.

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

I don't see Isaiah 11 specifically referring to the mortal ministry of Christ to Gentiles unless 
some Gentiles heard and were converted by Christ's message before his death and resurrection.

Joseph Smith is not in the lineage of Jesse so he is not the root of Jesse or the rod out of the 
stem of Jesse as is taught.  After adding himself into the Book of Genesis (50:24-38), I figured 
he would also reword Isaiah 11 to "root of Joseph" or "stem of Joseph", or "Ephraim" to mean what 
the LDS Church teaches.

The Gentiles being drawn to the ensign (Christ) occurs primarily with Peter's visit to Cornelius 
and then later, and predominantly, with Paul (who refers to himself as the apostle to the Gentiles).

But obviously your interpretation of Isaiah 11:10 can’t possibly be true given the timing described above, since Isaiah 11:10-16 describes the gathering of Israel starting immediately after the ensign is raised up, and Paul taught that Israel would be blinded in part until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, and Jesus said the Jews would be led away captive until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, and all of that would be long after the time of Christ.  So how do you explain that? 

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

The manual has these points:

• "It is Ephraim, today, who holds the priesthood.
• "It is with Ephraim that the Lord has made covenant and has revealed the fulness of the everlasting gospel". 
• "It is Ephraim who is building temples and performing the ordinances in them for both the living and for the dead".

I'm assuming this was when there was zero representation by Manasseh's tribe in the church.

When was Manasseh first gathered by Ephraim so the above points could be said of that tribe?

The first members of the restored church were of the tribe of Ephraim and Manasseh started coming into the church right after that.

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

The manual mentioned above provides three passages (JST Genesis 48:5-11; Deuteronomy 33:16-17; and 
D&C 133:30-39) in an attempt to show its teaching of there being a gathering first of the tribes 
of Ephraim and Manasseh followed by the direction by those two tribes for the other ten tribes.
  
I checked those three but they don't symbolize either a physical or spiritual gathering.

We’ve already been over this.  This is exactly what you said in your post on 05/27/2024, in which you said you also thought the same thing in your post on 05/14/2024, which I addressed in my post on 06/09/2024.

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

On 7/7/2024 at 10:04 PM, InCognitus said:

The Ephraimites (and Manasseh) among the Gentile nations are gathered first (they are called Gentiles),

It's peculiar to LDS theology to view it that way.  I think (maybe I could be wrong) even the Book 
of Mormon views Gentiles and Israelites as referring to the same people.

It’s not really peculiar to LDS theology when you examine it.  Remember our discussion about Genesis 48:19, where Jacob set Ephraim before Manasseh?   Jacob said of Ephraim (the younger of the two), “his younger brother shall be greater than he [Manasseh], and his [Ephraim’s] seed shall become a multitude of nations.”  (Genesis 48:19).  The Hebrew word translated as “nations” in that verse is ggôyim (גֹּויִם), which is also translated as Gentiles in other places, and it’s the same word found in Isaiah 11:10, where it says “to it [the ensign] shall the Gentiles [ggôyim] seek”.   So it’s found right in the Biblical texts.  Are the Biblical texts peculiar to LDS theology?

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

The account is recorded in Genesis 37:5-11.  This prophecy of Joseph's family bowing down to him 
foreshadows the future events where Joseph's brothers come to Egypt during a famine, bow down 
before him unknowingly, and fulfill the prophecy. 

But I see you are trying to connect JST Genesis 48:10-11 (which Joseph Smith added to the Bible) 
to some future fulfillment because it was never fulfilled in the Old Testament. No one ever bows 
down to the tribes of Ephraim or Manasseh.  If anything, the tribes bow down when King David 
becomes the monarch. The tribes of Ephraim or Manasseh did not deliver the other tribes from 
physical or spiritual captivity or bondage in their generation.

The Introduction notes for JST Genesis 48 says, "Just as ancient Joseph saved his family temporally, 
his descendants will save Israel spiritually in the latter days."

But there nothing in chapter 48 which speaks of the 1800's or later.  JST Genesis 48:10-11 tries 
to compare apples to potatoes, saving them from physical famine in one verse and then switching 
to saving them from spiritual famine.

I think you are straining really hard to try to make apples into potatoes and are ignoring (or purposely avoiding) the spiritual symbolism of Joseph’s life.  Theologians through the centuries have seen Joseph (the one sold into Egypt) as a type of Christ.  If they can see parallels between the physical salvation from the famine in the land provided by Joseph as compared to the spiritual salvation from the famine that came through Christ, why can’t you see the same thing as happening through Joseph in the last days?  The famine at the time of the restoration of the gospel was much worse than physical famine in some ways, for it was “not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord” (Amos 8:11).   

Even in early Christianity, some of the early Christian fathers saw Christ working in Joseph in the last days in the fulfillment of the prophecy in Deuteronomy 33:17 regarding the pushing together of the “nations” (for two such examples, see Tertullian – Against Marcion, Book 3, Chapter 18, and Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 91). 

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

As for bowing down, I would go with Genesis 49:8 - "Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall 
praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father's children shall bow down 
before thee".  

This would explain why Ephraim is envious of Judah.  This envy should end in the future when the 
tribes of Israel are at peace, possibly in the Millennium (Isaiah 11:13).

I think you keep forgetting  about Zechariah 10:6–12:

"6 And I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph, and I will bring them again to place them; for I have mercy upon them: and they shall be as though I had not cast them off: for I am the Lord their God, and will hear them.  7 And they of Ephraim shall be like a mighty man, and their heart shall rejoice as through wine: yea, their children shall see it, and be glad; their heart shall rejoice in the Lord.  8 I will hiss for them, and gather them; for I have redeemed them: and they shall increase as they have increased.  9 And I will sow them among the people: and they shall remember me in far countries; and they shall live with their children, and turn again.  10 I will bring them again also out of the land of Egypt, and gather them out of Assyria; and I will bring them into the land of Gilead and Lebanon; and place shall not be found for them.  11 And he shall pass through the sea with affliction, and shall smite the waves in the sea, and all the deeps of the river shall dry up: and the pride of Assyria shall be brought down, and the sceptre of Egypt shall depart away.  12 And I will strengthen them in the Lord; and they shall walk up and down in his name, saith the Lord."
 

On 7/17/2024 at 7:46 AM, theplains said:

On 7/7/2024 at 10:04 PM, InCognitus said:

What is the point you are trying to make here?

A few scriptures speak of the blessings upon Abraham.

"And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all 
families of the earth be blessed" (Genesis 12:3).

"Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying 
unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed" (Acts 3:25).

Abraham's seed can be thought of in three ways:

The singular seed - Jesus Christ (Galatians 3:16).  This one is which I believe the scriptures 
teach of primary importance.

The physical seed - the Hebrew people who descended from Abraham through Isaac.

The spiritual seed - those adopted through faith (Romans 4:11-17; Galatians 3:29).

Abraham 2:9-11 introduces an object of being the seed - the Priesthood. In one moment, seed is 
equated to male priesthood holders. In another moment, women are included as the covenant people. 
The blessing and cursing seem to be applicable to only the priesthood holders as seen below.

And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee above measure, and make thy name 
great among all nations, and thou shalt be a blessing unto thy seed after thee, that in their 
hands they shall bear this ministry and Priesthood unto all nations;

And I will bless them through thy name; for as many as receive this Gospel shall be called after 
thy name, and shall be accounted thy seed, and shall rise up and bless thee, as their father;

And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee; and in thee (that is, in 
thy Priesthood) and in thy seed (that is, thy Priesthood), for I give unto thee a promise that 
this right shall continue in thee, and in thy seed after thee (that is to say, the literal seed, 
or the seed of the body) shall all the families of the earth be blessed, even with the blessings 
of the Gospel, which are the blessings of salvation, even of life eternal.

Doctrine and Covenants 68:15-20, 107:40-41 together with Abraham 2:9-11 stresses the importance 
of being a descendant (of literal seed) as a requirement for holding the priesthood.

Nowadays, departing from anything mentioned in the Bible or Book of Mormon, the LDS Church declares 
someone to be of Abraham's seed (the Priesthood), the chosen seed, without regard to whether they 
are a literal descendant or not.  This is done via the Patriarchal blessing.

In the Old Testament, the priesthood belongs to Levi, the Lord's firstborn.  In the New Testament, 
Jesus (from Judah) becomes our high priest.  The royal priesthood of believers (1 Peter 2:5,9) is
 not associated with one's literal lineage or gender.
 
Elder David Bednar had some interesting teachings in a priesthood session back in 2005.  They 
could equally be applied to faithful women of the LDS Church.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2005/11/becoming-a-missionary?lang=eng

All of us who have received the holy priesthood bear the sacred obligation to bless the nations 
and families of the earth by proclaiming the gospel and inviting all to receive by proper 
authority the ordinances of salvation.

Rather, the obligation to proclaim the restored gospel of Jesus Christ is inherent in the oath 
and covenant of the priesthood into which we enter. Missionary work essentially is a priesthood 
responsibility, and all of us who hold the priesthood are the Lord's authorized servants on the 
earth and are missionaries at all times and in all places—and we always will be. Our very identity 
as holders of the priesthood and the seed of Abraham is in large measure defined by the 
responsibility to proclaim the gospel.

Brethren, you are preparing for a lifetime of missionary work. As holders of the priesthood, we 
are missionaries always. 

A priesthood holder is a missionary at all times and in all places. A missionary is who and what 
we are as bearers of the priesthood and as the seed of Abraham.

The heirs of all the promises and covenants made by God to Abraham are referred to as the seed 
of Abraham.

I declare my witness that Jesus is the Christ, our Savior and Redeemer. I know that He lives! And 
I witness that we, as holders of the priesthood, are His representatives in the glorious work of 
proclaiming His gospel, today and always. In the sacred name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Again, what is the point that you are trying to make here?

Edited July 26, 2024 by InCognitus

[mbh26]

 What tribe was Mulek, son of Zedekiah, from?  

[ZealouslyStriving]

5 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

 What tribe was Mulek, son of Zedekiah, from?  

Judah.... He was a descendant of David.

[mbh26]

5 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Judah.... He was a descendant of David.

Are most Native Americans from the tribe of Ephraim or Manasseh?  I haven't heard of many from the tribe of Judah.  

[ZealouslyStriving]

12 minutes ago, mbh26 said:

Are most Native Americans from the tribe of Ephraim or Manasseh?  I haven't heard of many from the tribe of Judah.  

"Native Americans" are a mix of pre-Lehite Asian tribes, probably some Viking stock, and Israelites from Manasseh, Ephraim, Judah, and in my humble opinion, some Levi (as a king would likely have at least one Levite priest traveling with him), and Benjamin (whom I believe were recruited by Jeremiah as a type of Secret Service to protect young Mulek).

[theplains]

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

Yes, those verses describe the first time the gospel would be preached to the Gentiles, and that’s what Paul was talking about in Romans 15.

But obviously your examples above can’t possibly describe what Paul or Jesus had in mind in Romans 11:25 or Luke 21:24.  In Romans 11:25, Paul said that Israel’s “blindness in part” would continue “until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in”, which was obviously a “fulness” that would happen in the future from the time Paul wrote to the Romans, and all your examples occurred prior to that time.  

We've discussed Romans 15 previously. In case I did not emphasize it before, allow me to do so 
here. 

In Romans 15:8-12, Paul is speaking about Jesus Christ and the impact of His ministry on both 
Jews and Gentiles. Here's a breakdown of those verses:

Romans 15:8: Paul explains that Jesus Christ became a servant to the circumcision (the Jews) to 
confirm God's promises to the patriarchs. This means Jesus' ministry validated the covenants made 
with their ancestors, like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Romans 15:9: Shifting focus to the Gentiles, Paul highlights that Jesus' work also aimed at 
extending mercy to the Gentiles so they, too, may glorify God. He supports this with a quote from 
the Old Testament: "For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy 
name" (Psalm 18:49).

Romans 15:10: Paul quotes Moses to show that the inclusion of the Gentiles was always part of 
God's plan: "Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people" (Deuteronomy 32:43).

Romans 15:11: He reinforces this again by quoting from Psalms: "Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; 
and laud him, all ye people" (Psalm 117:1).

Romans 15:12: Finally, Paul quotes Isaiah: "There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise 
to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust" (Isaiah 11:10). This indicates that 
Jesus, being a descendant of Jesse (the father of King David), would be a hope and ruler for the 
Gentiles.

Paul is emphasizing that Jesus Christ's mission was inclusive and that both Jews and Gentiles are 
called to glorify God together. This promotes unity among the Roman Christians, acknowledging that 
through Christ, God's promises and mercy extend to all people.

Paul is not referring to Jesus in one part of the chapter and then someone else (who Latter-day 
Saints believe is Joseph Smith) in another part of the chapter.

Joseph Smith is not the root and the rod of Jesse like the LDS Church teaches in its seminary 
manual.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-113-isaiah-interpreted?lang=eng

Jesus comes in the lineage of Jesse. That is one of the qualifications in Isaiah 11. Another 
qualification is "righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle 
of his reins".

A commentary by Matthew Henry gives a good explanation of why the atonement of Christ is set up 
as the ensign, or beacon, for the people.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/mhc/Isa/Isa_011.cfm?a=690012

In Genesis 49:10, Jacob says "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from 
between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be."
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

And in Luke 21:24, Jesus said that Israel would be scattered until “the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”, and Jesus was talking about a time long after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.

Let's examine a few verses before and after that for context.

20 - And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof 
is nigh.

21 - Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst 
of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 

22 - For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 

23 - But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there 
shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. 

24 - And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: 
and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. 

25 - And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth 
distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 

26 - Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on 
the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 

27 - And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 

28 - And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your 
redemption draweth nigh.

Do you believe the events of verse 24 belongs with the events of verses 20-23 or verses 25-28?  
In other words, do you separate the events of verses 20,22  (... Jerusalem compassed with armies ... 
For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled) with the 
event of verse 24 ( ... and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of 
the Gentiles be fulfilled)?
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

I’m saying that the Jews “shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”, and the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the coming forth of the Book of Mormon and returning to the covenants represents the ensign being raised up just prior to the time when Israel would be gathered again.

How do you identify the "they" in verse 24?

Are "they" all Jews throughout all Israel, only Jews in Jerusalem, or just those of various tribes 
that were in Jerusalem at the time of the conquest?

How do you understand Jerusalem being encompassed by armies and being trodden down of the Gentiles 
until their times were fulfilled?
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

But obviously your interpretation of Isaiah 11:10 can’t possibly be true given the timing described above, since Isaiah 11:10-16 describes the gathering of Israel starting immediately after the ensign is raised up, and Paul taught that Israel would be blinded in part until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, and Jesus said the Jews would be led away captive until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, and all of that would be long after the time of Christ.  So how do you explain that?

"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in 
your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles 
be come in" (Romans 11:25). 

I think "Israel" in that verse means the population as a whole. The early church was 100% Jewish 
(not restricting this only to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin) and then this began expanding to 
Gentiles.  Blindness in part had happened to Israel, but it was not "blindness in whole".  There 
were relatively few believers when compared to the population of Israel at the time.

But the ensign had been raised up and the grafting in of the Gentiles had begun.  As the Book of 
Acts mentions several times, the Lord continued to add to his church (Acts 2:41; 2:47; 5:14, 11:24).

If you believe Paul is referring to blindness being upon all Israelites until the fulness of 
Gentiles be come in, then Joseph Smith and all LDS leaders are not of the lineage of Ephraim or 
Manasseh because they would still be in blindness "until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in".

I like how Chuck Smith commented on that section.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/smith_chuck/c2000_Rom/Rom_011.cfm?a=1057025

In Ezekiel 39, God declared, "And in that day when I am sanctified before the nations of the world 
(that is, the day when He destroys the Russian army), then will I pour out my Spirit again upon the 
nation of Israel." Right now, God's Spirit is being poured out upon we Gentiles until the fullness 
of the Gentiles is come in, but as soon as that takes place, then God is going to deal with the 
nation of Israel.

Regarding the identity of the ensign, LDS leaders teach that The Church of Jesus Christ of 
Latter-day Saints is the ensign for the gathering of Israel and the spread of the gospel.

Doctrine and Covenants 64:41-42 is one example.  General Conference sermons also identify it as 
such.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1989/10/an-ensign-to-the-nations?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2011/04/an-ensign-to-the-nations?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2003/10/an-ensign-to-the-nations-a-light-to-the-world?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2017/04/that-our-light-may-be-a-standard-for-the-nations?lang=eng
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

The first members of the restored church were of the tribe of Ephraim and Manasseh started coming into the church right after that.

How do you know that?
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

Remember our discussion about Genesis 48:19, where Jacob set Ephraim before Manasseh?   Jacob said of Ephraim (the younger of the two), “his younger brother shall be greater than he [Manasseh], and his [Ephraim’s] seed shall become a multitude of nations.”  (Genesis 48:19).

Yes. This is something between Ephraim and Manasseh. But Judah would have pre-eminence overall.

We see Ephraim being greater than Manasseh after the kingdom splits into two nations. I don't see 
any significance on this upon the New Testament church.
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

 I think you are straining really hard to try to make apples into potatoes and are ignoring (or purposely avoiding) the spiritual symbolism of Joseph’s life.  Theologians through the centuries have seen Joseph (the one sold into Egypt) as a type of Christ.  If they can see parallels between the physical salvation from the famine in the land provided by Joseph as compared to the spiritual salvation from the famine that came through Christ, why can’t you see the same thing as happening through Joseph in the last days?  The famine at the time of the restoration of the gospel was much worse than physical famine in some ways, for it was “not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord” (Amos 8:11).

Adherents of Seventh-Day Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Christian Science could make the same 
claim of their leaders.

I think this famine was predominantly between the last Old Testament prophet and the arrival of 
John the Baptist.  We've had famines even during the dark ages but Christ's church was still alive.  
It was not destroyed like the 1997 Gospel Principles taught.

I agree with you.  Spiritual salvation from the famine came through Christ.  There is, and has 
been, a spiritual famine among unbelievers since the days of Christ.  But on the flip side, there 
has been no spiritual famine among believers during the preaching work since the days of the 
disciples because Christ has been building his church.  Spiritual salvation has not ceased.

But if you believe there was no spiritual salvation before Joseph Smith was born and after the 
apostles died, please explain what you mean by salvation and how you believe a person is saved.
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

 Even in early Christianity, some of the early Christian fathers saw Christ working in Joseph in the last days in the fulfillment of the prophecy in Deuteronomy 33:17 regarding the pushing together of the “nations” (for two such examples, see Tertullian – Against Marcion, Book 3, Chapter 18, and Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 91). 

I found the comparison of horns and the cross to be a stretch.

The articles mention Deuteronomy 33:17 but I didn't see any connection with a gathering of 
physical Israel or preaching the gospel.
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

I think you keep forgetting  about Zechariah 10:6–12:

"6 And I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph, and I will bring them again to place them; for I have mercy upon them: and they shall be as though I had not cast them off: for I am the Lord their God, and will hear them.  7 And they of Ephraim shall be like a mighty man, and their heart shall rejoice as through wine: yea, their children shall see it, and be glad; their heart shall rejoice in the Lord.  8 I will hiss for them, and gather them; for I have redeemed them: and they shall increase as they have increased.  9 And I will sow them among the people: and they shall remember me in far countries; and they shall live with their children, and turn again.  10 I will bring them again also out of the land of Egypt, and gather them out of Assyria; and I will bring them into the land of Gilead and Lebanon; and place shall not be found for them.  11 And he shall pass through the sea with affliction, and shall smite the waves in the sea, and all the deeps of the river shall dry up: and the pride of Assyria shall be brought down, and the sceptre of Egypt shall depart away.  12 And I will strengthen them in the Lord; and they shall walk up and down in his name, saith the Lord."

What does Zechariah 10:6-12 mean for you today?
 

On 7/26/2024 at 6:00 PM, InCognitus said:

Again, what is the point that you are trying to make here?

I was making two points:

1] Elder David Bednar's address is something that would also make sense if women were in the 
audience.  Everything he said, which I highlighted in a previous reply, could be said of women 
who preach the gospel.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2005/11/becoming-a-missionary?lang=eng

I understand that you don't agree with women being in the royal priesthood of believers, but the 
same principle is symbolized in an October 1974 General Conference sermon, given by Gordon B. 
Hinckley.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1974/10/a-city-set-upon-a-hill?lang=eng

My brethren and sisters, I seek the direction of the Holy Spirit that I may say something that 
will add to your faith.

We have, indeed, become as a city upon a hill for the world to see. If we are to be that which 
the Lord would have us, we must indeed become "a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar 
people; that [we] should shew forth the praises of him who hath called [us] out of darkness into 
his marvellous light." (1 Pet. 2:9.)

How do women act as members of this holy priesthood?  They show forth the praises of him who 
called them out of darkness into his marvellous light.  The men do likewise.

I find it peculiar that he used the phrase "we have become as a city" in the past tense but then 
switches to "we must indeed become a royal priesthood", indicating something yet future; as if 
faithful men and women are not yet members of the royal priesthood.

Peter uses the present tense for his audience - "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, 
a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who 
called you out of darkness into his marvelous light".  

2] Doctrine and Covenants 68:15-20, 107:40-41 together with Abraham 2:9-11 stresses the importance 
of being a descendant (of literal seed) as a requirement for holding the priesthood.

In addition to males who are literally from Abraham's lineage, the LDS Church declares a male 
member to be in the lineage of a certain tribe via a patriarchal blessing, and if worthy makes 
him a priest. Regardless of being male or female, priest or not, at some point their physical blood 
is taught to change into the literal blood of Abraham.

From two sources:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/21-covenant-israel?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/the-pearl-of-great-price-student-manual-2018/the-book-of-abraham/abraham-2-1-13?lang=eng

Search for the phrase "blood of Abraham (actually)".

In a spiritual sense, the seed of Abraham are those who have faith in Jesus Christ (John 8:39; 
Romans 9:6–8; Galatians 3:7,29).  A patriarchal blessing is not required and the physical blood 
of the believer does not change into the literal blood of Abraham when acted upon by the Holy 
Ghost.

[CV75]

38 minutes ago, theplains said:

We've discussed Romans 15 previously. In case I did not emphasize it before, allow me to do so 
here. 

In Romans 15:8-12, Paul is speaking about Jesus Christ and the impact of His ministry on both 
Jews and Gentiles. Here's a breakdown of those verses:

Romans 15:8: Paul explains that Jesus Christ became a servant to the circumcision (the Jews) to 
confirm God's promises to the patriarchs. This means Jesus' ministry validated the covenants made 
with their ancestors, like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Romans 15:9: Shifting focus to the Gentiles, Paul highlights that Jesus' work also aimed at 
extending mercy to the Gentiles so they, too, may glorify God. He supports this with a quote from 
the Old Testament: "For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy 
name" (Psalm 18:49).

Romans 15:10: Paul quotes Moses to show that the inclusion of the Gentiles was always part of 
God's plan: "Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people" (Deuteronomy 32:43).

Romans 15:11: He reinforces this again by quoting from Psalms: "Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; 
and laud him, all ye people" (Psalm 117:1).

Romans 15:12: Finally, Paul quotes Isaiah: "There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise 
to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust" (Isaiah 11:10). This indicates that 
Jesus, being a descendant of Jesse (the father of King David), would be a hope and ruler for the 
Gentiles.

Paul is emphasizing that Jesus Christ's mission was inclusive and that both Jews and Gentiles are 
called to glorify God together. This promotes unity among the Roman Christians, acknowledging that 
through Christ, God's promises and mercy extend to all people.

Paul is not referring to Jesus in one part of the chapter and then someone else (who Latter-day 
Saints believe is Joseph Smith) in another part of the chapter.

Joseph Smith is not the root and the rod of Jesse like the LDS Church teaches in its seminary 
manual.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-113-isaiah-interpreted?lang=eng

Jesus comes in the lineage of Jesse. That is one of the qualifications in Isaiah 11. Another 
qualification is "righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle 
of his reins".

A commentary by Matthew Henry gives a good explanation of why the atonement of Christ is set up 
as the ensign, or beacon, for the people.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/mhc/Isa/Isa_011.cfm?a=690012

In Genesis 49:10, Jacob says "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from 
between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be."
 

Let's examine a few verses before and after that for context.

20 - And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof 
is nigh.

21 - Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst 
of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 

22 - For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 

23 - But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there 
shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. 

24 - And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: 
and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. 

25 - And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth 
distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 

26 - Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on 
the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 

27 - And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 

28 - And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your 
redemption draweth nigh.

Do you believe the events of verse 24 belongs with the events of verses 20-23 or verses 25-28?  
In other words, do you separate the events of verses 20,22  (... Jerusalem compassed with armies ... 
For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled) with the 
event of verse 24 ( ... and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of 
the Gentiles be fulfilled)?
 

How do you identify the "they" in verse 24?

Are "they" all Jews throughout all Israel, only Jews in Jerusalem, or just those of various tribes 
that were in Jerusalem at the time of the conquest?

How do you understand Jerusalem being encompassed by armies and being trodden down of the Gentiles 
until their times were fulfilled?
 

"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in 
your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles 
be come in" (Romans 11:25). 

I think "Israel" in that verse means the population as a whole. The early church was 100% Jewish 
(not restricting this only to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin) and then this began expanding to 
Gentiles.  Blindness in part had happened to Israel, but it was not "blindness in whole".  There 
were relatively few believers when compared to the population of Israel at the time.

But the ensign had been raised up and the grafting in of the Gentiles had begun.  As the Book of 
Acts mentions several times, the Lord continued to add to his church (Acts 2:41; 2:47; 5:14, 11:24).

If you believe Paul is referring to blindness being upon all Israelites until the fulness of 
Gentiles be come in, then Joseph Smith and all LDS leaders are not of the lineage of Ephraim or 
Manasseh because they would still be in blindness "until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in".

I like how Chuck Smith commented on that section.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/smith_chuck/c2000_Rom/Rom_011.cfm?a=1057025

In Ezekiel 39, God declared, "And in that day when I am sanctified before the nations of the world 
(that is, the day when He destroys the Russian army), then will I pour out my Spirit again upon the 
nation of Israel." Right now, God's Spirit is being poured out upon we Gentiles until the fullness 
of the Gentiles is come in, but as soon as that takes place, then God is going to deal with the 
nation of Israel.

Regarding the identity of the ensign, LDS leaders teach that The Church of Jesus Christ of 
Latter-day Saints is the ensign for the gathering of Israel and the spread of the gospel.

Doctrine and Covenants 64:41-42 is one example.  General Conference sermons also identify it as 
such.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1989/10/an-ensign-to-the-nations?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2011/04/an-ensign-to-the-nations?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2003/10/an-ensign-to-the-nations-a-light-to-the-world?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2017/04/that-our-light-may-be-a-standard-for-the-nations?lang=eng
 

How do you know that?
 

Yes. This is something between Ephraim and Manasseh. But Judah would have pre-eminence overall.

We see Ephraim being greater than Manasseh after the kingdom splits into two nations. I don't see 
any significance on this upon the New Testament church.
 

Adherents of Seventh-Day Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Christian Science could make the same 
claim of their leaders.

I think this famine was predominantly between the last Old Testament prophet and the arrival of 
John the Baptist.  We've had famines even during the dark ages but Christ's church was still alive.  
It was not destroyed like the 1997 Gospel Principles taught.

I agree with you.  Spiritual salvation from the famine came through Christ.  There is, and has 
been, a spiritual famine among unbelievers since the days of Christ.  But on the flip side, there 
has been no spiritual famine among believers during the preaching work since the days of the 
disciples because Christ has been building his church.  Spiritual salvation has not ceased.

But if you believe there was no spiritual salvation before Joseph Smith was born and after the 
apostles died, please explain what you mean by salvation and how you believe a person is saved.
 

I found the comparison of horns and the cross to be a stretch.

The articles mention Deuteronomy 33:17 but I didn't see any connection with a gathering of 
physical Israel or preaching the gospel.
 

What does Zechariah 10:6-12 mean for you today?
 

I was making two points:

1] Elder David Bednar's address is something that would also make sense if women were in the 
audience.  Everything he said, which I highlighted in a previous reply, could be said of women 
who preach the gospel.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2005/11/becoming-a-missionary?lang=eng

I understand that you don't agree with women being in the royal priesthood of believers, but the 
same principle is symbolized in an October 1974 General Conference sermon, given by Gordon B. 
Hinckley.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1974/10/a-city-set-upon-a-hill?lang=eng

My brethren and sisters, I seek the direction of the Holy Spirit that I may say something that 
will add to your faith.

We have, indeed, become as a city upon a hill for the world to see. If we are to be that which 
the Lord would have us, we must indeed become "a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar 
people; that [we] should shew forth the praises of him who hath called [us] out of darkness into 
his marvellous light." (1 Pet. 2:9.)

How do women act as members of this holy priesthood?  They show forth the praises of him who 
called them out of darkness into his marvellous light.  The men do likewise.

I find it peculiar that he used the phrase "we have become as a city" in the past tense but then 
switches to "we must indeed become a royal priesthood", indicating something yet future; as if 
faithful men and women are not yet members of the royal priesthood.

Peter uses the present tense for his audience - "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, 
a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who 
called you out of darkness into his marvelous light".  

2] Doctrine and Covenants 68:15-20, 107:40-41 together with Abraham 2:9-11 stresses the importance 
of being a descendant (of literal seed) as a requirement for holding the priesthood.

In addition to males who are literally from Abraham's lineage, the LDS Church declares a male 
member to be in the lineage of a certain tribe via a patriarchal blessing, and if worthy makes 
him a priest. Regardless of being male or female, priest or not, at some point their physical blood 
is taught to change into the literal blood of Abraham.

From two sources:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/21-covenant-israel?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/the-pearl-of-great-price-student-manual-2018/the-book-of-abraham/abraham-2-1-13?lang=eng

Search for the phrase "blood of Abraham (actually)".

In a spiritual sense, the seed of Abraham are those who have faith in Jesus Christ (John 8:39; 
Romans 9:6–8; Galatians 3:7,29).  A patriarchal blessing is not required and the physical blood 
of the believer does not change into the literal blood of Abraham when acted upon by the Holy 
Ghost.

On the contrary, Paul said that Jesus’ mission was excusive to the circumcision, who in turn minister to the Gentiles in His name. Paul uses Isaiah to show that the “root of Jesse” refers to those commissioned to minister to the Gentiles in Jesus’ name, and then includes himself, a Benjaminite, in that category (verse 16). Isaiah 11:10 is ultimately a last-days reference and is clarified in D&C so show that Joseph Smith, a Josephite/Ephraimite, was so commissioned as a root of Jesse in an especially significant way (verse 1).

[InCognitus]

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

We've discussed Romans 15 previously. In case I did not emphasize it before, allow me to do so 
here. 

In Romans 15:8-12, Paul is speaking about Jesus Christ and the impact of His ministry on both 
Jews and Gentiles. Here's a breakdown of those verses:

Romans 15:8: Paul explains that Jesus Christ became a servant to the circumcision (the Jews) to 
confirm God's promises to the patriarchs. This means Jesus' ministry validated the covenants made 
with their ancestors, like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Romans 15:9: Shifting focus to the Gentiles, Paul highlights that Jesus' work also aimed at 
extending mercy to the Gentiles so they, too, may glorify God. He supports this with a quote from 
the Old Testament: "For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy 
name" (Psalm 18:49).

Romans 15:10: Paul quotes Moses to show that the inclusion of the Gentiles was always part of 
God's plan: "Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people" (Deuteronomy 32:43).

Romans 15:11: He reinforces this again by quoting from Psalms: "Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; 
and laud him, all ye people" (Psalm 117:1).

Romans 15:12: Finally, Paul quotes Isaiah: "There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise 
to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust" (Isaiah 11:10). This indicates that 
Jesus, being a descendant of Jesse (the father of King David), would be a hope and ruler for the 
Gentiles.

Paul is emphasizing that Jesus Christ's mission was inclusive and that both Jews and Gentiles are 
called to glorify God together. This promotes unity among the Roman Christians, acknowledging that 
through Christ, God's promises and mercy extend to all people.

Paul is not referring to Jesus in one part of the chapter and then someone else (who Latter-day 
Saints believe is Joseph Smith) in another part of the chapter.

We’ve been over this many times already (01/27/2024, 02/03/2024, 02/17/2024, 02/25/2024, 03/03/2024 for example).  

And CV75 already answered this adequately above, and I say the same thing.  Paul is not saying (as you claim) that Jesus Christ’s mission was both to the Jews and Gentiles.  Paul clearly says in verse 8 (of Romans 15) that Christ “was a minister of the circumcision [i.e. to the Jews] for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers” (Romans 15:8).  And in verse 16 Paul says that he himself  (not Christ) is “the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.”  (Romans 15:16)

So Jesus himself didn’t go to the Gentiles, and Paul knows this.  But Paul shows that the scriptures foretold that the gospel would bet taken to the Gentiles through the Lord’s servants, as he proves by quoting Psalms 18:49 (or 2 Samuel 22:50), Psalms 117:1, and Isaiah 11:10. 

But you keep getting off track and diverting from the main question, which is who is the person in Isaiah 11:10 that shows up and signals the beginning of the gathering of Israel in the last days?  Paul never identifies that person as Christ.  And you and I both know that person can’t possibly be Christ, because we both agree that the gathering of Israel has already begun, and Jesus prophesied during his mortal ministry that the scattering of Israel would be even more severe at the time the temple would be destroyed a short time after his departing.  That doesn’t signal a gathering, it signals an even greater scattering, and after Jesus was resurrected the gospel was taken from the Jews and given to the Gentiles (Matthew 21:43, Acts 13:46, Acts 18:6, Acts 28:28).  The Gentiles gather to Christ when the gospel is preached to them by Christ’s servants, but that is all done through Christ’s servants, and not by Jesus Christ personally.

As for the idea that scripture cannot refer to one person in one part of the chapter and then someone else in another part of the chapter, that’s just absurd.  That’s a very poor rule of interpretation, as the context should guide us in how to understand a passage instead of making up an arbitrary rule and applying it to all scripture.

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

Joseph Smith is not the root and the rod of Jesse like the LDS Church teaches in its seminary 
manual.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-113-isaiah-interpreted?lang=eng

Jesus comes in the lineage of Jesse. That is one of the qualifications in Isaiah 11. Another 
qualification is "righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle 
of his reins".

But that’s a quote from Isaiah 11:5 which is talking about Christ.  

But REMEMBER (stay focused), we are discussing the identity of the person who shows up in Isaiah 11:10, which as I pointed out before is a verse that begins a completely new paragraph and topic in the Hebrew text (reread my post on 02/03/2024).  The arrival of that person signals the beginning of the final gathering of Israel as noted in Isaiah 11:11-16.  And as has been shown (over and over and over again), that person can’t possibly be Christ at the time of his mortal ministry, since you and I both agree that the gathering of Israel has already begun to some degree, and Christ, during his mortal ministry prophesied that Israel would be scattered completely around the time of the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem (putting the fulfillment of the gathering of Israel described in Isaiah 11:10-16 far into the future from Christ’s mortal ministry).

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

A commentary by Matthew Henry gives a good explanation of why the atonement of Christ is set up 
as the ensign, or beacon, for the people.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/mhc/Isa/Isa_011.cfm?a=690012

In Genesis 49:10, Jacob says "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from 
between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be."

Matthew Henry (1662 to 1714) suffers from the same lack of modern perspective as we discussed previously with John Darby. 

As I said previously for John Darby, it’s easy for Matthew Henry (living in the early 1700’s) to imagine the events of Isaiah 11:10-16 as taking place far into the future with a fulfillment at the millennial reign of Christ (and certainly the fulfillment of those verses will be stepped up when Jesus returns).  But Matthew Henry doesn’t have our modern perspective to see what is happening today, and if he did he probably would recognize the beginning of the gathering of Israel taking place today the same way you seem to be doing.  Christ hasn’t returned for his millennial reign yet, but today we see the beginning of the gathering of Israel taking place.  So obviously Matthew Henry was wrong in his interpretation of Isaiah 11:10 as referring to Christ (and so are you unless you believe Jesus has returned already).

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

Let's examine a few verses before and after that for context.

20 - And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof 
is nigh.

21 - Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst 
of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto. 

22 - For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. 

23 - But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there 
shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. 

24 - And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: 
and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. 

25 - And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth 
distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; 

26 - Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on 
the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken. 

27 - And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. 

28 - And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your 
redemption draweth nigh.

Do you believe the events of verse 24 belongs with the events of verses 20-23 or verses 25-28?  
In other words, do you separate the events of verses 20,22  (... Jerusalem compassed with armies ... 
For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled) with the 
event of verse 24 ( ... and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of 
the Gentiles be fulfilled)?

The events described in verses 20-24 form a complete package describing the sequence of things that happen leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem and the destruction of the temple, and this should be clear from verse 20: “when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof [of Jerusalem] is nigh”.

This should also be evident from the context when you go back to read verses 5-7 to find out what questions Jesus is answering. Those verses read:

“And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said, As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things [the destruction of the temple] be? and what sign will there be when these things shall come to pass?”

The Matthew account of this same discourse has the disciples asking this same question (about when would be the destruction of the temple) but the question about the “sign” is clarified: “what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” (Matthew 24:3).  So there are two separate questions being addressed by Jesus in these chapters.

In Luke 21, it’s much clearer to see which question Jesus is answering, because verses 8-24 clearly pertain to the question about when will the temple be destroyed, and verse 24 (the verse we are discussing) marks the division between the two questions because of the long period of time specified between the destruction of the temple and the scattering of the inhabitants of the land of Judaea with the future fulfillment of the “times of the Gentiles”, and the and the signs of his coming noted in verses 25 onward.

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

How do you identify the "they" in verse 24?

Are "they" all Jews throughout all Israel, only Jews in Jerusalem, or just those of various tribes 
that were in Jerusalem at the time of the conquest?

“Israel” (as a land region) didn’t exist at that point in time.  But Jesus explained what he means in verse 21 and 23:  “Then let them which are in Judæa flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.”  (Luke 21:21)  And “But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! for there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people.” (Luke 21:23)   So basically it’s the region of land that includes Judaea.  

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

How do you understand Jerusalem being encompassed by armies and being trodden down of the Gentiles 
until their times were fulfilled?

I’m not sure how to understand what you are implying in the way you phrased your question above.  Either it’s a badly phrased question, or do you really believe that Jesus was saying that Jerusalem would be encompassed by armies until the time of Gentiles was fulfilled? 

As mentioned earlier, in context it’s obvious that Jesus was describing the sequence of events leading up to the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem and the scattering of the remaining Israelites and them losing possession of their lands (an indication of them breaking their covenant with God).  In verse 20, Jesus said that when they would see that Jerusalem was encompassed by armies, it was then that they shall “know that the desolation thereof is nigh”, in other words it would signal the time when they should get out or die.  For those who didn’t leave, Jesus said that they shall fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all nations, and Jerusalem would fall into the hands of the Gentiles “until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled”.

This is precisely what happened.  In 70 AD, Titus surrounded Jerusalem and ultimately destroyed the temple and the entire city.

As Josephus described it, “Now as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury, (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done,) Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison, as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind. “ (Josephus, Wars, 7.1:1)

See also Wikipedia:  Siege of Jerusalem (70 CE)

And the rest is history, as they say.  In 130 AD, Emperor Hadrian came to Jerusalem and made it a Roman colony and erected a temple to Jupiter on the Temple Mount (Aelia Capitolina).  In 326 AD Constantine took control of Jerusalem, and it has been in the hands of Gentiles (through one “crusade” after another) until recent times.  (See Wikipedia – Timeline of Jerusalem).  

Adam Clarke (in the early 1800’s) wrote this in his commentary on Luke 21:24:  “Trodden down of the Gentiles] Judea was so completely subjugated that the very land itself was sold by Vespasian; the Gentiles possessing it, while the Jews were either nearly all killed or led away into captivity.  Of the Gentiles be fulfilled] Till the different nations of the earth, to whom God shall have given the dominion over this land, have accomplished all that which the Lord hath appointed them to do; and till the time of their conversion to God take place. But when shall this be? We know not. The nations are still treading down Jerusalem, and the end is known only to the Lord. See the note on Mat 24:31.”

Of course that was written in the early 1800’s, and many things have changed since that time (as shown in the timeline below).

This is a good summary from the Jewish Virtual Library website, with the critical turning point, as prophesied by Jesus in Luke 21:24, shown in red (added by me):

Quote

Herodian Period (37 BCE - 70 CE)

• 37 BCE - King Herod Restructures Second Temple, Adds Retaining Walls
• 30 CE - Jesus Crucified by Romans in Jerusalem

Roman Period (70 - 324 CE)

• 70 CE - Roman Forces Destroy Jerusalem and Demolish Second Temple
• 135 CE - Jerusalem Rebuilt as a Roman City

Byzantine Period (324-638 CE)

• 335 CE - Church of the Holy Sepulchre Built
• 614 CE - Persians Capture Jerusalem
• 629 CE - Byzantine Christians Recapture Jerusalem from Persians

First Muslim Period (638-1099 CE)

• 638 CE - Caliph Omar Enters Jerusalem
• 661-750 CE - Jerusalem Ruled Under Umayyad Dynasty
• 691 CE - Dome of the Rock Built on Site of Destroyed Jewish Temples
• 750-974 CE - Jerusalem Ruled Under Abassid Dynasty

Crusader Period (1099-1187 CE)

• 1099 CE - First Crusaders Capture Jerusalem

Ayyubid Period (1187-1259 CE)

• 1187 CE - Saladin Captures Jerusalem from Crusaders
• 1229-1244 CE - Crusaders Briefly Recapture Jerusalem Two Times

Mamluk Period (1250-1516)

• 1250 - Muslim Caliph Dismantles Walls of Jerusalem; Population Rapidly Declines

Ottoman Period (1516-1917)

• 1517 - Ottoman Empire Captures Jerusalem
• 1538-1541 - Suleiman the Magnificent Rebuilds the Walls of Jerusalem

British Mandate (1917-1948)

• 1917 - British Capture Jerusalem in World War I

Divided City (1948-1967)

• 1948 - State of Israel Established; Jerusalem Divided By Armistice Lines Between Israel & Jordan

Reunification (1967-Present)

• 1967 - Israel Captures Jerusalem's Old City and Eastern Half; Reunites City

That explains it quite well.

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

On 7/26/2024 at 4:00 PM, InCognitus said:

But obviously your interpretation of Isaiah 11:10 can’t possibly be true given the timing described above, since Isaiah 11:10-16 describes the gathering of Israel starting immediately after the ensign is raised up, and Paul taught that Israel would be blinded in part until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in, and Jesus said the Jews would be led away captive until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, and all of that would be long after the time of Christ.  So how do you explain that?

"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in 
your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles 
be come in" (Romans 11:25). 

I think "Israel" in that verse means the population as a whole. The early church was 100% Jewish 
(not restricting this only to the tribes of Judah and Benjamin) and then this began expanding to 
Gentiles.  Blindness in part had happened to Israel, but it was not "blindness in whole".  There 
were relatively few believers when compared to the population of Israel at the time.

Paul explains exactly what he means when he says “that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in” earlier in the same chapter.  In verse 7-8, he says: “What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.”

In other words, Paul acknowledges that a few “elect” of the house of Israel has “obtained it” (the gospel of Jesus Christ).  But as he also explains in the same chapter that the time for the preaching to the Jews had passed, and the gospel was turned over to the Gentiles, and the recovery of the Jews couldn’t begin again “until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in”. 

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

But the ensign had been raised up and the grafting in of the Gentiles had begun.  As the Book of 
Acts mentions several times, the Lord continued to add to his church (Acts 2:41; 2:47; 5:14, 11:24).

You claim that “the ensign had been raised up and the grafting in of the Gentiles had begun”, but clearly this cannot be the case because, as noted many times before, Isaiah 11:10-16 describes the gathering of Israel commencing immediately after the ensign was raised, for it is “in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people” (Isaiah 11:11).  It cannot have been in the time of Paul because Jesus said the Jews would be scattered even more when the temple was destroyed in 70 AD.  So there is no way this could possibly be construed as beginning in Paul’s day.

You said that “the Book of Acts mentions several times, the Lord continued to add to his church (Acts 2:41; 2:47; 5:14, 11:24)”, but again, those were the few elect, and it was shortly after that time that the apostles were forced to turn away from the Jews and preach to the Gentiles instead.  Jesus foretold of this turning point: “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.”  (Matthew 21:43)

And so it was with the preaching of the apostles:

Acts 13:46 “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles”.  

Acts 18:6, “And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.” (Acts 18:6)

Acts 28:28 “Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.” (Acts 28:28)

So the time for taking the gospel to the house of Israel had ended until, as Jesus said, "the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled".

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

If you believe Paul is referring to blindness being upon all Israelites until the fulness of 
Gentiles be come in, then Joseph Smith and all LDS leaders are not of the lineage of Ephraim or 
Manasseh because they would still be in blindness "until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in".

In his second epistle to the Corinthians, Paul explained when and how the blindness would be changed:  “But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ.  But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart.  Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.”  (NKJV, 2 Corinthians 3:14-16)

This is exactly what the Lord says will happen with the people of Ephraim in the latter days as they become “mighty men”: “And I will sow them among the people: and they shall remember me in far countries; and they shall live with their children, and turn again.”  (Zechariah 10:9)

And God called Joseph Smith as his prophet, and through him the fulness of the gospel was restored: “And when the times of the Gentiles is come in, a light shall break forth among them that sit in darkness, and it shall be the fulness of my gospel” (Doctrine and Covenants 45:28).  The light broke forth among them that sat in darkness.  That also signaled the beginning point for God to gather Israel again and the ensign was raised up to the nations.

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

Yes. This is something between Ephraim and Manasseh. But Judah would have pre-eminence overall.

We see Ephraim being greater than Manasseh after the kingdom splits into two nations. I don't see 
any significance on this upon the New Testament church.

Genesis 48:19 is not just something between Ephraim and Manasseh, since becoming a “multitude of nations [ggôyim]” has an implication on the entire world and the prophecies of the last days.  And Judah only has pre-eminence first in David and later in Christ.

And of course this does not have any significance on the New Testament church, and I'm glad you noticed that, because these prophesies pertain to the latter days at a time when Isaiah 11:10-16 would be fulfilled and the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people.

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

On 7/26/2024 at 4:00 PM, InCognitus said:

 I think you are straining really hard to try to make apples into potatoes and are ignoring (or purposely avoiding) the spiritual symbolism of Joseph’s life.  Theologians through the centuries have seen Joseph (the one sold into Egypt) as a type of Christ.  If they can see parallels between the physical salvation from the famine in the land provided by Joseph as compared to the spiritual salvation from the famine that came through Christ, why can’t you see the same thing as happening through Joseph in the last days?  The famine at the time of the restoration of the gospel was much worse than physical famine in some ways, for it was “not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord” (Amos 8:11).

Adherents of Seventh-Day Adventist, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Christian Science could make the same 
claim of their leaders.

And what claim is that, exactly?  

And are you suggesting that the existence of potential false teachings from some groups invalidate all similar claims from all other groups?  Did the existence of false prophets throughout Bible times invalidate the proclamations made by true prophets?

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

I think this famine was predominantly between the last Old Testament prophet and the arrival of 
John the Baptist.  We've had famines even during the dark ages but Christ's church was still alive.  
It was not destroyed like the 1997 Gospel Principles taught.

I agree with you.  Spiritual salvation from the famine came through Christ.  There is, and has 
been, a spiritual famine among unbelievers since the days of Christ.  But on the flip side, there 
has been no spiritual famine among believers during the preaching work since the days of the 
disciples because Christ has been building his church.  Spiritual salvation has not ceased.

Spiritual salvation has not ceased (even those who were born prior to the time of Christ can be saved), but the famine spoken about in Amos 8:11 is not about the lack of spiritual salvation, but from “hearing the words of the Lord”.  

If you think that famine (described in Amos 8:11) occurred predominantly between the last Old Testament prophet and the arrival of John the Baptist, do you believe that nobody read or pronounced scripture during that period of time?  Or was it the fact that there were no prophets during that time and the word of the Lord was no longer given?  How is that any different than uninspired men claiming that God has said all that he is going to say and we have all of God’s word in the 66 books we now call “the Bible”, declaring (on God's behalf) that the canon of scripture is closed?

The re-opening of the heavens and restoration of the fulness of the gospel came about through those of the tribe of Joseph, and this saved the earth from the “famine… of hearing the words of the Lord”, and that is part of the symbolism found in the life of Joseph (sold into Egypt) and the fulfillment of the work of his descendants in the latter-days.

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

I found the comparison of horns and the cross to be a stretch.

The articles mention Deuteronomy 33:17 but I didn't see any connection with a gathering of 
physical Israel or preaching the gospel.

The cross analogy is a bit much, but stretch or not, two different early Christian writers (one who lived from c. AD 100 – c. 165, and the other from c. AD 155 – c. 220) had the same understanding of Christ working through the tribe of Joseph (as pronounced in the blessing upon him) in bringing people to Christ as the gospel is preached to them among the nations.  A lot of people today have lost sight of that blessing and its meaning today.

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

What does Zechariah 10:6-12 mean for you today?

It’s that God foretold that Ephraim would be recovered, and not only recovered but they shall be mighty and be part of the gathering in the latter days.

On 8/8/2024 at 2:09 PM, theplains said:

I was making two points:

1] Elder David Bednar's address is something that would also make sense if women were in the 
audience.  Everything he said, which I highlighted in a previous reply, could be said of women 
who preach the gospel.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2005/11/becoming-a-missionary?lang=eng

I understand that you don't agree with women being in the royal priesthood of believers, but the 
same principle is symbolized in an October 1974 General Conference sermon, given by Gordon B. 
Hinckley.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1974/10/a-city-set-upon-a-hill?lang=eng

My brethren and sisters, I seek the direction of the Holy Spirit that I may say something that 
will add to your faith.

We have, indeed, become as a city upon a hill for the world to see. If we are to be that which 
the Lord would have us, we must indeed become "a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar 
people; that [we] should shew forth the praises of him who hath called [us] out of darkness into 
his marvellous light." (1 Pet. 2:9.)

How do women act as members of this holy priesthood?  They show forth the praises of him who 
called them out of darkness into his marvellous light.  The men do likewise.

I find it peculiar that he used the phrase "we have become as a city" in the past tense but then 
switches to "we must indeed become a royal priesthood", indicating something yet future; as if 
faithful men and women are not yet members of the royal priesthood.

Peter uses the present tense for his audience - "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, 
a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who 
called you out of darkness into his marvelous light".  

2] Doctrine and Covenants 68:15-20, 107:40-41 together with Abraham 2:9-11 stresses the importance 
of being a descendant (of literal seed) as a requirement for holding the priesthood.

In addition to males who are literally from Abraham's lineage, the LDS Church declares a male 
member to be in the lineage of a certain tribe via a patriarchal blessing, and if worthy makes 
him a priest. Regardless of being male or female, priest or not, at some point their physical blood 
is taught to change into the literal blood of Abraham.

From two sources:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/21-covenant-israel?lang=eng
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/the-pearl-of-great-price-student-manual-2018/the-book-of-abraham/abraham-2-1-13?lang=eng

Search for the phrase "blood of Abraham (actually)".

In a spiritual sense, the seed of Abraham are those who have faith in Jesus Christ (John 8:39; 
Romans 9:6–8; Galatians 3:7,29).  A patriarchal blessing is not required and the physical blood 
of the believer does not change into the literal blood of Abraham when acted upon by the Holy 
Ghost.

So basically you are using the same out of context assumptions on Latter-day Saint quotations of 1 Peter 2:9 (which was quoting from Exodus 19:6) as you and others do when trying to come up with a "priesthood of all believers" from thin air.  Should I be surprised?  

These assumptions are taken fully out of context because the full context of the Old and New Testaments as well as the latter-day restoration of the priesthood shows that priesthood authority was administered to men by ordination "by the laying on of hands".  As I posted elsewhere:

• Jesus, while he was here in his mortal ministry, ordained the apostles and gave them authority (Mark 3:14, John 15:16).
• Paul (and Barnabas) were called to the work and set apart by the laying on of hands, having authority from the church to preach, in Acts 13:1-4.
• Paul promotes the practice of ordaining elders in every church as described in Acts 14:23.
• Paul later wrote to Timothy reminding him that he had a gift given him by prophecy, through the laying on the hands of the presbytery (1 Timothy 4:14)
• Paul also wrote to Titus, saying that he was also appointed to "ordain elders in every city" (Titus 1:5)

And you claim, without any biblical support whatsoever, that all of the above is not necessary, because anyone who believes in Christ has this priesthood authority simply because he (or she) believes it to be so?  I don't think so.

Edited August 19, 2024 by InCognitus
Spelling fix

[theplains]

On 8/8/2024 at 4:47 PM, CV75 said:

On the contrary, Paul said that Jesus’ mission was excusive to the circumcision, who in turn minister to the Gentiles in His name. Paul uses Isaiah to show that the “root of Jesse” refers to those commissioned to minister to the Gentiles in Jesus’ name, and then includes himself, a Benjaminite, in that category (verse 16). Isaiah 11:10 is ultimately a last-days reference and is clarified in D&C so show that Joseph Smith, a Josephite/Ephraimite, was so commissioned as a root of Jesse in an especially significant way (verse 1).

I was discussing this particular topic with incognitus some time ago and made these comments:

===

We've discussed Romans 15 previously. In case I did not emphasize it before, allow me to do so 
here. 

In Romans 15:8-12, Paul is speaking about Jesus Christ and the impact of His ministry on both 
Jews and Gentiles. Here's a breakdown of those verses:

Romans 15:8: Paul explains that Jesus Christ became a servant to the circumcision (the Jews) to 
confirm God's promises to the patriarchs. This means Jesus' ministry validated the covenants made 
with their ancestors, like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Romans 15:9: Shifting focus to the Gentiles, Paul highlights that Jesus' work also aimed at 
extending mercy to the Gentiles so they, too, may glorify God. He supports this with a quote from 
the Old Testament: "For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy 
name" (Psalm 18:49).

Romans 15:10: Paul quotes Moses to show that the inclusion of the Gentiles was always part of 
God's plan: "Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people" (Deuteronomy 32:43).

Romans 15:11: He reinforces this again by quoting from Psalms: "Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; 
and laud him, all ye people" (Psalm 117:1).

Romans 15:12: Finally, Paul quotes Isaiah: "There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise 
to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust" (Isaiah 11:10). This indicates that 
Jesus, being a descendant of Jesse (the father of King David), would be a hope and ruler for the 
Gentiles.

Paul is emphasizing that Jesus Christ's mission was inclusive and that both Jews and Gentiles are 
called to glorify God together. This promotes unity among the Roman Christians, acknowledging that 
through Christ, God's promises and mercy extend to all people.

Paul is not referring to Jesus in one part of the chapter and then someone else (who Latter-day 
Saints believe is Joseph Smith) in another part of the chapter.

Joseph Smith is not the root and the rod of Jesse like the LDS Church teaches in its seminary 
manual.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-113-isaiah-interpreted?lang=eng

Jesus comes in the lineage of Jesse. That is one of the qualifications in Isaiah 11. Another 
qualification is "righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle 
of his reins".

A commentary by Matthew Henry gives a good explanation of why the atonement of Christ is set up 
as the ensign, or beacon, for the people.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/mhc/Isa/Isa_011.cfm?a=690012

In Genesis 49:10, Jacob says "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from 
between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be."

[CV75]

4 hours ago, theplains said:

I was discussing this particular topic with incognitus some time ago and made these comments:

===

We've discussed Romans 15 previously. In case I did not emphasize it before, allow me to do so 
here. 

In Romans 15:8-12, Paul is speaking about Jesus Christ and the impact of His ministry on both 
Jews and Gentiles. Here's a breakdown of those verses:

Romans 15:8: Paul explains that Jesus Christ became a servant to the circumcision (the Jews) to 
confirm God's promises to the patriarchs. This means Jesus' ministry validated the covenants made 
with their ancestors, like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

Romans 15:9: Shifting focus to the Gentiles, Paul highlights that Jesus' work also aimed at 
extending mercy to the Gentiles so they, too, may glorify God. He supports this with a quote from 
the Old Testament: "For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy 
name" (Psalm 18:49).

Romans 15:10: Paul quotes Moses to show that the inclusion of the Gentiles was always part of 
God's plan: "Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people" (Deuteronomy 32:43).

Romans 15:11: He reinforces this again by quoting from Psalms: "Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; 
and laud him, all ye people" (Psalm 117:1).

Romans 15:12: Finally, Paul quotes Isaiah: "There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise 
to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust" (Isaiah 11:10). This indicates that 
Jesus, being a descendant of Jesse (the father of King David), would be a hope and ruler for the 
Gentiles.

Paul is emphasizing that Jesus Christ's mission was inclusive and that both Jews and Gentiles are 
called to glorify God together. This promotes unity among the Roman Christians, acknowledging that 
through Christ, God's promises and mercy extend to all people.

Paul is not referring to Jesus in one part of the chapter and then someone else (who Latter-day 
Saints believe is Joseph Smith) in another part of the chapter.

Joseph Smith is not the root and the rod of Jesse like the LDS Church teaches in its seminary 
manual.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-113-isaiah-interpreted?lang=eng

Jesus comes in the lineage of Jesse. That is one of the qualifications in Isaiah 11. Another 
qualification is "righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle 
of his reins".

A commentary by Matthew Henry gives a good explanation of why the atonement of Christ is set up 
as the ensign, or beacon, for the people.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/mhc/Isa/Isa_011.cfm?a=690012

In Genesis 49:10, Jacob says "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from 
between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be."

I understand this point of view, and also that Paul spoke of Jesus, Jews, Gentiles, himself and others commissioned out of tribe of Israel, and using Isaiah as support. "How beautiful are the feet...!" Isaiah’s prophecy, under the guiding inspiration of a subsequent commissioned person rightly applies the same principle to Joseph Smith by revelation (e.g., D&C). Paul's message is that anyone can be brought into the family of Abraham, which ties back to the family of Noah and Adam through the other patriarchs; Jesse the father of David is a transmitting element forward to Christ and then beyond the mortal lifetimes of His first commissioned apostles to those called in the  Restoration.

[theplains]

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

 

So Jesus himself didn’t go to the Gentiles, and Paul knows this.  But Paul shows that the scriptures foretold that the gospel would bet taken to the Gentiles through the Lord’s servants, as he proves by quoting Psalms 18:49 (or 2 Samuel 22:50), Psalms 117:1, and Isaiah 11:10. 

The Gentiles gather to Christ when the gospel is preached to them by Christ’s servants, but that is all done through Christ’s servants, and not by Jesus Christ personally.

I'm not sure how you see servants in Isaiah 11 when the manual only identifies one person in Isaiah 11:10,12.  

Are you getting the idea of Latter-day servants [plural] from Jacob 5:61,70,72,75 and also spoken of 
the seminary manual?

https://media.ldscdn.org/pdf/scripture-and-lesson-support/book-of-mormon-seminary-student-study-guide/2008-01-000-book-of-mormon-seminary-student-study-guide-eng.pdf

Another thing I noticed is in verses Doctrine and Covenants 113:7 and 8:

"What is meant by the command in Isaiah, 52d chapter, 1st verse, which saith: Put on thy strength, 
O Zion—and what people had Isaiah reference to? He had reference to those whom God should call in 
the last days, who should hold the power of priesthood to bring again Zion, and the redemption of 
Israel; and to put on her strength is to put on the authority of the priesthood, which she, Zion, 
has a right to by lineage; also to return to that power which she had lost".

A few questions come to mind:

What priesthood is this referring to?
What lineage has the authority of the priesthood as its right?
What time did this lineage get this priesthood by right?
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

But REMEMBER (stay focused), we are discussing the identity of the person who shows up in Isaiah 11:10, which as I pointed out before is a verse that begins a completely new paragraph and topic in the Hebrew text (reread my post on 02/03/2024).  The arrival of that person signals the beginning of the final gathering of Israel as noted in Isaiah 11:11-16.

I know.  The LDS Church identifies the root and the rod as Joseph Smith.

Verses 11-12 say:

And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time 
to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and 
from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the 
islands of the sea. 

And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and 
gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

When, approximately, did Joseph Smith start the assembling of the outcasts of Israel and the 
gathering together of the dispersed of Judah?
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

 And as has been shown (over and over and over again), that person can’t possibly be Christ at the time of his mortal ministry, since you and I both agree that the gathering of Israel has already begun to some degree, and Christ, during his mortal ministry prophesied that Israel would be scattered completely around the time of the destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem (putting the fulfillment of the gathering of Israel described in Isaiah 11:10-16 far into the future from Christ’s mortal ministry).

Jeremiah 31:10 states, "Hear the word of the Lord, O ye nations, and declare it in the isles 
afar off, and say, He that scattered Israel will gather him, and keep him, as a shepherd doth 
his flock." 

It is God who did the scattering.  It's the same person who does the gathering.

Unless you can refer me to newspaper clippings or other sources, I am not able to say that 
Latter-day Saints and other Christian groups were gathering the remnant of Jacob to Israel in 
1948 and afterwards.

But regarding your statement of "far into the future from Christ's mortal ministry" for Isaiah 
11:10-16.   

Can you clarify the physical or spiritual aspect of this gathering?

If spiritual, wasn't Jesus performing the gathering through Peter, Paul, and the other disciples 
after His ascension? If physical, what is the destination for the gathering of the outcasts of 
Israel?
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

But Matthew Henry doesn’t have our modern perspective to see what is happening today, and if he did he probably would recognize the beginning of the gathering of Israel taking place today the same way you seem to be doing.  Christ hasn’t returned for his millennial reign yet, but today we see the beginning of the gathering of Israel taking place.  So obviously Matthew Henry was wrong in his interpretation of Isaiah 11:10 as referring to Christ (and so are you unless you believe Jesus has returned already).

Jesus was gathering (adding) to his church in the Book of Acts from a heavenly position and 
continues to do so,.

Does Jesus need to return to earth to gather the outcasts of Israel?

I don't see anywhere in scripture where a gathering of Israelites and Gentiles needs to be done 
by Christ personally after the Second Coming.
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

In Luke 21, it’s much clearer to see which question Jesus is answering, because verses 8-24 clearly pertain to the question about when will the temple be destroyed, and verse 24 (the verse we are discussing) marks the division between the two questions because of the long period of time specified between the destruction of the temple and the scattering of the inhabitants of the land of Judaea with the future fulfillment of the “times of the Gentiles”, and the and the signs of his coming noted in verses 25 onward.

I see Jesus making a reference to the destruction in 70 A.D. but sometimes I think verses 20-27 
also point to a future state of events where enemy armies surround Jerusalem.  Sort of what we 
see in Zechariah 12:3.
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

This is a good summary from the Jewish Virtual Library website, with the critical turning point, as prophesied by Jesus in Luke 21:24, shown in red (added by me):

That explains it quite well.

Thank you that historical information.

So you believe the times of the Gentiles was fulfilled in 1967 since Jerusalem was no more trodden 
down of the Gentiles?
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

In other words, Paul acknowledges that a few “elect” of the house of Israel has “obtained it” (the gospel of Jesus Christ).  But as he also explains in the same chapter that the time for the preaching to the Jews had passed, and the gospel was turned over to the Gentiles, and the recovery of the Jews couldn’t begin again “until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in”. 

I see that you mention the term "house of Israel". 

Do you believe Paul is referring to all Israelite tribes or just Judah (plus/minus Benjamin)?

What is the date "until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in" so the recovery of the blind of 
the house of Israel could begin?
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

You claim that “the ensign had been raised up and the grafting in of the Gentiles had begun”, but clearly this cannot be the case because, as noted many times before, Isaiah 11:10-16 describes the gathering of Israel commencing immediately after the ensign was raised, for it is “in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people” (Isaiah 11:11).

I don't see "immediately" implied in Isaiah 11:10-16 but let's proceed with your line of reasoning.

When exactly was the ensign raised so the gathering of Israel [the remnant of his people, not the
Gentiles first] could commence immediately after it was raised?
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

 So the time for taking the gospel to the house of Israel had ended until, as Jesus said, "the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled".

What date marked "the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" so the gospel could begin being taken 
to the house of Israel?
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

And God called Joseph Smith as his prophet, and through him the fulness of the gospel was restored: “And when the times of the Gentiles is come in, a light shall break forth among them that sit in darkness, and it shall be the fulness of my gospel” (Doctrine and Covenants 45:28).  The light broke forth among them that sat in darkness.  That also signaled the beginning point for God to gather Israel again and the ensign was raised up to the nations.

Would you help me understand what you wrote. It seems to be similar to Romans 11:25. "For I would 
not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own 
conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come 
in."

Questions about Doctrine and Covenants 45:28:

What year was the fulness of the gospel restored?
When is the time when the "time of the Gentiles is come in?"
When is the beginning point for God to gather Israel, not Gentile?

For me, I could sum up the gospel in one verse - John 3:16.  It was never lost and never needed 
to be restored.  One could use the Book of John instead of all the forty-seven chapters in Gospel 
Principles.  God made the gospel very easy to understand.
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

And what claim is that, exactly?  

And are you suggesting that the existence of potential false teachings from some groups invalidate all similar claims from all other groups?  Did the existence of false prophets throughout Bible times invalidate the proclamations made by true prophets?

No, but the devil would not set up a religion that teaches all false principles. He mixes truth 
with error. His ultimate aim is to prevent people from worshipping the true God or have them 
worshipping a false god.

For example, a lot of what Jehovah's Witnesses teach is true.  But they proclaim another Jesus 
Christ; who they teach is Michael the Archangel. 

If Jesus really is Michael the Archangel, then many Christians are worshipping an angel.

Then we have the Latter-day Saints.  Let me summarize things as I understand them. 

An eternal intelligence became a spirit child of his heavenly parents.  This man would be born 
on some earth and then become a God.  Then this God went on to populate an unknown number of 
worlds (one of them being called Earth) with spirit children who would worship him - instead of 
them worshipping his own heavenly father (that is, the Grandfather God of Jesus Christ).  The 
LDS believe in and teach the Atonement of Jesus Christ, but their Jesus is another Jesus - the 
first spirit child of heavenly parents. He too went on to become a God. Somehow Jesus became a 
God in spirit form without the need to come to an earth to get a mortal body, follow the plan of 
salvation, and participate in a celestial marriage.

If that viewpoint is false, then Latter-day Saints are worshipping a false god. If the LDS 
viewpoint is true, then many people are worshipping a false god.
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

If you think that famine (described in Amos 8:11) occurred predominantly between the last Old Testament prophet and the arrival of John the Baptist, do you believe that nobody read or pronounced scripture during that period of time?

There was a minority of believers that kept hope alive in a coming future Messiah. Some examples 
were Simeon (Luke 2:25-35),  the prophetess Anna (Luke 2:36-38), and Philip (John 1:43-51).
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

 Or was it the fact that there were no prophets during that time and the word of the Lord was no longer given?

We know of the prophetess Anna (mentioned above) but we have no records of new canon between 
Malachi and New Testament writings.
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

How is that any different than uninspired men claiming that God has said all that he is going to say and we have all of God’s word in the 66 books we now call “the Bible”, declaring (on God's behalf) that the canon of scripture is closed?

I don't believe God is finished saying all he is going to say but I don't believe we have to 
add sermons to the Bible to make it appear that the canon of scripture is still open.

If outsiders were to look at the LDS Church, they could say that the canon of scripture was 
closed since the last revelation was given in the Doctrine and Covenants way back in 1978.  
Not sure why Declarations 1 and 2 were added in those terms to reflect revelation from God 
when none of the other sections of the D&C are referred to as Declaration 1,2,3, all the way 
up to 138.

Then there's the Journal of Discourses. For some reason, they were not added to the canon - as 
if the words of those prophets were really not words from God.
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

The re-opening of the heavens and restoration of the fulness of the gospel came about through those of the tribe of Joseph, and this saved the earth from the “famine… of hearing the words of the Lord”, and that is part of the symbolism found in the life of Joseph (sold into Egypt) and the fulfillment of the work of his descendants in the latter-days.

The famine is people rejecting the words of the Lord already written in the Bible.

For those who believe in the extra books of canon in the LDS Church, the famine of hearing the 
supposed words of the Lord still exists today. Maybe there's a famine in the LDS Church today 
for not hearing the supposed words of the Lord through the supposed prophets who contributed 
to the Journal of Discourses. 
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

It’s that God foretold that Ephraim would be recovered, and not only recovered but they shall be mighty and be part of the gathering in the latter days.

Zechariah 10:1-12 is about the restoration of the houses of Judah and Israel. It's not about a 
gathering of Gentiles by the tribe of Ephraim. The gathering is mentioned in verse 10 - "I will 
bring them again also out of the land of Egypt, and gather them out of Assyria; and I will bring 
them into the land of Gilead and Lebanon; and place shall not be found for them".  It's a 
gathering of Israelites, not Gentiles.
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

So basically you are using the same out of context assumptions on Latter-day Saint quotations of 1 Peter 2:9 (which was quoting from Exodus 19:6) as you and others do when trying to come up with a "priesthood of all believers" from thin air.  Should I be surprised?

Before the Law was instituted, God had desired to make the Israelites (all of them, not just 
the men) into a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.  It's not some of you will be this while 
others of you will be that.  It's AND, not OR.

This is seen in Exodus 19:3-6:

And Moses went up unto God, and the LORD called unto him out of the mountain, saying, Thus shalt 
thou say to the house of Jacob, and tell the children of Israel; 

Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you 
unto myself. 

Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar 
treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: 

And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou 
shalt speak unto the children of Israel. 

In the New Testament, the holy priesthood is made up of believers who have these attributes:

Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up 
spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye 
should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous 
light: 

In computer lingo, these attributes are AND, not OR operators.

Please go through the verses above (Exodus 19:3-6; 1 Peter 2:5,9) and identify all words, 
descriptions, and actions that you believe are not applicable to faithful women.
 

On 8/18/2024 at 8:31 PM, InCognitus said:

  

These assumptions are taken fully out of context because the full context of the Old and New Testaments as well as the latter-day restoration of the priesthood shows that priesthood authority was administered to men by ordination "by the laying on of hands".  As I posted elsewhere:

• Jesus, while he was here in his mortal ministry, ordained the apostles and gave them authority (Mark 3:14, John 15:16).
• Paul (and Barnabas) were called to the work and set apart by the laying on of hands, having authority from the church to preach, in Acts 13:1-4.
• Paul promotes the practice of ordaining elders in every church as described in Acts 14:23.
• Paul later wrote to Timothy reminding him that he had a gift given him by prophecy, through the laying on the hands of the presbytery (1 Timothy 4:14)
• Paul also wrote to Titus, saying that he was also appointed to "ordain elders in every city" (Titus 1:5)

And you claim, without any biblical support whatsoever, that all of the above is not necessary, because anyone who believes in Christ has this priesthood authority simply because he (or she) believes it to be so?  I don't think so.

Doctrine and Covenants 50 teaches that only ordained people can preach the gospel. 

I'm assuming this includes female LDS missionaries. 

Verily I say unto you, he that is ordained of me and sent forth to preach the word of truth by 
the Comforter, in the Spirit of truth, doth he preach it by the Spirit of truth or some other 
way? (17)

And if it be by some other way it is not of God. (18)

He that is ordained of God and sent forth, the same is appointed to be the greatest, 
notwithstanding he is the least and the servant of all. (26)

Women in our church are sent out by the laying on of hands to preach the gospel but we don't 
really view this as a formal ordination like how the Catholic Church ordains male priests.

But if a female sister wanted to stand on Fifth Avenue and preach the gospel on a street corner 
by reading straight from the Bible, she would not need authorization from the church. 

Can you summarize what a male high priest in the LDS Church does for those who don't hold the 
priesthood?

[theplains]

On 8/19/2024 at 3:53 PM, CV75 said:

I understand this point of view, and also that Paul spoke of Jesus, Jews, Gentiles, himself and others commissioned out of tribe of Israel, and using Isaiah as support. 

Who do you believe Paul is referring to in Romans 15:12?

"And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over 
the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust".