Sermon on the Mount - two messages for different groups?

[marineland]

I'm into lesson 22 of the Religion 275 class manual.  

Page 104 - Remind students that when the resurrected Savior appeared to His people at the
temple in Bountiful, He delivered a sermon that was similar to His biblical Sermon
on the Mount. 
 

One difference I observe from the Book of Mormon is it adds words that are not found
in the Bible, thus splitting Christ's message between two groups in the audience.

The records indicate that Jesus manifested himself to the Nephites and commences speaking 
to the entire congregation (as recounted in 3 Nephi 11:9). However, in 3 Nephi 11:18-41, 
it appears that his discourse is directed primarily towards Nephi and the eleven. Verse 
41 directs them to convey this message to the multitude (as outlined in verses 29-40). 
Moving on to 3 Nephi 12:1, Jesus resumes addressing the multitude, including, it seems, 
the twelve disciples. Then, in 3 Nephi 13:25-34, he shifts to giving instructions 
specifically to the twelve disciples.

The Book of Mormon's version of 3 Nephi 13:25-26 is different from Matthew 6:25-26. In 
3 Nephi 14:1-2 (also departing from Matthew 7:1-2), Jesus ends his conversation with the 
twelve and turns and speaks to the multitude.

There is no indication in Matthew 7:1-2 that Jesus shifts his audience. According to the
Bible, he continues delivering the rest of his message to the multitude seamlessly, maintaining 
the flow from the previous chapter (Matthew 6).

Regarding baptism, 3 Nephi 11:21 says the Lord gave Nephi power to baptize the people after 
he ascended back into heaven.  But Nephi was already baptizing and ordaining people before 
this (3 Nephi 7:24-26).  

Wasn't he authorized to baptize before, or was he using the wrong method (sprinkling as 
opposed to immersion), or was he using incorrect words?

3 Nephi 11:22 says the Lord called others and also gave them the power to baptize the people. 
3 Nephi 11:28 indicates they were doing improper baptisms because disputations rose among 
them regarding the method and other points of doctrine.  But I couldn't determine the time
frame (year ? B.C. or year ? A.D) for the start of this baptism-related apostasy among the 
Nephites.

[ZealouslyStriving]

18 minutes ago, marineland said:

Regarding baptism, 3 Nephi 11:21 says the Lord gave Nephi power to baptize the people after 
he ascended back into heaven.  But Nephi was already baptizing and ordaining people before 
this (3 Nephi 7:24-26).  

Wasn't he authorized to baptize before, or was he using the wrong method (sprinkling as 
opposed to immersion), or was he using incorrect words?

They were reaffirming their commitment to the covenant made alive through the Atonement of Jesus:

1 And now I speak concerning baptism. Behold, elders, priests, and teachers were baptized; and they were not baptized save they brought forth fruit meet that they were worthy of it. (Moroni 6)

*There are also examples in Church history of "reformations" where the Saints rededicated themselves to the Covenant through rebaptism. I think it happened twice under Brigham.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

They were reaffirming their commitment to the covenant made alive through the Atonement of Jesus:

1 And now I speak concerning baptism. Behold, elders, priests, and teachers were baptized; and they were not baptized save they brought forth fruit meet that they were worthy of it. (Moroni 6)

*There are also examples in Church history of "reformations" where the Saints rededicated themselves to the Covenant through rebaptism. I think it happened twice under Brigham.

They did it when they entered the Salt Lake Valley.  I think they did it during the retrenchment period, but can’t say for sure.

Baptism, as in being immersed in water by a priesthood holder with a blessing, can be used for more than reason in our faith.  It was previously used for healing as well.  For whatever reason, leadership decided to limit it by policy to one type of ordinance, which is appropriate in my view since there are other ways to achieve what they were using rebaptism for, such as healing blessings and the Sacrament.  My guess is there are a couple of reasons they limited it, but the most important one of them was most likely to focus on the covenant aspect of baptism.  This is also how we teach the Sacrament to primary kids, though we begin by teaching it is about thinking about Jesus, which is a very good first step, imo.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/behold-your-little-ones-nursery-manual/lesson-27-the-sacrament-helps-me-think-about-jesus-christ?lang=eng#figure1_p1

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/come-follow-me-for-primary-new-testament-2023/54-preparing-children?lang=eng#title17

[CV75]

3 hours ago, marineland said:

I'm into lesson 22 of the Religion 275 class manual.  

Page 104 - Remind students that when the resurrected Savior appeared to His people at the
temple in Bountiful, He delivered a sermon that was similar to His biblical Sermon
on the Mount. 
 

One difference I observe from the Book of Mormon is it adds words that are not found
in the Bible, thus splitting Christ's message between two groups in the audience.

The records indicate that Jesus manifested himself to the Nephites and commences speaking 
to the entire congregation (as recounted in 3 Nephi 11:9). However, in 3 Nephi 11:18-41, 
it appears that his discourse is directed primarily towards Nephi and the eleven. Verse 
41 directs them to convey this message to the multitude (as outlined in verses 29-40). 
Moving on to 3 Nephi 12:1, Jesus resumes addressing the multitude, including, it seems, 
the twelve disciples. Then, in 3 Nephi 13:25-34, he shifts to giving instructions 
specifically to the twelve disciples.

The Book of Mormon's version of 3 Nephi 13:25-26 is different from Matthew 6:25-26. In 
3 Nephi 14:1-2 (also departing from Matthew 7:1-2), Jesus ends his conversation with the 
twelve and turns and speaks to the multitude.

There is no indication in Matthew 7:1-2 that Jesus shifts his audience. According to the
Bible, he continues delivering the rest of his message to the multitude seamlessly, maintaining 
the flow from the previous chapter (Matthew 6).

Regarding baptism, 3 Nephi 11:21 says the Lord gave Nephi power to baptize the people after 
he ascended back into heaven.  But Nephi was already baptizing and ordaining people before 
this (3 Nephi 7:24-26).  

Wasn't he authorized to baptize before, or was he using the wrong method (sprinkling as 
opposed to immersion), or was he using incorrect words?

3 Nephi 11:22 says the Lord called others and also gave them the power to baptize the people. 
3 Nephi 11:28 indicates they were doing improper baptisms because disputations rose among 
them regarding the method and other points of doctrine.  But I couldn't determine the time
frame (year ? B.C. or year ? A.D) for the start of this baptism-related apostasy among the 
Nephites.

Noah , Nehor and Zoramites led corrupt churches in the BC era. Alma's mission was to correct the affairs of many churches in several places (begins in Alma 6 for several chapters and resumes in 31) in the BC era. The mode of baptism isn't mentioned specifically in these missions, but neither does 3 Nephi 11:28 require it, as the second sentence in 28 refers first to disputations in general, and then to points of doctrine, and overall points to contention:

28 And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no ^adisputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been.

29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of ^acontention is not of me, but is of the ^bdevil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.

The record from Samuel through the arrival of the resurrected Christ is full of examples of a corrupted society and its churches.

 

 

 

[california boy]

28 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Noah , Nehor and Zoramites led corrupt churches in the BC era. Alma's mission was to correct the affairs of many churches in several places (begins in Alma 6 for several chapters and resumes in 31) in the BC era. The mode of baptism isn't mentioned specifically in these missions, but neither does 3 Nephi 11:28 require it, as the second sentence in 28 refers first to disputations in general, and then to points of doctrine, and overall points to contention:

28 And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no ^adisputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been.

29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of ^acontention is not of me, but is of the ^bdevil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.

The record from Samuel through the arrival of the resurrected Christ is full of examples of a corrupted society and its churches.

Maybe we should move this quote over the the Church Finance thread.  

[CV75]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

Maybe we should move this quote over the the Church Finance thread.  

Ha ha glad I wasn't drawn into that one!

[The Nehor]

8 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

They were reaffirming their commitment to the covenant made alive through the Atonement of Jesus:

1 And now I speak concerning baptism. Behold, elders, priests, and teachers were baptized; and they were not baptized save they brought forth fruit meet that they were worthy of it. (Moroni 6)

*There are also examples in Church history of "reformations" where the Saints rededicated themselves to the Covenant through rebaptism. I think it happened twice under Brigham.

It also wasn’t always a general thing. Sometimes people would be rebaptized before marriage or before other big life events or just as part of a personal rededication. Some restorationist offshoots still do rebaptisms.

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

Ha ha glad I wasn't drawn into that one!

I was about to mention that Nehor was there, he would know. 

[The Nehor]

17 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I was about to mention that Nehor was there, he would know. 

The investments that were kept in my name was simply being kept as a rainy day fund to maintain the ability to handle our church in a time of crisis. Rumors that Lamanite kings contributed to said fund are greatly exaggerated and they had no say in the day to day operations of my church. 

Edited April 17, 2024 by The Nehor

[InCognitus]

On 4/16/2024 at 9:43 AM, marineland said:

I'm into lesson 22 of the Religion 275 class manual.  

Page 104 - Remind students that when the resurrected Savior appeared to His people at the
temple in Bountiful, He delivered a sermon that was similar to His biblical Sermon
on the Mount. 
 

One difference I observe from the Book of Mormon is it adds words that are not found
in the Bible, thus splitting Christ's message between two groups in the audience.

The records indicate that Jesus manifested himself to the Nephites and commences speaking 
to the entire congregation (as recounted in 3 Nephi 11:9). However, in 3 Nephi 11:18-41, 
it appears that his discourse is directed primarily towards Nephi and the eleven. Verse 
41 directs them to convey this message to the multitude (as outlined in verses 29-40). 

But none of the above has anything to do with the portions of the Savior's sermon that are parallel to the sermon on the mount.  As the manual Religion 275 manual states:  "3 Nephi 12:1–16, 43–45; 13:1, 5–7, 16–18, 22–24, 33; 14:1–5, 21–27 - Christ’s sermon at the temple in Bountiful teaches us how to be like Him".  The sermon on the mount portion doesn't start until chapter 12.

On 4/16/2024 at 9:43 AM, marineland said:

The Book of Mormon's version of 3 Nephi 13:25-26 is different from Matthew 6:25-26. In 
3 Nephi 14:1-2 (also departing from Matthew 7:1-2), Jesus ends his conversation with the 
twelve and turns and speaks to the multitude.

That the Book of Mormon version is differing from Matthew on those verses shows that the Book of Mormon account is far more aware of the context of that sermon than was included in Matthew.  The Book of Mormon account reads as follows in those verses:

"And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words he looked upon the twelve whom he had chosen, and said unto them: Remember the words which I have spoken. For behold, ye are they whom I have chosen to minister unto this people. Therefore I say unto you, take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?  Behold the fowls of the air, for they sow not, neither do they reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?"  (3 Nephi 13:25-26)

Compare the above to the context that Luke includes for this same portion of the sermon, in Luke 12:22-24, where Jesus shifts his focus of his discussion from "the innumerable multitude of people" that had gathered (Luke 12:1) to his disciples:

"And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on.  The life is more than meat, and the body is more than raiment.  Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls?"  (Luke 12:22–24)

On 4/16/2024 at 9:43 AM, marineland said:

There is no indication in Matthew 7:1-2 that Jesus shifts his audience. According to the
Bible, he continues delivering the rest of his message to the multitude seamlessly, maintaining 
the flow from the previous chapter (Matthew 6).

Yes, Matthew left that part out.  But there is clearly an indication that Jesus shifted his audience in the account provided by Luke.

On 4/16/2024 at 9:43 AM, marineland said:

Regarding baptism, 3 Nephi 11:21 says the Lord gave Nephi power to baptize the people after 
he ascended back into heaven.  But Nephi was already baptizing and ordaining people before 
this (3 Nephi 7:24-26).  

Wasn't he authorized to baptize before, or was he using the wrong method (sprinkling as 
opposed to immersion), or was he using incorrect words?

This commentary explains it quite well, from Joseph F. McConkie, Robert L. Millet, and Brent L. Top, volume 4 of Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon:

Quote

21-26.  Reading these verses, one may wonder whether Nephi did not already have priesthood authority and whether the ordinance of baptism was not already being practiced among the Nephites. The answer to both questions would be yes. Nephi already had authority, and baptism was already being practiced.

The doctrinal significance of these verses is not merely to reiterate the importance of baptism by the proper priesthood authority but rather to demonstrate the establishment of a new gospel dispensation among the Nephites and the accompanying ordinations and ordinances that a new dispensation necessitated. Of the events described in these verses, President Joseph Fielding Smith taught: “There is nothing strange in the fact that when the Lord came to the Nephites, Nephi was baptized and so was everybody else although they had been baptized before. The Church among the Nephites before the coming of Christ was not in its fulness and was under the law of Moses. The Savior restored the fulness and gave them all the ordinances and blessings of the gospel. Therefore, it actually became a new organization, and through baptism they came into it.

We have a similar condition in this dispensation. The Prophet Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery were baptized by command of the Angel John the Baptist. Several others were baptized before the organization of the Church. However, on the day the Church was organized, all who had been previously baptized were baptized again, not for the remission of sins, but for entrance into the Church. In each case the reason was the same.” (Answers to Gospel Questions 3:205-6; see also 4:96-97.)

21.  I give unto you power] Nephi was not being given any additional priesthood by the Lord, but rather he was receiving new authority to perform ordinances associated with the “new organization” that Christ established among them. With “old things” done away, Nephi was given power and authority to administer in the “new things” in a dispensation with the fulness of gospel ordinances. Nephi, in turn, was then able to ordain (or in our terminology “set apart”) others to establish and set in order this new Church.

Joseph Fielding McConkie, Robert L. Millet, Brent L. Top, Doctrinal Commentary on the Book of Mormon, Vol. 4, p. 55-56

 

Edited April 20, 2024 by InCognitus

[marineland]

On 4/19/2024 at 10:32 PM, InCognitus said:

Compare the above to the context that Luke includes for this same portion of the sermon, in Luke 12:22-24, where Jesus shifts his focus of his discussion from "the innumerable multitude of people" that had gathered (Luke 12:1) to his disciples:

Luke 12 is not the Sermon on the Mount.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, marineland said:

Luke 12 is not the Sermon on the Mount.

No, but the portion he is comparing is the same and indicates that it was customary to periodically switch His instruction between the more general audience and the twelve disciples.

It makes sense to me that the Sermon on the Mount was given many times, and Jesus repeated varying portions at varying times. during His mortal ministry. It makes sense that He would repeat it again in Jerusalem before His Ascension, and  given that there were many sheep scattered across the world, wherever He visited these various groups after that.

What do you make of the Book of Mormon account, as you put it, "splitting Christ's message between two groups in the audience"? The disciples heard everything.

[marineland]

On 4/23/2024 at 6:31 PM, CV75 said:

What do you make of the Book of Mormon account, as you put it, "splitting Christ's message between two groups in the audience"? The disciples heard everything.

Joseph Smith added extra sentences to the JST which are different from how the
Greek manuscript of Matthew's account has it.

"And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words he looked
upon the twelve whom he had chosen, and said unto them: Remember the words
which I have spoken. For behold, ye are they whom I have chosen to minister
unto this people. Therefore I say unto you ..." [the twelve]

The online version of the Bible of Matthew 6:25 does not have this.

Edited April 25, 2024 by marineland

[ZealouslyStriving]

8 minutes ago, marineland said:

Joseph Smith added extra sentences to the JST which are different from how the
Greek manuscript of Matthew's account has it.

"And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words he looked
upon the twelve whom he had chosen, and said unto them: Remember the words
which I have spoken. For behold, ye are they whom I have chosen to minister
unto this people. Therefore I say unto you ..." [the twelve]

The online version of the Bible of Matthew 6:25 does not have this.

And? 🤷‍♀️

[CV75]

1 hour ago, marineland said:

Joseph Smith added extra sentences to the JST which are different from how the
Greek manuscript of Matthew's account has it.

"And now it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words he looked
upon the twelve whom he had chosen, and said unto them: Remember the words
which I have spoken. For behold, ye are they whom I have chosen to minister
unto this people. Therefore I say unto you ..." [the twelve]

The online version of the Bible of Matthew 6:25 does not have this.

And what do you make of that?

[marineland]

On 4/25/2024 at 10:23 AM, CV75 said:

And what do you make of that?

@ZealouslyStriving

I was just making the statement that Smith added things which were not there
in the Greek.

Edited April 27, 2024 by marineland

[CV75]

35 minutes ago, marineland said:

@ZealouslyStriving

I was just making the statement that Smith added things which were not there
in the Greek.

Why is this significant, or important?

[marineland]

On 4/27/2024 at 11:05 AM, CV75 said:

Why is this significant, or important?

He casts doubt on the Bible when he does this.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, marineland said:

He casts doubt on the Bible when he does this.

Only for certain views of the Bible, such as it’s inerrant.

[CV75]

3 hours ago, marineland said:

He casts doubt on the Bible when he does this.

The existence of two accounts never had the effect on me of doubting the Bible, so such a thing never, ever crossed my mind. How does it for you, or how do you think it does for others?

For me, they are two separate events recorded and translated in ways that resulted in two separate transmissions and witnesses. I take them both as authentically of God and to generate faith in Christ and represent His teachings. While there are obvious differences in place/time/audience, etc., do you see contradictions on points of faith or doctrine between the Matthew and 3 Nephi accounts and their messages, and if so, what are they?

As a side question, is it reasonable that the Lord would not teach the same things as recorded in Mathew 5 - 7 but in other settings?

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, CV75 said:

The existence of two accounts never had the effect on me of doubting the Bible, so such a thing never, ever crossed my mind. How does it for you, or how do you think it does for others?

There are already plenty of contradictions between accounts in the Bible.

[marineland]

On 4/30/2024 at 2:06 PM, CV75 said:

The existence of two accounts never had the effect on me of doubting the Bible, so such a thing never, ever crossed my mind. How does it for you, or how do you think it does for others?

For me, they are two separate events recorded and translated in ways that resulted in two separate transmissions and witnesses. I take them both as authentically of God and to generate faith in Christ and represent His teachings. While there are obvious differences in place/time/audience, etc., do you see contradictions on points of faith or doctrine between the Matthew and 3 Nephi accounts and their messages, and if so, what are they?

As a side question, is it reasonable that the Lord would not teach the same things as recorded in Mathew 5 - 7 but in other settings?

It's reasonable to expect that the Lord might impart similar or varied teachings 
in different contexts.

Upon examining Matthew 5-7 alongside 3 Nephi chapters 13 and 14, I couldn't help 
but notice a discrepancy. While both narratives feature both the crowd and the 
twelve disciples, the account in the Book of Mormon depicts Jesus delivering one 
message to the twelve, another to both the twelve and the crowd, and then having 
the twelve relay to the audience what Jesus had specifically told them. Conversely, 
in the Bible, the message is consistent, imparted to both the audience and the 
disciples simultaneously.

In the Sermon on the Mount, there's a singular transmission and a unified witness. 
The idea of separate transmissions and witnesses would make more sense if, after 
delivering the sermon, Jesus had instructed each of his twelve disciples to visit 
different villages in Israel and convey precisely what he had taught them in that 
earlier setting.

Perhaps Joseph Smith included additional text because he believed the Greek
manuscript lacked accuracy in that particular account.

[CV75]

2 hours ago, marineland said:

It's reasonable to expect that the Lord might impart similar or varied teachings 
in different contexts.

Upon examining Matthew 5-7 alongside 3 Nephi chapters 13 and 14, I couldn't help 
but notice a discrepancy. While both narratives feature both the crowd and the 
twelve disciples, the account in the Book of Mormon depicts Jesus delivering one 
message to the twelve, another to both the twelve and the crowd, and then having 
the twelve relay to the audience what Jesus had specifically told them. Conversely, 
in the Bible, the message is consistent, imparted to both the audience and the 
disciples simultaneously.

In the Sermon on the Mount, there's a singular transmission and a unified witness. 
The idea of separate transmissions and witnesses would make more sense if, after 
delivering the sermon, Jesus had instructed each of his twelve disciples to visit 
different villages in Israel and convey precisely what he had taught them in that 
earlier setting.

Perhaps Joseph Smith included additional text because he believed the Greek
manuscript lacked accuracy in that particular account.

On what basis do you suggest that Joseph Smith came up with 3 Nephi 12 – 14 because he believed the Greek manuscript lacked accuracy, and that as a result of this, the existence of the 3 Nephi account casts doubt on the Bible? 

Matthew allows for Jesus instructing the twelve disciples to visit different villages in Israel and convey what He taught, including Chapters 5 - 7 and elsewhere, and in private (Chapters 10 and 13 for example).

[marineland]

On 5/2/2024 at 1:53 PM, CV75 said:

On what basis do you suggest that Joseph Smith came up with 3 Nephi 12 – 14 because he believed the Greek manuscript lacked accuracy, and that as a result of this, the existence of the 3 Nephi account casts doubt on the Bible? 

It's an opinion based on Joseph's version adding  sentences which are not there.

I recently received this book from Amazon.

Joseph Smith made significant additions and modifications to the Hebrew and Greek 
manuscripts in his new translation of the Bible. Whole pages are literally added 
to Genesis. The differences are displayed with the use of columns. The newer 
editions are a few hundred pages larger after they added some extra topics: The 
Plan of Salvation, the Fall, etc.   ( ISBN-13 978-0830900329 )

On 5/2/2024 at 1:53 PM, CV75 said:

Matthew allows for Jesus instructing the twelve disciples to visit different villages in Israel and convey what He taught, including Chapters 5 - 7 and elsewhere, and in private (Chapters 10 and 13 for example).

I wonder if all the hundreds of Quorums of the Seventies in the LDS Church do the
same.

[ZealouslyStriving]

Joseph corrected some passages and added additional details through inspiration and revelation- not because he had any familiarity with the Greek and decided it was wrong.

He didn't start learning Hebrew until he had done most of the work he did on the Inspired Version.