- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I found it interesting what I could learn about those people who were alive at the time of Jesus Christ’s visit in the Americas. Old Testament Sacrifice Practice Believers– “And ye shall offer up unto me no more the shedding of blood; yea, your sacrifices and your burnt offerings shall be done away, for I will accept none of your sacrifices and your burnt offerings.” (3 Nephi 9:19) More Righteous – Not Murderers– “And it was the more righteous part of the people who were saved, and it was they who received the prophets and stoned them not; and it was they who had not shed the blood of the saints, who were spared-” ( 3 Nephi 10:12) Knowledge of the prophecies of Jesus Christ– (3 Nephi 11:12) NOTE: It might have been good people/saints/prophets cast out of the tribes and their hierarchies. The Nephi prophet of the time was called forth and given authority to baptize and preach by Jesus Christ.
I also think that there is a component of hope of these people in the sense that the people could transition from Old Testament offerings to the New Testament worship (3 Nephi 9:20) consisting of “a broken heart and a contrite spirit”.
Additional thoughts?
For me, I take hope that the wording clearly states that these people survived because they did not murder others (stone the prophets). It doesn’t state that they had a specific belief in the prophecies (though some of them would have). In fact, when Jesus Christ is talking to them he shifts them over to a higher law that includes shifting religious observance inwards instead of outwards.
I have a hard time with this concept. Entire cities destroyed in gruesome ways because of their unrighteousness. There is a hint that perhaps the cities cast the righteous out of their midst so that there were none remaining in the city (like the story of lot). There were several references to the wailing and despair of those that remained in mourning for their kindred dead. I imagine that most in that day had lost friends and loved ones.
One of the things that is sometimes said about the BoM is that it serves as a bridge between the OT and the NT. This is true chronologically (it covers the period after Malachi but before Matthew). This chapter reminds me that it also helps to meld the OT God (of wrath) with the NT God (of sustenance and forgiveness). After the cities are destroyed the voice of Jesus is heard lamenting their destruction.
Quote:4 O ye people of these great cities which have fallen, who are descendants of Jacob, yea, who are of the house of Israel, how oft have I gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and have nourished you.
5 And again, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, who have fallen; yea, O ye people of the house of Israel, ye that dwell at Jerusalem, as ye that have fallen; yea, how oft would I have gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens, and ye would not.
This is a God that speaks softly and carries a big stick. (Theodore Roosevelt)
I have trouble with it too, but from a more theological point of view. Bottom line is that I have trouble reconciling the Old Testament “God of Wrath” with the New Testament “God of Love.” I recognize each is existent in the other (love in the OT, wrath – at least promised – in the NT). And to top it off it’s all supposed to be the same guy!The BoM leans more heavily toward wrath from my point of view, although I clearly don’t read it as much as I “should” nor do I have a strong testimony of it. And, the BoM does seem to have quite a bit of grace in it as well. And then on the other hand (how many hands is that now?) if it’s all non-literal/symbolic/simile/metaphor/parable I guess who is who doesn’t really matter. Here is my take on it, from a non-literal view. Looking back on ancient Israel, they were God’s chosen people, and yet they got picked on, pushed around, beaten up, captured, enslaved, subjugated… and the only thing that got them through, was their belief that God would vindicate them.
Psalms 137 wrote:
By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof.For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion. How shall we sing the LORD’S song in a strange land? If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy. Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed;
happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
That’s one of the greatest appeals of all Abrahamic Religions; that God will one day smite and punish those who have wronged us (the wicked), and that all of our pains and sufferings will be made right and our righteousness rewarded. I think Joseph Smith strongly held that view. He suffered a lot, and his life ended tragically, yet he frequently pronounced the harshest heavenly judgement on all those who opposed him. It’s that belief, that helps many of the downtrodden to find peace and carry on.
dande48 wrote:
Here is my take on it, from a non-literal view.Looking back on ancient Israel, they were God’s chosen people, and yet they got picked on, pushed around, beaten up, captured, enslaved, subjugated… and the only thing that got them through, was their belief that God would vindicate them.
Psalms 137 wrote:
By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof.For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion. How shall we sing the LORD’S song in a strange land? If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy. Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof. O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed;
happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
That’s one of the greatest appeals of all Abrahamic Religions; that God will one day smite and punish those who have wronged us (the wicked), and that all of our pains and sufferings will be made right and our righteousness rewarded. I think Joseph Smith strongly held that view. He suffered a lot, and his life ended tragically, yet he frequently pronounced the harshest heavenly judgement on all those who opposed him. It’s that belief, that helps many of the downtrodden to find peace and carry on.
I agree with you, Dande, but I also think they’re all wrong for the same reason the Jews missed the Messiah the first time. Don’t get me wrong, I’m big into hope (see my signature line) and I think that’s the greatest thing about Christ’s earthly ministry. But I also think we all misunderstand justice.
I’m reminded of a Simpsons episode (they’ve probably covered everything by now). Marge: I thought you said the law was powerless.
Chief Wiggum: Powerless to help you, not punish you.
Literal event, non-divine intervention approach: History is written by the victors. Some crazy natural disasters went down, lots of people died, and it left the survivors dazed and grasping for reasons behind what had happened. They came up with an answer that they were spared because they were more righteous than the people that had died. They deceived themselves because they desperately wanted to believe that if they were righteous enough they could escape similar disasters in the future.
Literal event, divine intervention approach: Thanks but no thanks. It’s just that uh…, how do I put this… I’ve already got this other god that I’m seeing right now. Maybe if things don’t work out with them we can… no, you know what? I’m good.
Story approach: pretty much what dande48 said. A story written by people that find comfort in believing in the prosperity gospel and rely on belief in a just world/universe.
dande48 wrote:
That’s one of the greatest appeals of all Abrahamic Religions; that God will one day smite and punish those who have wronged us (the wicked), and that all of our pains and sufferings will be made right and our righteousness rewarded.
Historian Richard Bushman was asked about some of the questionable verses in the OT and he said something like the following, (paraphrase) “I try to be as charitable as I can with people whose lives must have been so hard as to take comfort in such things.”
This to me recognizes that the scriptures did not appear magically from heaven but were written by inspired individuals at least in part to fulfill the social, national, and spiritual needs of the day. We can acknowledge that and have some measure of charity towards them without thinking that their scriptures need to equally apply to all times and all places. There are many good and inspiring “timeless” principles. There is also much that is quite limited by time and place (racism, sexism, barbarism) that I will happily leave in the past.
Daily dose of humble pie, courtesy of Brother Bushman. Reminds me of an episode of Call the Midwife where the main character is despairing to a Parrish father over the living conditions of her impoverished patients. She tried to explain that she knows about poverty because of where she works. The Father explains that he doesn’t think she actually does know about it; being impoverished means you’ve never known love, to say nothing of respect. To not know the difference between manipulation and love is something most of us don’t experience. It stopped me in my tracks, er Netflix binge.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fwiw, thematically, the Book of Mormon is a lot like the Bible. The books prior to 3rd Nephi are a lot like the Old Testament, especially as it chronicles a “chosen people” who are split into warring tribes of cousins. Contextually, why would that be? Those were Old Testament, pre-Christ years. 3rd Nephi is like the Gospels. Why? It covers Christ’s lifetime years. 4th Nephi is like Paul’s early epistles (especially a longer version of Acts, during the heyday of unity). Why? It follows Christ’s time with the people. The last books are a lot like the later espistles, as Paul struggled with schisms and dissension, and the apocalyptic visions of Revelations. God also is portrayed quite differently by various prophets over the course of the book, just like In the Bible.
It is interesting to look at it that way.
Old Timer wrote:
Fwiw, thematically, the Book of Mormon is a lot like the Bible. The books prior to 3rd Nephi are a lot like the Old Testament, especially as it chronicles a “chosen people” who are split into warring tribes of cousins. Contextually, why would that be? Those were Old Testament, pre-Christ years. 3rd Nephi is like the Gospels. Why? It covers Christ’s lifetime years. 4th Nephi is like Paul’s early epistles (especially a longer version of Acts, during the heyday of unity). Why? It follows Christ’s time with the people. The last books are a lot like the later espistles, as Paul struggled with schisms and dissension, and the apocalyptic visions of Revelations.God also is portrayed quite differently by various prophets over the course of the book, just like In the Bible.
It is interesting to look at it that way.
I like that – thank you!I have come to the conclusion myself that from Mosiah on (especially the war chapters in Alma) we are getting the themes, stories, and narrative from a war-wary general – so there is going to be a lot of black and white thinking, and the key points/connections are going to be from that perspective. Mormon theoretically had entire libraries of information to go through and condense down to what we got – so it is likely that there was an unconscious bias towards things he understood and could use as building blocks for the stories in the Book of Mormon.
Quote:Behold, that great city Zarahemla have I burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof.
And behold, that great city Moroni have I caused to be sunk in the depths of the sea, and the inhabitants thereof to be drowned.
And behold, that great city Moronihah have I covered with earth, and the inhabitants thereof, to hide their iniquities and their abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come any more unto me against them.
And behold, the city of Gilgal have I caused to be sunk, and the inhabitants thereof to be buried up in the depths of the earth;
Yea, and the city of Onihah and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Mocum and the inhabitants thereof, and the city of Jerusalem and the inhabitants thereof; and waters have I caused to come up in the stead thereof, to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints shall not come up any more unto me against them.
And behold, the city of Gadiandi, and the city of Gadiomnah, and the city of Jacob, and the city of Gimgimno, all these have I caused to be sunk, and made hills and valleys in the places thereof; and the inhabitants thereof have I buried up in the depths of the earth, to hide their wickedness and abominations from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints should not come up any more unto me against them.
And behold, that great city Jacobugath, which was inhabited by the people of king Jacob, have I caused to be burned with fire because of their sins and their wickedness, which was above all the wickedness of the whole earth, because of their secret murders and combinations; for it was they that did destroy the peace of my people and the government of the land; therefore I did cause them to be burned, to destroy them from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints should not come up unto me any more against them.
And behold, the city of Laman, and the city of Josh, and the city of Gad, and the city of Kishkumen, have I caused to be burned with fire, and the inhabitants thereof, because of their wickedness in casting out the prophets, and stoning those whom I did send to declare unto them concerning their wickedness and their abominations.
And because they did cast them all out, that there were none righteous among them, I did send down fire and destroy them, that their wickedness and abominations might be hid from before my face, that the blood of the prophets and the saints whom I sent among them might not cry unto me from the ground against them.
And many great destructions have I caused to come upon this land, and upon this people, because of their wickedness and their abominations.
O all ye that are spared because ye were more righteous than they, will ye not now return unto me, and repent of your sins, and be converted, that I may heal you?
This shortly before his resurrection but well after the entirety of his mortal ministry. Jesus must have hit a rough patch during the transition from being an OT god to a NT god.
I guess there’s always a period of transition where things are getting ironed out. Also, I believe that in JS’s zeal to restore
allthings he inadvertently restored many OT views that were meant to be buried in the past. nibbler wrote:
This shortly before his resurrection but well after the entirety of his mortal ministry. Jesus must have hit a rough patch during the transition from being an OT god to a NT god.
I’ve often heard this, that God changed his approach after the “atonement”, to be a more loving and forgiving God… But looking at Christian history, it looks like God didn’t mellow until the reformation. Not to mention, the major transition’s He’s undertaken in the past 100 years.
Which makes me wonder, who was setting the bar for Godhood, when Heavenly Father reached His exaltation? It feel’s like He’s had plenty of learning and growing to do. Thank goodness he has such wonderful children to teach Him.
dande48 wrote:
I’ve often heard this, that God changed his approach after the “atonement”, to be a more loving and forgiving God… But looking at Christian history, it looks like God didn’t mellow until the reformation. Not to mention, the major transition’s He’s undertaken in the past 100 years.Which makes me wonder, who was setting the bar for Godhood, when Heavenly Father reached His exaltation? It feel’s like He’s had plenty of learning and growing to do. Thank goodness he has such wonderful children to teach Him.
My family found a science fiction/fantasy series about a human who was transitioned over into being a human entity in a space ship body sent to find other places for humanity to colonize safely. In the story, he winds up discovering and “shepherding” a post-fire pre-spear civilization – and quite a few adventures the human and the civilization have are based on the extermination of threats to the civilization and then have others unexpectedly show up. My description is poor, but it has given me food for thought about godhood…
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.