This week's reading covers the tree of life.
"Tree of life" has an unusual distribution in the scriptures. If you use Wordcruncher, type it in and you'll get the result below. (If you don't use Wordcruncher, you should.)
https://wordcruncher.com/
The phrase "fruit of the tree of life" appears only in the Book of Mormon.
This is interesting because Jonathan Edwards uses the phrase many times as well.
_____
Another part of the lesson discusses 1 Nephi 9.
This traditional interpretation raises several questions that we can discuss briefly. An alternative interpretation, in my view, makes more sense.
1. Predestination? The traditional interpretation frames this passage as the Lord providing a replacement for the lost 116 pages, centuries before Martin Harris committed the deed. If that's the case, did Martin have any choice in the matter? Do any of us? I think we do, and that's one reason why I don't accept the traditional interpretation.
2. Not an exact match. The small plates of Nephi were not an exact match to the 116 pages anyway. The Lord told Joseph to translate until he came to the account of King Benjamin, which was right where the 116 pages ended. That implies there was some overlap between the plates of Nephi and the abridgment.
3. Plates needed? The seer/peep stone-in-a-hat narrative claims Joseph didn't refer to the plates while translating. If that's the case, why would the Lord have to provide these separate plates of Nephi? Whoever was capable of putting the words on the stone would presumably have the power to relate Nephi's account, even if that entity could not (for some reason) replicate the wording from the first time through the Book of Lehi.
4. Critics. The critics say Joseph Smith invented the plates of Nephi because he knew he could not reproduce, word-for-word, his original dictation. That's a reasonable observation, assuming Joseph was merely reading words that appeared on a stone. If Joseph was translating, as he said he was, then an exact replication would be essentially impossible.
_____
Alternative interpretation
I interpret 1 Nephi 8 as a command from the Lord to keep a sacred history. It's no more complicated or metaphysical than that.
The original records Mormon abridged were in the repository of Nephite artifacts in the Hill Cumorah. It wouldn't matter what pages of translation Joseph might have lost; the originals were all available, not far away.
Everything in the Book of Mormon had double coverage, we could say.
Mormon's explanation of the plates of Nephi, that he would keep them with his other plates and write his history upon them, explains the importance of the record--then and now.
"Tree of life" has an unusual distribution in the scriptures. If you use Wordcruncher, type it in and you'll get the result below. (If you don't use Wordcruncher, you should.)
https://wordcruncher.com/
The phrase "fruit of the tree of life" appears only in the Book of Mormon.
_____
Another part of the lesson discusses 1 Nephi 9.
Why did Nephi make two sets of plates?
The Lord’s “wise purpose” in having Nephi create two records became clear centuries later. After Joseph Smith translated the first 116 manuscript pages of the Book of Mormon, he gave the pages to Martin Harris, who lost them (see Doctrine and Covenants 10:1–23). But Nephi’s second set of plates covered the same time period, and the Lord commanded Joseph Smith to translate these plates rather than retranslate what had been lost (see Doctrine and Covenants 10:38–45).
For more about the plates mentioned in 1 Nephi 9, see “A Brief Explanation about the Book of Mormon”; 1 Nephi 19:1–5; 2 Nephi 5:29–32; and Words of Mormon 1:3–9.
This traditional interpretation raises several questions that we can discuss briefly. An alternative interpretation, in my view, makes more sense.
1. Predestination? The traditional interpretation frames this passage as the Lord providing a replacement for the lost 116 pages, centuries before Martin Harris committed the deed. If that's the case, did Martin have any choice in the matter? Do any of us? I think we do, and that's one reason why I don't accept the traditional interpretation.
2. Not an exact match. The small plates of Nephi were not an exact match to the 116 pages anyway. The Lord told Joseph to translate until he came to the account of King Benjamin, which was right where the 116 pages ended. That implies there was some overlap between the plates of Nephi and the abridgment.
3. Plates needed? The seer/peep stone-in-a-hat narrative claims Joseph didn't refer to the plates while translating. If that's the case, why would the Lord have to provide these separate plates of Nephi? Whoever was capable of putting the words on the stone would presumably have the power to relate Nephi's account, even if that entity could not (for some reason) replicate the wording from the first time through the Book of Lehi.
4. Critics. The critics say Joseph Smith invented the plates of Nephi because he knew he could not reproduce, word-for-word, his original dictation. That's a reasonable observation, assuming Joseph was merely reading words that appeared on a stone. If Joseph was translating, as he said he was, then an exact replication would be essentially impossible.
_____
Alternative interpretation
I interpret 1 Nephi 8 as a command from the Lord to keep a sacred history. It's no more complicated or metaphysical than that.
The original records Mormon abridged were in the repository of Nephite artifacts in the Hill Cumorah. It wouldn't matter what pages of translation Joseph might have lost; the originals were all available, not far away.
Everything in the Book of Mormon had double coverage, we could say.
Mormon's explanation of the plates of Nephi, that he would keep them with his other plates and write his history upon them, explains the importance of the record--then and now.
Brother Neville, are all your readers comments welcome?
ReplyDeleteI ask, because I read your Captain Moroni's blogpost from Jan 23, which was directly on the topic of "come Follow Me," and was concerned about what appeared to be your attempt to sow seeds of doubt among your readers. I attempted to comment on my concerns, but alas you, as moderator of the blog, apparently refused to publish it.
ReplyDeleteI'm shocked! You have repeatedly lamented the abominable practice M2C has of "censoring" your views, so I would have never imagined you would "censor" the views of a reputable follower of Christ whose opinions and views differed from your own. Isn't there a word for one who complains about another and then does the same thing himself?
At any rate, since you apparently hide behind the "moderator" shield it's clear you only want to hear "good news and public accolades." Apparently you prefer to give your orations in an echo chamber, and I can't blame you. It's certainly safer and more pleasing to the ear and the ego.
The post you censored was on a very sensitive subject: "Are you or are you not a critic of the Church who is with increasing fury sowing seeds of doubt among the Saints about their ability to know "who" speaks for God and "where" to find those truths."
I will attempt to cut and paste that censored post here - but alas, I know moderators have great power over the words of the humble follower, so my attempt may ultimately be foiled. But if that is what you do - just know the world is watching and will take note.
This was my post that you censored:
..................
Brother Neville
It seems you are determined to offer your faith filed readers only false, faithless choices. It is disingenuous for you to suggest, as you do in this blogpost, that if someone discovers a mistake or inclusion or omission in the material sent by today’s Prophets and Apostles to members around the world - that it is a sign the barbarians (M2C) are at the gate or that Prophets and Apostles don’t know what is going on…or they didn’t read it before it was published…or they didn’t approve publication…or it doesn’t represent their views, etc.
“And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ.” The title page of the Book of Mormon makes it clear misstatements or mistakes, even in scripture, can be made by anyone who labors for Zion. So I’m willing to give our current Prophets the benefit of the doubt and believe they are as concerned as anyone about the topic Elder Stevenson commented on.
You should take more care in what you write. Your post “condemns the things of God” in order to justify your paranoia about M2C and gain leverage for your ideological position that an evil cartel is out to get you and undermine Oliver Cowdery. The fact you are willing to throw our First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve and other General Authorities under the bus to advance the Heartland Movement is no credit to the Movement.
You ask “how did such an error show up in the most important manual of 2020” then answer your own question by laying the blame on the cartel that now includes “General Authorities” who are approving revisionist history because they are part of the cartel.
Are you even listening to yourself? You’re saying the Saints can’t trust the Brethren all of the time but they can always trust you! WOW!
This blogpost confirms to me that you are a critic of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and it’s leaders. It’s there in black and white. You are telling your readers they can’t trust some General Authorities because they have motives that fit with your conspiracy theories. Can you tell us which of the General Authorities that speak in the upcoming General Conference we can trust and which ones we should tune out because they are part of the conspiracy?
(but wait...there's more)
It’s pretty clear you are willing to create a division among the Saints by undermining unnamed Brethren we can’t trust - sowing seeds of doubt that weaken our confidence in living prophets - just so you can score cheap points for your conspiracy theories and Oliver Cowdery. It appears at this point there is little difference between you and Abner Cole or Eber Howe or (dare I say it) Oliver Cowdery...all critics of the Church.
ReplyDeleteThe obvious answer given by every faithful member of the Church to the question of how the error you referred to shows up in the most recent Come, Follow Me manual is the simplest answer (not the convoluted and conspiratorial answer you proffer) and is simply stated by a former member of the First Presidency: “There have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles or doctrine.” (President Dieter F. Uchtdorf)
Why can’t your blog EVER take the most faith filled course toward harmony and unity instead of continually criticizing the Church, its leaders or even it’s faithful, hardworking and devoted employees, for their failings? Why does it always have to be about M2C? Why can’t your writings fill our hearts with confidence in our dear Prophets today instead of promoting what those long-since dead supposedly said?
Jesus Christ stands at the head of the Church that bears His name, so your continuing drumbeat about faithless employees and conspiracies from within and Prophets and Apostles and Seventies who are ignoring you and Oliver Cowdery is simply a demonstration of your lack of faith in Him and His interest in preserving His Church. Do you think He wasn’t paying attention when that manual was written either? Do you think those “messengers” He called to teach His people weren’t minding the store? Are they just another example of subordinates who have gone rogue? You seem to have conveniently forgotten that He is currently in charge of this Church and He is not easy to deceive. He is the one who said His Church will roll forth to fill the whole earth - whether or not the prophets today “get it right” about a NY Cumorah.
As one who has spent almost four decades within the walls of the Church Office Building and Church Administration Building - not ever as an employee, but with callings and assignments form the First Presidency or Quorum of the Twelve - I can assure your readers that Satan himself is cheering wildly when he read what you have written today. Your closing comment at the end of your blogpost that it would be a mistake for the Saints to believe everything they read in Church manuals, the Ensign or Gospel Topics Essays is sure to make the Devil smile.
ReplyDeleteYou would rather have the Saints be forced to pick and choose which Brethren to believe; or which General Conference talks to listen to and which ones to tune out; or whether or not to study Come, Follow Me (because someone found a mistake there once); or whether or not to study the Ensign (because some of it might be M2C toxic or the artwork depicting palm trees is offensive; or whether or not to believe the Gospel Topics Essays are the words of Prophets and Apostles (instead of the frenzied mind of conspiratorial M2C supporters); etc.
The bottom line is that you are willing to sow seeds of doubt among the Latter-day Saints - seeds that will cause them to question “who” really speaks for the Lord and “where” they can find His word - for the simple purpose of advancing jyour ideology. Coincidently, that’s exactly what Satan is busy doing, but you will be pleased to know that he is doing just fine inthat regard and doesn’t need your help any longer. You are now free to devote your writings to topics and words that don’t throw living Prophets under the bus or condemn them (or their fellow-workers) for a word.
I am one of those countless souls you are condemning for a word. For more years than you have been alive countless, nameless disciples who were called of God by holy Prophets and Apostles have worked and labored, researched, created, drafted, edited, refined, discarded, started-over, and done everything in their power and under the power of Heaven to make an offering to the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve that would spark an affirmation from the Holy Ghost to THEM that it was a proper, sacred and acceptable offering they could make to HIM and thereafter publish to the world in HIS NAME.
How could you so thoughtlessly cast into doubt ALL the efforts of disciples and Prophets to make an acceptable offering to the Lord - just so you could score cheap points with your followers? Your words show utter contempt for the Lord and His laborers today.
I have been a steady of your blogs for over a year - but the heresy you are promoting in this post has crossed a line and classifies you as a “critic of the Church” and leads me to plead with you to stop this nonsense before you find yourself on the outside looking in.
Your stock is falling to a new low as your posts continue to disappoint those of us seeking to build our faith in Jesus Christ.
No “Huzzah for Zion” today.