What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4079

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by ransomme »

Bronco73idi wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:41 pm
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:09 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 26th, 2023, 4:51 pm

I asked for a link….
I asked for a turn key mountain retreat. Besides, the reply was to Luke. .
In another thread
I guess RMN was correct about lazy learners.

Original October 5th Joseph Smith journal entry
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... y-1844/123

1st draft manuscript changing Joseph's original journal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... r-1843/143

Final manuscript
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... l-1844/118

Published printing
https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-6-chapter-2

Bronco73idi
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3675

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Bronco73idi »

ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 11:34 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:41 pm
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:09 pm

I asked for a turn key mountain retreat. Besides, the reply was to Luke. .
In another thread
I guess RMN was correct about lazy learners.

Original October 5th Joseph Smith journal entry
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... y-1844/123

1st draft manuscript changing Joseph's original journal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... r-1843/143

Final manuscript
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... l-1844/118

Published printing
https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-6-chapter-2
When I provide quotes I try to post the link with it. Not everyone can be perfect like my clumpy dirt self.

Lol

Bronco73idi
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3675

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Bronco73idi »

ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 11:34 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:41 pm
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:09 pm

I asked for a turn key mountain retreat. Besides, the reply was to Luke. .
In another thread
I guess RMN was correct about lazy learners.

Original October 5th Joseph Smith journal entry
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... y-1844/123

1st draft manuscript changing Joseph's original journal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... r-1843/143

Final manuscript
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... l-1844/118

Published printing
https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-6-chapter-2
The last link was good, gives a nice review of the life in Nauvoo during that time.

His October 5 address on plurality of wives is well worded to say the least.

User avatar
Being There
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2952

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Being There »

John Tavner wrote: April 26th, 2023, 8:29 pm
JRM wrote: April 26th, 2023, 8:18 pm
John Tavner wrote: April 26th, 2023, 8:09 pm

Your BoM states that it is there to establish the Truth of hte First (Bible). Establish means to firm up to solidify, to confirm.. 2 Nephi 26. In fact I'll be so bold to state that an understanding of the BoM without a firm foundation in the Bible means you will have a wrong understanding of what hte Book of Mormon teaches. One can't "establish" truth unless they know what the truth is being taught.
Agreed, but the Book of Mormon tells us that there are plain and precious parts removed or altered in the Bible. Book of Mormon first and Bible second. If there are things in the Bible that aren’t quite right, go with the Book of Mormon. Your salvation will depend on it.

And, it isn’t my Book of Mormon. It is Christ’s.
Does not say altered, that is an interpolation of man/ false tradition. Only says plain and precious removed - plain and precious means somthing clear and valuable. - it doesn't mean that it is twisted or wrong. Mormonism has really twisted our view on the Bible to their own salvation's detriment- and I mean that because there are passages in the BoM that if read without the understanding of the Bible, leads to wrong theology. Bible is first, Book of Mormon second- it's why it says ANOTHER testament, not THE Testament- which is also somewhat wrong. because testametn means covenant. THe Bible shows the covenant God made with man through Christ, very clearly, without context of hte Bible, the BoM doesn't make much sense at all. Also it's why Joseph almost always quoted from the Bible.
Bible is first, Book of Mormon second
I know where you are coming from my friend -
and I agree with you on just how important the Bible is -
but I'm not so sure that we should put it above the book of Mormon -
for many reasons -
which to only name a few -

The Lord Himself put the church under condemnation for treating the Book of Mormon lightly.
( are you doing the same ? )

“Your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief,
and because you have treated lightly the things you have received
57 And they shall remain under this condemnation
until they repent and remember the new covenant,

even the Book of Mormon and the former
commandments which I have given them,
not only to say, but to do according to
that which I have written—

“I told the brethren,” he said, “that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”
Joseph Smith

User avatar
Being There
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2952

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Being There »

Being There wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:36 am
John Tavner wrote: April 26th, 2023, 8:29 pm
JRM wrote: April 26th, 2023, 8:18 pm
Agreed, but the Book of Mormon tells us that there are plain and precious parts removed or altered in the Bible. Book of Mormon first and Bible second. If there are things in the Bible that aren’t quite right, go with the Book of Mormon. Your salvation will depend on it.

And, it isn’t my Book of Mormon. It is Christ’s.
Does not say altered, that is an interpolation of man/ false tradition. Only says plain and precious removed - plain and precious means somthing clear and valuable. - it doesn't mean that it is twisted or wrong. Mormonism has really twisted our view on the Bible to their own salvation's detriment- and I mean that because there are passages in the BoM that if read without the understanding of the Bible, leads to wrong theology. Bible is first, Book of Mormon second- it's why it says ANOTHER testament, not THE Testament- which is also somewhat wrong. because testametn means covenant. THe Bible shows the covenant God made with man through Christ, very clearly, without context of hte Bible, the BoM doesn't make much sense at all. Also it's why Joseph almost always quoted from the Bible.
Bible is first, Book of Mormon second
I know where you are coming from my friend -
and I agree with you on just how important the Bible is -
but I'm not so sure that we should put it above the book of Mormon -
for many reasons -
which to only name a few -

The Lord Himself put the church under condemnation for treating the Book of Mormon lightly.
( are you doing the same ? )

“Your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief,
and because you have treated lightly the things you have received
57 And they shall remain under this condemnation
until they repent and remember the new covenant,

even the Book of Mormon and the former
commandments which I have given them,
not only to say, but to do according to
that which I have written—

“I told the brethren,” he said, “that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”
Joseph Smith
and when the rest of it comes - ( the sealed portion)
the words of Jesus Christ -
will you reject it, and the Lord's end-time servant - who brings it ?

quote


*****
The Father empowers a latter-day servant


""A Bible!, A Bible! We have got a Bible" is referring to the Words of Christ and the Brother of Jared's vision
(the sealed portion) that the end-time servant brings to us - the church - to all the Gentiles - they will reject him and Christ's words.
*** (please see below)

The Book of Mormon comes forth to try the Gentiles' faith:
it contains but the "lesser part" of Jesus' words to the Nephites.(3 Nephi 26:8).
If the Gentiles will believe that portion - the Book of Mormon -
the Lord will manifest to them the greater things also.(3 Nephi 26:9).
The Book of Mormon, the record of a fallen people, contains warnings to the Gentiles: Moroni adds to the Book of Mormon a brief history of the Jaredites, addressing his abridgment specifically to the Gentiles.(Eth. 2:11).
He interrupts his account four times to speak directly to the them. (Eth. 2:9-12; 4:6-5; 8:23-26; 12:6-41).
Moroni has seen the Gentiles in a vision.(Morm 8:35). He tells them, therefore, things they should know.
The nation that does not serve God will be swept off the land. (Eth 2:9-10).
The Gentiles should repent and become clean before the Lord. (Eth. 4:6).
They should not allow secret combinations to get above them. (Eth 8:23-25).
They must exercise faith as did the ancients. (Eth. 12:6-31).
They must have hope and charity. (Eth.12:36-37).


Two consecutive histories of fallen peoples on this land fore-warn
the Gentiles of their own imminent fate. (Eth. 2:11; 8:21-26).
Mormon has vividly described the destruction of the Nephites. (Morm. 6:1-22).
Now Moroni recounts the destruction of the Jaredites in order to persuade
the Gentiles to repent. (Eth. 2:11; 8:23).

The Lord bids the Gentiles to come unto him.(Eth. 4:13).
In him they may be cleansed and sanctified. (Eth. 4:6-7).
The two following parallel statements tell the Gentiles the cause of their unbelief. Rhetorical markers are "when ye shall" and "then shall".

Ether 4
15 Behold, when ye shall rend that veil of unbelief which doth cause you to remain in your awful state of wickedness, and hardness of heart, and blindness of mind, then shall the great and marvelous things which have been hid up from the foundation of the world from you—yea, when ye shall call upon the Father in my name, with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, then shallye know that the Father hath remembered the covenant which he made unto your fathers, O house of Israel.
16 And then shall my revelations which I have caused to be written by my servant John be unfolded in the eyes of all the people. (emphasis added (Italicized) "when ye shall" "then shall"


The parallel nature of this scripture reveals a deeper meaning.
It teaches that people can rend the veil of unbelief- which has caused
them to remain in an awful state of wickedness, hardness of heart, and blindness of mind - by calling on the Father in the name of Jesus with a broken heart and a a contrite spirit.

It further teaches that the great and marvelous things hidden up from the foundation of the world are the Father's fulfillment of his covenant with the house of Israel, as contained in the revelations of John. These great and marvelous things, however, have not yet been revealed.
As adverse as it may seem , we conclude from these scriptures, therefore, that many of us as Gentiles still remain in an awful state of wickedness. We have not yet rent the veil of our unbelief- we have not called upon the Father in the name of Jesus as we ought.
The Gentiles' rending of the veil is significant in this overall scripture.
Moroni has just shown us how the Brother of Jared "rent the veil".
The Lord now bids the Gentiles to do the same.
When they exercise faith as the Brother of Jared saw.
In other words, the Lord invites the Gentiles to make their calling and election sure by being received into his presences as the Brother of Jared was.
When they do that, he will reveal to them the "greater things", unfolding to them all his revelations.

The Lord's great and marvelous work typifies the greater things.
The Lord performs that work among the Gentiles.
To that end, he sends among them the three Nephite disciples. The great and marvelous work involves the coming forth of the words of Christ.

*****
The Father empowers a latter-day servant to bring forth the words of Christ to
the Gentiles. The servant is the light to the Gentiles. To him, they rally as to an ensign. When the Lord lifts up his hand and ensign to the Gentiles, they perform their saving mission to the house of Israel.
Through his latter-day servant, the Lord concludes His work among the Gentiles and commences His work among the house of Israel: as the Lord's covenant, light, and ensign, the servant personifies the gospel that has hitherto served as a "covenant", "light", and "standard" to the Gentiles, as the gospel has been a "messenger" preparing the way before the Lord, so the servant is a "messenger" who prepares the way before the Lord's coming to earth.


The Book of Mormon contains less than a hundredth part of Jesus' words to the Nephites. Yet, in the last days, the fullness of Jesus' words comes forth to the Gentiles in accordance with the servant's mission.
The plates of Nephi contain the greater part of what Jesus taught the people.
They, therefore, are among the "other books" to come forth. They "make known to all kindreds, tongues, and people, that the Lamb of God is the Son of the Eternal Father, and the Savior of the world".
They make known also the folly and abominations of the Gentiles.
Prophecies about the Gentiles in the latter days thus show two facets.
Those Gentiles who are under condemnation- which causes the Lord to withhold from them the greater things- will remain under condemnation if they do not repent.
For that reason, the Gentiles must turn from their evil ways.
Those Gentiles who make their calling and election sure, to whom the Lord reveals the greater things, do not, of course, represent all the Gentiles.
In the latter days, the gospel turns first to the Gentiles.
But when many of them reject it, the gospel turns to the Jews and other natural lineages of Israel.


***Moroni saw that many Gentiles would mock the Brother of Jared's vision.
Moroni writes that vision in the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon.
Many Gentiles too, will not believe the great and marvelous work - will not believe the words of Christ.
Of the words of Christ coming forth in the day, the Gentiles will say, "A Bible!, A Bible! We have got a Bible, and there cannot be any more Bible".
The Words of Christ and the Brother of Jared's vision cover the entire history of humanity. In that respect, they resemble the Bible more than the Book of Mormon does. The two full accounts will come forth to the Gentiles- when some Gentiles become sanctified as the Brother of Jared - and turn from the Gentiles to the house of Israel.

From these scriptures , we gain a clearer idea of how so many Gentiles will sin against the gospel of Jesus Christ .
They will disavow the new revelations the Lord will bring forth. Having formerly received the gospel, many Gentiles will now reject it. Instead of repenting of their iniquities, they will harden their hearts and deny the Lord of Hosts. Refusing to come unto Christ and obey his voice, these Gentiles will be as "salt that hath lost its savor".
At the time they reject the gospel, the wicked Gentiles are "lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations". They are "filled with all manner of lyings, and of deceits, and of mischiefs, and all manner of hypocrisy, and murders, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, and of secret abominations". Being "lifted up in the pride of their eyes", they "put down the power and miracles of God". Publishing for money, they "preach up unto themselves their own wisdom and their own learning, that they may get gain and grind upon the face of the poor".
(3 Nephi 16:10)

These Gentiles have no charity for their fellow beings. They don't thank the Jews nor Lehi's descendants for the scriptures they have received from them. Instead, they curse and hate them and will not recover them. (please see below *** (A) )
The Lord lengthens out his arm to the Gentiles all the day long. But they mar the Lord's servant who brings forth His words.
Their rejecting the Lord's servant and their rejecting the gospel doubly testifies of their apostasy;
Nephi, therefore, offers no hope for the Gentiles unless they reconcile themselves to Christ.
Although the Gentiles know God's decrees on this land, many allow secret combinations to get above them. Drunken with iniquity and all manner of abominations, they suffer woes- God's covenant curse.

When they reject his words, the Lord cuts them off from his people.
He removes the fullness of his gospel from among the wicked, giving it to those who will receive it.
With the wicked Gentiles' apostasy and its aftermath, the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.


The Lord turns the iniquities of the Gentiles upon their own heads. He comes out in justice against them. The wicked Gentiles bring down the fullness of God's wrath, just as the Jaredites and Nephites did. The Lord visits the Gentiles "with thunder and with earthquake, and with a great noise, and with storm, and with tempest, and with the flame of devouring fire". The sword of justices falls on the wicked Gentiles. He destroys the Gentiles; cities and chariots and executes vengeance and fury upon them.
He covers their land with a desolating sickness. A scourge consumes the wicked.
The unrepentant Gentiles cannot stand before God's power. Lehi's descendants, whom God empowers, marshal themselves and vex the wicked Gentiles.
They go among the Gentiles like a lion among the beasts, treading down and tearing to pieces. Lehi's descendants, who are of the house of Israel, inherit the Gentiles' lands and cities. The Lord reestablishes Lehi's descendants in this land, even as the wicked Gentiles perish.

Although the scriptures say that the Gentiles will perish, the Lord doesn't utterly destroy them. Some Gentiles, as we have seen, turn from their evil ways. Some don't harden their hearts. They don't unite with that great and abominable church nor fight against Zion. These Gentiles know where their blessings come from - they know that the Lord has blessed them with the blessings of Israel.
To save as many Gentiles as will come to him, the Lord calls on them before the day of judgement. he stirs up the Gentiles and the house of Israel in order to persuade them to repent. The Gentiles must repent and not continue in iniquity. They must forthwith repent and humble themselves. If they do, it will be well with them. As they repent and come to the Lord, he will be merciful to them. Those Gentiles who repent and obey the words of Christ will be blessed.
The Gentiles who come unto Christ receive baptism; they obtain a remission of their sins and are filled with the Holy Ghost. When the Gentiles come unto Christ, he shows them their weakness; yet his grace suffices for those who humble themselves. Faith, hope, and charity bring the Gentiles of Christ, the fountain of all righteousness. The Lord saves the righteous Gentiles both temporally and spiritually.
After manifesting himself to the Gentiles, the Lord manifests himself to the Jews. The gospel goes first to the Gentiles and then to the house of Israel.
The Gentiles take the gospel to Lehi's descendants, and also to the Jews.
The Twelve, the Seventy, and other Latter-day Saints assist in carrying the gospel of the Jews.

When the Lord lifts up his hand to the Gentiles, they serve as an "ensign/standard" to the house of Israel.
The house of Israel receives the Book of Mormon through the fullness of the Gentiles. That involves, additionally, the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon. "Other books" go forth from the righteous Gentiles to the house of Israel. These books convince the house of Israel of the truthfulness of the gospel and they are blessed again under the covenant.
The Lord softens many Gentiles' hearts toward Lehi's descendants. Many care for the house of Israel and sorrow for their destruction. They curse the house of Israel and serve as fathers and mothers to them. They minister the gospel's fullness to Lehi's descendants. The Lord consecrates the Gentiles' riches to the poor of the house of Israel.
Thus are the natural branches grafted back into the olive tree.
When the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, the Jews again gather to Jerusalem. The righteous Gentiles assist the house of Israel in gathering them from dispersion; they carry the house of Israel to the lands fo their inheritance. They assist Lehi's descendants to gather to the New Jerusalem. They help Lehi's descendants build the city. The Lord's promises are great to the Gentiles. The Lord blesses the righteous Gentiles by numbering them with the house of Israel. The Lord numbers many Gentiles with Lehi's descendants. The Lord has promised this land to Lehi's descendants.
Like them, the righteous Gentiles are blessed on this land forever.
Like them, these Gentiles come down captive no more. The righteous Gentiles also are the covenant people of the Lord.

Analysis of the term Gentiles in the scriptures thus supports our earlier findings about the Gentiles; latter-day mission. But it yields a complete and more detailed picture of what that mission is all about. The question of identities - of Latter-day Saint "Gentiles" and other inhabitants of the Americas- is here resolved.
The twofold nature of the Gentiles in the last days- with some numbered among Lehi's descendants and others cut off from the Lord's people- transcends our Latter-day Saint identity. Those who make their calling and election sure are called "Gentiles", even as those cut off from the Lord's covenant are called "Gentiles". In the end, however, the repentant Gentiles assume the identity of the house of Israel whereas the unrepentant are destroyed. Together with other gentile inhabitants of the Americas, the unrepentant remain "Gentiles" and suffer God's judgments.
Latter-day Saints who fulfill their righteous mission, therefore, are known as Gentiles but only for an interim period.
The interval between the coming forth of the Book of Mormon and the Lord's day of judgment serves as a time of probation that determines which identity will emerge. As with all the Lord's covenants, that probationary period enables us to prove our faithfulness and to receive the promised blessings. Just as the Jews anciently ministered the gospel to the Gentiles, so will the Gentiles minister it to the house of Israel."

*** (A)
As a natural branch of the olive tree (Romans 11:24), the Jews brought forth the Bible in its purity (1 Nephi 14:23) long before the Gentile church removed from it “many plain and precious parts” and “many covenants of the Lord” (1 Nephi 13:20–40). Of the Gentiles, God thus says, “O fools, they shall have a Bible; and it shall proceed forth from the Jews, mine ancient covenant people. And what thank they the Jews for the Bible which they receive from them? Yea, what do the Gentiles mean? Do they remember the travails, and the labors, and the pains of the Jews, and their diligence unto me, in bringing forth salvation unto the Gentiles? O ye Gentiles, have ye remembered the Jews, mine ancient covenant people? Nay; but ye have cursed them, and have hated them, and have not sought to recover them. But behold, I will return all these things upon your own heads; for I the Lord have not forgotten my people. Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews?” (2 Nephi 29:4–6).

Because this scripture specifically addresses God’s people “in Zion” (2 Nephi 28:21, 24), it is the end-time descendants of Ephraim who have come through the Gentile lineages who come under this condemnation. A revelation given through the prophet Joseph Smith affirms this: “Your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treated lightly the things you have received—Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation. And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all. And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—That they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom; otherwise there remaineth a scourge and judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion” (D&C 84:54–58).

Isaiah, in fact, informs us that “a scourge and judgment” will be poured out on many of the children of Zion who are of the tribe of Ephraim. In an entire chapter devoted to Ephraim and its prophets, Isaiah says, “A hail shall sweep away your false refuge and waters flood the hiding place.
Your covenant with death shall prove void, your understanding with Sheol have no effect: when the flooding scourge sweeps through, you shall be overrun by it. As often as it sweeps through, you shall be seized by it: morning after morning it shall sweep through, by day and by night [it shall seize you]; it shall cause terror merely to hear word of it” (Isaiah 28:17–19; cf. D&C 5:19). For those Ephraimites who believe his truth, on the other hand, God “lays in Zion a stone” (Isaiah 28:16; emphasis added)—an end-time seer—as an antidote to the flooding scourge that overruns the wicked.

Isaiah 28:13 "But the word of the Lord was unto them
precept upon precept, precept upon precept;
line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little;
that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken,
and snared, and taken."

Isaiah cites that this people would be given "precept upon precept;
precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little and there a little."
These identical words, were used by the Prophet Joseph Smith among his closing instructions
to the latter day saints, warning us to go forward not backward. D.C.128:21-22 ; 2Nephi 28:30

Instead of receiving a greater portion of the “word of Jehovah” through divine revelation, the people of Ephraim remain ensconced in its lesser version as that is all they know.
The end result is their ruination: “Sanctify Jehovah of Hosts, making him your fear, him your awe. And [to you] he will be a sanctuary, but to the two houses of Israel a stumbling block or obstructing rock, and a snare, catching unawares the inhabitants of Jerusalem. Many will stumble into them, and when they fall shall be broken, and when they become ensnared shall be taken captive” (Isaiah 8:13-15; cf. 5:13; 42:18-25)."

User avatar
Being There
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2952

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Being There »

ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2022, 11:00 am This thread here by @Kit-OTW about the suspect nature/origins of Section 119 made me wonder what other Sections are suspect.
https://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtop ... 7#p1260577

So for starters, we need to look at any sections published after Joseph's death, especially those that do not have surviving documents, those from July 8th/12, 1938, really any dated after 5 August 1838 (for reasons/history see the post linked above), and put into the D&C from the 1844 edition or later.

In addition to 119 what other sections should we label as "SUS"?

*(current section numbers)
Added in the 1844 edition: 103, 105, 112, 119, 124, 127, 128, and 135 (current section numbers)
Added in the 1876 edition: 2, 13, 77, 85, 87, 108-11, 113-18, 120-23, 125, 126, 129-32, and 136
Added in the 1981 edition: 137, 138

Before I scrutinize these, has someone already done this work?
copied from my post
Can we even trust the D&C ?

Post by Being There » April 1st, 2023, 8:05 am

I know the D&C has some incredible things in it,
but there's been so may changes.
I mean how do we know which parts we can trust and accept as revelation
and which parts we can't.


Like I commented to someone else -

"I guess the real question is, is it really all revelation.
I for one do not believe it was all from direct revelation.
And if it is, some things have been added and taken out -
been changed and modified, according to the desires of those men who did it.
Over the years church authorities have made hundreds of changes to our scriptures -
and to many other things - just look at all the changes made over the years
with things to do with the temple and the endowment alone.

Some things in the D&C contradicts many other scriptures we have in the Bible and Book of Mormon.
Just look at the controversy over section 132 alone - over polygamy.

Many scholars of the D&C have stated there are sections that are questionable as to whether or not
they were actual revelation from the Lord, or from man.


quote

III. It is the Same: God’s Words versus Man’s Words

Good men and inspired servants sent of the Lord do their best to quote God’s words as accurately as possible,
not adding to or taking away anything from them. These servants point to God as our source light and truth, not
themselves. Contrast this imperfect and corrupt men who seek the praise of the world and financial support from
others. God defines this as “priestcraft” (2 Ne. 26:29). Such live on the accolades of men and filthy lucre. They
raise themselves up as a light in replacement of God. Our Savior stated that He is the light we are look to, and
the things He does as our example (3 Ne. 18:24).

Thus Saith the Lord God’s words are powerful and important, much more so than those of any man. God
often introduces His word by using some variation of the phrase “Thus saith the Lord.” They alert us that we
should pay close attention to what follows. The Doctrine and Covenants has many such phrases. They include,
“Hearken unto me, saith the Lord your God" (Section 51); “Behold, I am God; give heed unto my word”
(Section 13); “Listen to the voice of Jesus Christ, your redeemer, the Great I AM” (section 29); "Listen to
the voice of the Lord your God, Even Alpha and Omega" (section 35), and so on.

Some things we read are not God’s words.


An example of a so-called "revelation" from God in the Doctrine and Covenants
that did not come from Him is portions of Section 20.
Elder James. E. Talmage read its first few verses, believing that they were the words of Christ,
or at least those given to Joseph Smith by Him.
He believed they were also tied to the Lord’s birth date.
With this assumption, Elder Talmage added his own statements
about this probability in His book Jesus the Christ,
stating that April 6th was most likely the Lord’s birthday.
This book statement is believed to have started our April 6th tradition for Christ’s birthday.
In the Joseph Smith Paper’s project,
we have since learned that the words in the first few verses of D&C 20 are not those of the Lord,
nor those of a sent angel from His throne, nor those of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
Instead, they are added words of John Whitmer, Joseph Smith’s scribe at the time,
used to introduce the reader to the rest of the section.
Elder Talmage’s mistaken belief that they were the Lord’s words has led to a now fully entrenched LDS
“tradition” that they also reveal our Lord’s birthdate (see the paper, “The LDS April 6th Tradition”).


God’s Words versus Man’s Words The introductory paragraph to D&C 20 (above it) states that it is a
“revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet,” yet this introduction, along with the first few verses of
Section 20 were written by a committee that compiled that particular edition of the scriptures in 1981. Nowhere
in this section does our Lord Jesus Christ identify these words as coming from Him.

We now know, thanks largely to the Joseph Smith Papers project, that section 20 is a hodgepodge of statements
thrown together by as many as six different early Church leaders, who did so in a hurry to get it ready for
publication. Joseph Smith the Prophet may have been among them, but the original document also shows other
“voices” that are not our Lord’s. This is especially true of the first few verses of D&C 20, which we now know
were written by John Whtimer, Joseph Smith’s scribe at the time. Additional verses in Section 20 may be
written by Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, or Sidney Rigdon, among others.

More importantly, many today assume these “servants” and others (like our General Authorities) are the
“servants” God referred to in verse 38 of Section 1 of the D&C, where the Lord states, “Whether it be by mine
own voice, or by the voice of my servants it is the same.” Many times they are not the same. We should
understand the context of this statement by God, and what He means by “his servants.” The voices in writing in
D&C 20, and many others today are not "the same voice” as God's, nor those of His chosen “angels” – those
sent from His throne who are His “servants” sent to quote Him directly, doing so accurately - word for word.
Thus, we should also be careful in how we use the word “servant” today and how we interpret D&C 1:38. We
should pay close attention to those servants sent of God who quote God’s words accurately. Statements by men
are much less important, not matter how well-meaning or eloquent they might be.

Does this mean that section 20 should be ignored? No. It contains many patterns for governing the operations of
the church. But some of those patterns were created by men (some believe they suggest a Campbellite
influence), and not necessarily the pattern laid out by God Himself for the Church.

Take for example, section 27, a revelation given in the voice of one of God's servants – this time an angel. One
day Joseph set out to buy some wine for the sacrament. On the way he was stopped by an angel, who warned
him he was about to purchase wine from his enemies, and that he might want to think twice about doing so in
case it was poisoned. The angel didn’t warn Joseph in his own words, adding His own commentary, but instead
saying, “Listen to the voice of Jesus Christ, your Lord, your God, and your redeemer, whose word is quick and
powerful.” From there the angel quoted God directly, delivering the message he was sent to deliver, accurately
and without embellishment. He recited it word for word just as if it had come from the mouth of God Himself.
He then departed. That is what it really means in D&C 1:38 when God said, “Whether it be by mine own voice,
or by the voice of my servants it is the same.”

In the October General Conferences of 2010 and 2014 a leader stood and quoted this verse of scripture, implying
that what followed would be the same as the Lord’s own words. It is was the Lord’s words, quoted exactly as He
gave them, then “they are the same.” Certainly there were edifying words spoken by these leaders, but this verse
in D&C 1 doesn’t necessarily mean the words of leaders past, present, or future are the words of Christ, unless
they are exactly His, or if they speaking under the power of the Holy Ghost (who is one with God and bears of
the truth of all things). Only then is one speaking with “the tongue of angels.”

We often place too much trust in “the arm of flesh.” This is one of the biggest problems in our current culture.
Where possible, we should verify all things said or written as God’s word by way of the Spirit. We read in 3
Nephi 19:8 about the Twelve Apostles at Bountiful and how they taught most effectively. “And when they had
ministered those same words which Jesus had spoken – nothing varying from the words which Jesus had
spoken – behold, they knelt again and prayed to the Father in the name of Jesus.” Here His servants spoke the
same words as Jesus, the people knowing that they were His. Then is the meaning of D&C 1:38 fulfilled,
“Whether it be by mine own voice, or by the voice of my servants it is the same.” Note verses 36 through 38 of
D&C 1 hereafter. The whole section is the Lord’s introduction to His own words that are to go forth to the world. He states:

37 Search these commandments, for they are true and faithful, and the prophecies and promises which are in
them shall all be fulfilled.
38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the
earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the
voice of my servants, it is the same.
39 For behold, and lo, the Lord is God, and the Spirit beareth record, and the record is true, and the truth
abideth forever and ever. Amen.

Note the Lord is counseling us to search these commandments - the ones in the revelations of this particular
book – that ARE HIS! No reference is made in this section to anything a Church leader might one day say in
the future. This is important in understanding the next verse, "What I the Lord have spoken I have spoken, and I
excuse not myself." They are His words, not mans. Our Lord is God. He makes no apologies for the precise
predictions He has made. Note that God is speaking in the past tense. What He has spoken He has spoken. This
is not a reference about what a future leader of the Church may say. He's referencing His own words here, and
His words alone. "And though the heavens and the earth may pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall
all be fulfilled." If our powerful God said it, then we can be sure it will happen.

The key question is, "what is the same" as His words, what is the same as His voice? He is talking about His
word as revealed in this book – the Doctrine and Covenants where His prophecies, His predictions, and the
judgments He assures us will come to pass are found. The servants He is referring to are those men to whom
these particular revelations in the D&C were given to and recorded by. This list includes Joseph and Hyrum
Smith, Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon, John, David, and Peter Whitmer, etc. We should not miss the clear
reference in them in verse 6 - to "my servants" - the very ones instructed by Him to publish these words to the world.

Thus, in Section 1 of the D&C, His introduction to His words that follow, God is telling His people that all the
prophecies foretold in the sections that follow this introduction will come to pass. Why - because He spoke it,
"and I excuse not myself.” His words are quick and powerful and will be fulfilled! This is the context of the
Lord’s words, “Whether it be by mine own voice, or by the voice of my servants it is the same.” He is not saying
that future leaders words are or will be His. He is saying that the words He gave past prophets in the Bible, Book
of Mormon, and those given Joseph Smith and others in the D&C - relative to coming judgments in our day -
will be fulfilled, but He gave them to these men. They are His words, given in revelation! They are not prepared
talks by men, not matter how good and well-intended they may be. If the talks are given under the power of the
Holy Ghost, then they are comparable to His words, but not necessarily the same.

Last Thoughts on Section 27 In the original Book of Commandments, Section 27 was 13 verses shorter
than it is today, ending in verse 5, with the statement, “for the hour cometh that I will drink of the fruit of the
vine with you, on the earth, and with all those whom my Father hath given me out of the world.” We learn in the
Joseph Smith Papers project that Oliver Cowdery added the extra 13 verses beyond verse 5 – those of God’s
angel, starting with a statement he says was made by Moroni. We see this in the later part of verse 5 when the
angel seems to suddenly shift gears, stating, "I will drink of the fruit of the vine with you on the earth, and with
Moroni...”

Nothing Oliver Cowdery added in section 27 has the same status as that of, “by my voice or the voice of my
servant.” The angel appearing to Joseph Smith spoke for God, providing nothing more or less than His words.
Note the Lord’s words regarding the words He gave His chosen servant Joseph Smith to give us. God states,
“Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall
give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me” (D&C 21:4). An important qualification
for a true messenger is that the word of God they carry be as brief as possible, that it originate from God, and
that it is accurate.

Idolatry It is important that we quote God and angels often and accurately. And it is important that we
quote God more often than men – the arm of flesh, in our talks to one another. We have replaced too many of
God’s words with those of men. Too many talks quote General Authorities over and over rather than the words
of God. Leaders often quote each other. Sometimes they quote themselves from past talks. God has instead
spoken to us! His words are powerful. We should reference His words more frequently, doing so accurately. A
good second choice is to quote those chosen messengers that quote Him word for word, those who are “sent
ones” from His presence and throne. When a servant, chosen and sent by God states, “thus saith the Lord,” we
should pay close attention to what follows, then confirm that they are indeed the Lord’s words. We should then
follow them. In this way we can avoid idolatry and deception."

end quote

User avatar
Ymarsakar
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4470

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Ymarsakar »

Being There wrote: April 27th, 2023, 3:09 am
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2022, 11:00 am This thread here by @Kit-OTW about the suspect nature/origins of Section 119 made me wonder what other Sections are suspect.
https://www.ldsfreedomforum.com/viewtop ... 7#p1260577

So for starters, we need to look at any sections published after Joseph's death, especially those that do not have surviving documents, those from July 8th/12, 1938, really any dated after 5 August 1838 (for reasons/history see the post linked above), and put into the D&C from the 1844 edition or later.

In addition to 119 what other sections should we label as "SUS"?

*(current section numbers)
Added in the 1844 edition: 103, 105, 112, 119, 124, 127, 128, and 135 (current section numbers)
Added in the 1876 edition: 2, 13, 77, 85, 87, 108-11, 113-18, 120-23, 125, 126, 129-32, and 136
Added in the 1981 edition: 137, 138

Before I scrutinize these, has someone already done this work?
copied from my post
Can we even trust the D&C ?

Post by Being There » April 1st, 2023, 8:05 am

I know the D&C has some incredible things in it,
but there's been so may changes.
I mean how do we know which parts we can trust and accept as revelation
and which parts we can't.


Like I commented to someone else -

"I guess the real question is, is it really all revelation.
I for one do not believe it was all from direct revelation.
And if it is, some things have been added and taken out -
been changed and modified, according to the desires of those men who did it.
Over the years church authorities have made hundreds of changes to our scriptures -
and to many other things - just look at all the changes made over the years
with things to do with the temple and the endowment alone.

Some things in the D&C contradicts many other scriptures we have in the Bible and Book of Mormon.
Just look at the controversy over section 132 alone - over polygamy.

Many scholars of the D&C have stated there are sections that are questionable as to whether or not
they were actual revelation from the Lord, or from man.


quote

III. It is the Same: God’s Words versus Man’s Words

Good men and inspired servants sent of the Lord do their best to quote God’s words as accurately as possible,
not adding to or taking away anything from them. These servants point to God as our source light and truth, not
themselves. Contrast this imperfect and corrupt men who seek the praise of the world and financial support from
others. God defines this as “priestcraft” (2 Ne. 26:29). Such live on the accolades of men and filthy lucre. They
raise themselves up as a light in replacement of God. Our Savior stated that He is the light we are look to, and
the things He does as our example (3 Ne. 18:24).

Thus Saith the Lord God’s words are powerful and important, much more so than those of any man. God
often introduces His word by using some variation of the phrase “Thus saith the Lord.” They alert us that we
should pay close attention to what follows. The Doctrine and Covenants has many such phrases. They include,
“Hearken unto me, saith the Lord your God" (Section 51); “Behold, I am God; give heed unto my word”
(Section 13); “Listen to the voice of Jesus Christ, your redeemer, the Great I AM” (section 29); "Listen to
the voice of the Lord your God, Even Alpha and Omega" (section 35), and so on.

Some things we read are not God’s words.


An example of a so-called "revelation" from God in the Doctrine and Covenants
that did not come from Him is portions of Section 20.
Elder James. E. Talmage read its first few verses, believing that they were the words of Christ,
or at least those given to Joseph Smith by Him.
He believed they were also tied to the Lord’s birth date.
With this assumption, Elder Talmage added his own statements
about this probability in His book Jesus the Christ,
stating that April 6th was most likely the Lord’s birthday.
This book statement is believed to have started our April 6th tradition for Christ’s birthday.
In the Joseph Smith Paper’s project,
we have since learned that the words in the first few verses of D&C 20 are not those of the Lord,
nor those of a sent angel from His throne, nor those of the Prophet Joseph Smith.
Instead, they are added words of John Whitmer, Joseph Smith’s scribe at the time,
used to introduce the reader to the rest of the section.
Elder Talmage’s mistaken belief that they were the Lord’s words has led to a now fully entrenched LDS
“tradition” that they also reveal our Lord’s birthdate (see the paper, “The LDS April 6th Tradition”).


God’s Words versus Man’s Words The introductory paragraph to D&C 20 (above it) states that it is a
“revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet,” yet this introduction, along with the first few verses of
Section 20 were written by a committee that compiled that particular edition of the scriptures in 1981. Nowhere
in this section does our Lord Jesus Christ identify these words as coming from Him.

We now know, thanks largely to the Joseph Smith Papers project, that section 20 is a hodgepodge of statements
thrown together by as many as six different early Church leaders, who did so in a hurry to get it ready for
publication. Joseph Smith the Prophet may have been among them, but the original document also shows other
“voices” that are not our Lord’s. This is especially true of the first few verses of D&C 20, which we now know
were written by John Whtimer, Joseph Smith’s scribe at the time. Additional verses in Section 20 may be
written by Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, or Sidney Rigdon, among others.

More importantly, many today assume these “servants” and others (like our General Authorities) are the
“servants” God referred to in verse 38 of Section 1 of the D&C, where the Lord states, “Whether it be by mine
own voice, or by the voice of my servants it is the same.” Many times they are not the same. We should
understand the context of this statement by God, and what He means by “his servants.” The voices in writing in
D&C 20, and many others today are not "the same voice” as God's, nor those of His chosen “angels” – those
sent from His throne who are His “servants” sent to quote Him directly, doing so accurately - word for word.
Thus, we should also be careful in how we use the word “servant” today and how we interpret D&C 1:38. We
should pay close attention to those servants sent of God who quote God’s words accurately. Statements by men
are much less important, not matter how well-meaning or eloquent they might be.

Does this mean that section 20 should be ignored? No. It contains many patterns for governing the operations of
the church. But some of those patterns were created by men (some believe they suggest a Campbellite
influence), and not necessarily the pattern laid out by God Himself for the Church.

Take for example, section 27, a revelation given in the voice of one of God's servants – this time an angel. One
day Joseph set out to buy some wine for the sacrament. On the way he was stopped by an angel, who warned
him he was about to purchase wine from his enemies, and that he might want to think twice about doing so in
case it was poisoned. The angel didn’t warn Joseph in his own words, adding His own commentary, but instead
saying, “Listen to the voice of Jesus Christ, your Lord, your God, and your redeemer, whose word is quick and
powerful.” From there the angel quoted God directly, delivering the message he was sent to deliver, accurately
and without embellishment. He recited it word for word just as if it had come from the mouth of God Himself.
He then departed. That is what it really means in D&C 1:38 when God said, “Whether it be by mine own voice,
or by the voice of my servants it is the same.”

In the October General Conferences of 2010 and 2014 a leader stood and quoted this verse of scripture, implying
that what followed would be the same as the Lord’s own words. It is was the Lord’s words, quoted exactly as He
gave them, then “they are the same.” Certainly there were edifying words spoken by these leaders, but this verse
in D&C 1 doesn’t necessarily mean the words of leaders past, present, or future are the words of Christ, unless
they are exactly His, or if they speaking under the power of the Holy Ghost (who is one with God and bears of
the truth of all things). Only then is one speaking with “the tongue of angels.”

We often place too much trust in “the arm of flesh.” This is one of the biggest problems in our current culture.
Where possible, we should verify all things said or written as God’s word by way of the Spirit. We read in 3
Nephi 19:8 about the Twelve Apostles at Bountiful and how they taught most effectively. “And when they had
ministered those same words which Jesus had spoken – nothing varying from the words which Jesus had
spoken – behold, they knelt again and prayed to the Father in the name of Jesus.” Here His servants spoke the
same words as Jesus, the people knowing that they were His. Then is the meaning of D&C 1:38 fulfilled,
“Whether it be by mine own voice, or by the voice of my servants it is the same.” Note verses 36 through 38 of
D&C 1 hereafter. The whole section is the Lord’s introduction to His own words that are to go forth to the world. He states:

37 Search these commandments, for they are true and faithful, and the prophecies and promises which are in
them shall all be fulfilled.
38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the
earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the
voice of my servants, it is the same.
39 For behold, and lo, the Lord is God, and the Spirit beareth record, and the record is true, and the truth
abideth forever and ever. Amen.

Note the Lord is counseling us to search these commandments - the ones in the revelations of this particular
book – that ARE HIS! No reference is made in this section to anything a Church leader might one day say in
the future. This is important in understanding the next verse, "What I the Lord have spoken I have spoken, and I
excuse not myself." They are His words, not mans. Our Lord is God. He makes no apologies for the precise
predictions He has made. Note that God is speaking in the past tense. What He has spoken He has spoken. This
is not a reference about what a future leader of the Church may say. He's referencing His own words here, and
His words alone. "And though the heavens and the earth may pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall
all be fulfilled." If our powerful God said it, then we can be sure it will happen.

The key question is, "what is the same" as His words, what is the same as His voice? He is talking about His
word as revealed in this book – the Doctrine and Covenants where His prophecies, His predictions, and the
judgments He assures us will come to pass are found. The servants He is referring to are those men to whom
these particular revelations in the D&C were given to and recorded by. This list includes Joseph and Hyrum
Smith, Oliver Cowdery, Sidney Rigdon, John, David, and Peter Whitmer, etc. We should not miss the clear
reference in them in verse 6 - to "my servants" - the very ones instructed by Him to publish these words to the world.

Thus, in Section 1 of the D&C, His introduction to His words that follow, God is telling His people that all the
prophecies foretold in the sections that follow this introduction will come to pass. Why - because He spoke it,
"and I excuse not myself.” His words are quick and powerful and will be fulfilled! This is the context of the
Lord’s words, “Whether it be by mine own voice, or by the voice of my servants it is the same.” He is not saying
that future leaders words are or will be His. He is saying that the words He gave past prophets in the Bible, Book
of Mormon, and those given Joseph Smith and others in the D&C - relative to coming judgments in our day -
will be fulfilled, but He gave them to these men. They are His words, given in revelation! They are not prepared
talks by men, not matter how good and well-intended they may be. If the talks are given under the power of the
Holy Ghost, then they are comparable to His words, but not necessarily the same.

Last Thoughts on Section 27 In the original Book of Commandments, Section 27 was 13 verses shorter
than it is today, ending in verse 5, with the statement, “for the hour cometh that I will drink of the fruit of the
vine with you, on the earth, and with all those whom my Father hath given me out of the world.” We learn in the
Joseph Smith Papers project that Oliver Cowdery added the extra 13 verses beyond verse 5 – those of God’s
angel, starting with a statement he says was made by Moroni. We see this in the later part of verse 5 when the
angel seems to suddenly shift gears, stating, "I will drink of the fruit of the vine with you on the earth, and with
Moroni...”

Nothing Oliver Cowdery added in section 27 has the same status as that of, “by my voice or the voice of my
servant.” The angel appearing to Joseph Smith spoke for God, providing nothing more or less than His words.
Note the Lord’s words regarding the words He gave His chosen servant Joseph Smith to give us. God states,
“Wherefore, meaning the church, thou shalt give heed unto all his words and commandments which he shall
give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all holiness before me” (D&C 21:4). An important qualification
for a true messenger is that the word of God they carry be as brief as possible, that it originate from God, and
that it is accurate.

Idolatry It is important that we quote God and angels often and accurately. And it is important that we
quote God more often than men – the arm of flesh, in our talks to one another. We have replaced too many of
God’s words with those of men. Too many talks quote General Authorities over and over rather than the words
of God. Leaders often quote each other. Sometimes they quote themselves from past talks. God has instead
spoken to us! His words are powerful. We should reference His words more frequently, doing so accurately. A
good second choice is to quote those chosen messengers that quote Him word for word, those who are “sent
ones” from His presence and throne. When a servant, chosen and sent by God states, “thus saith the Lord,” we
should pay close attention to what follows, then confirm that they are indeed the Lord’s words. We should then
follow them. In this way we can avoid idolatry and deception."

end quote
Much of this analysis is very well done. THe logick especially with Talmage's date. Jeshua's birth is of course not Dec 24th. But it may also not be April either. The chronology can best be done via looking at the stars/signs in the heavens, they can be mathematically calculated backwards based upon which star conjunction the star of bethlehem was. Psalm 19:01 also provides clues.

When I read the D n C in question, and it wrote "year of our lord something something anno domi", that year itself was wrong. That was not the year Jeshua was born, so how could the date/month be right? Thus I knew when Talmage wrote of it, he himself was good intentioned but also wrong. BEcause they dont' realize that the "date" itself is wrong in terms of years.

Whether via astronomy or scholarly work, Jeshua's birth could have been -4 BC or -6 BC. If we don't even have the year correct, what else is wrong? A lot more. This is why I reiterate often times that everything we know about "his story" is wrong. Because "his story" is told by a 'him' and that force is called Satan/Adversary as described in Ephesians 6:12. An UnHoly Counsel perhaps that uses the unHoly Spirit to inspire their own prophets and apostles, with their own legion of fallen angels backing them.

Humanity has to dig deep into this mystery. It is not so simple as they were lead to believe by the experts. Just like 2020 Corona.

"then confirm that they are indeed the Lord’s words. "

Another people don't realize that they should do, is to question which "lord" this is. Because Baal/Bhaal also means lord but that is not Jeshua. The problem with using titles like "Christ", "Lord", or "Satan" is those are titles, they are not individual names.

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4079

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by ransomme »

Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 12:35 am
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 11:34 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:41 pm

In another thread
I guess RMN was correct about lazy learners.

Original October 5th Joseph Smith journal entry
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... y-1844/123

1st draft manuscript changing Joseph's original journal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... r-1843/143

Final manuscript
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... l-1844/118

Published printing
https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-6-chapter-2
The last link was good, gives a nice review of the life in Nauvoo during that time.

His October 5 address on plurality of wives is well worded to say the least.
Too bad it's a lie. But, you will see what you want to see.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13158
Location: England

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Robin Hood »

Section 139 is suspect because it doesn't exist.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10813
Location: England

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Luke »

Robin Hood wrote: April 27th, 2023, 6:55 am Section 139 is suspect because it doesn't exist.
Wish we had the 1886 Revelation as Sec. 139…

User avatar
John Tavner
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4221

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by John Tavner »

Being There wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:36 am
John Tavner wrote: April 26th, 2023, 8:29 pm
JRM wrote: April 26th, 2023, 8:18 pm
Agreed, but the Book of Mormon tells us that there are plain and precious parts removed or altered in the Bible. Book of Mormon first and Bible second. If there are things in the Bible that aren’t quite right, go with the Book of Mormon. Your salvation will depend on it.

And, it isn’t my Book of Mormon. It is Christ’s.
Does not say altered, that is an interpolation of man/ false tradition. Only says plain and precious removed - plain and precious means somthing clear and valuable. - it doesn't mean that it is twisted or wrong. Mormonism has really twisted our view on the Bible to their own salvation's detriment- and I mean that because there are passages in the BoM that if read without the understanding of the Bible, leads to wrong theology. Bible is first, Book of Mormon second- it's why it says ANOTHER testament, not THE Testament- which is also somewhat wrong. because testametn means covenant. THe Bible shows the covenant God made with man through Christ, very clearly, without context of hte Bible, the BoM doesn't make much sense at all. Also it's why Joseph almost always quoted from the Bible.
Bible is first, Book of Mormon second
I know where you are coming from my friend -
and I agree with you on just how important the Bible is -
but I'm not so sure that we should put it above the book of Mormon -
for many reasons -
which to only name a few -

The Lord Himself put the church under condemnation for treating the Book of Mormon lightly.
( are you doing the same ? )

“Your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief,
and because you have treated lightly the things you have received
57 And they shall remain under this condemnation
until they repent and remember the new covenant,

even the Book of Mormon and the former
commandments which I have given them,
not only to say, but to do according to
that which I have written—

“I told the brethren,” he said, “that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”
Joseph Smith
The Book of Mormon isn't a "Covenant" So It can't be talking aobut the book of Mormon, it's more like "You have taken lightly JEsus (found in the New Testament (see covenant), and the Book of Mormon, and the Commandmetns you've been given.

Yeah, Jjoseph SMith was 100% not including the Bible in that. Do you know how foolish he would have sounded to say people would draw closer to God from that book than any other when He drew closer to God through the Bible- Context is key and I believe Joseph was talking about books in general, not including the Bible. Also- fiuitfully, as I look across the LDS landscape, I'm not sure I see a lot of people closer to God than I do other Christians- so the fruits of that comment don't ring true to me- and they read the BoM, one could say it might be a false prophecy if it means how mormon's commonly interpret it.

User avatar
Ymarsakar
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4470

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Ymarsakar »

John Tavner wrote: April 27th, 2023, 8:14 am
Being There wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:36 am
John Tavner wrote: April 26th, 2023, 8:29 pm

Does not say altered, that is an interpolation of man/ false tradition. Only says plain and precious removed - plain and precious means somthing clear and valuable. - it doesn't mean that it is twisted or wrong. Mormonism has really twisted our view on the Bible to their own salvation's detriment- and I mean that because there are passages in the BoM that if read without the understanding of the Bible, leads to wrong theology. Bible is first, Book of Mormon second- it's why it says ANOTHER testament, not THE Testament- which is also somewhat wrong. because testametn means covenant. THe Bible shows the covenant God made with man through Christ, very clearly, without context of hte Bible, the BoM doesn't make much sense at all. Also it's why Joseph almost always quoted from the Bible.
Bible is first, Book of Mormon second
I know where you are coming from my friend -
and I agree with you on just how important the Bible is -
but I'm not so sure that we should put it above the book of Mormon -
for many reasons -
which to only name a few -

The Lord Himself put the church under condemnation for treating the Book of Mormon lightly.
( are you doing the same ? )

“Your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief,
and because you have treated lightly the things you have received
57 And they shall remain under this condemnation
until they repent and remember the new covenant,

even the Book of Mormon and the former
commandments which I have given them,
not only to say, but to do according to
that which I have written—

“I told the brethren,” he said, “that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”
Joseph Smith
The Book of Mormon isn't a "Covenant" So It can't be talking aobut the book of Mormon, it's more like "You have taken lightly JEsus (found in the New Testament (see covenant), and the Book of Mormon, and the Commandmetns you've been given.

Yeah, Jjoseph SMith was 100% not including the Bible in that. Do you know how foolish he would have sounded to say people would draw closer to God from that book than any other when He drew closer to God through the Bible- Context is key and I believe Joseph was talking about books in general, not including the Bible. Also- fiuitfully, as I look across the LDS landscape, I'm not sure I see a lot of people closer to God than I do other Christians- so the fruits of that comment don't ring true to me- and they read the BoM, one could say it might be a false prophecy if it means how mormon's commonly interpret it.
King James bible was created by King James and his employees. None of them claimed inspiration from anything except money and fear of the crown.

Before it was the Ecumenical Councils or Vatican Inquisition that created biblical canon, usually by using stuff like canons to blow people who disagreed up and bury them with their families.

Jeshua didn't receive a bible either.

Disciples of Christ are to follow the Christ. So what did the CHrist use? Vatican bible? Didn't exist. English alnguage? nope. King James? Ain't no King james in Jeshua's time.

So Jeshua used what he had because god can make use of anything or anyone. And so did JOseph Smith.

CuriousThinker
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1228

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by CuriousThinker »

ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 11:34 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:41 pm
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:09 pm

I asked for a turn key mountain retreat. Besides, the reply was to Luke. .
In another thread
I guess RMN was correct about lazy learners.

Original October 5th Joseph Smith journal entry
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... y-1844/123

1st draft manuscript changing Joseph's original journal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... r-1843/143

Final manuscript
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... l-1844/118

Published printing
https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-6-chapter-2
That makes me sick. I only ever heard the official version. How can they justify this?!

User avatar
Cruiserdude
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5469
Location: SEKS

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Cruiserdude »

CuriousThinker wrote: April 27th, 2023, 8:32 am
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 11:34 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 26th, 2023, 10:41 pm

In another thread
I guess RMN was correct about lazy learners.

Original October 5th Joseph Smith journal entry
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... y-1844/123

1st draft manuscript changing Joseph's original journal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... r-1843/143

Final manuscript
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... l-1844/118

Published printing
https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-6-chapter-2
That makes me sick. I only ever heard the official version. How can they justify this?!
This appears pretty blatant and drastic of a change.
I wonder if there is there more to the story?

User avatar
John Tavner
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4221

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by John Tavner »

Ymarsakar wrote: April 27th, 2023, 8:23 am
John Tavner wrote: April 27th, 2023, 8:14 am
Being There wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:36 am



I know where you are coming from my friend -
and I agree with you on just how important the Bible is -
but I'm not so sure that we should put it above the book of Mormon -
for many reasons -
which to only name a few -

The Lord Himself put the church under condemnation for treating the Book of Mormon lightly.
( are you doing the same ? )

“Your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief,
and because you have treated lightly the things you have received
57 And they shall remain under this condemnation
until they repent and remember the new covenant,

even the Book of Mormon and the former
commandments which I have given them,
not only to say, but to do according to
that which I have written—

“I told the brethren,” he said, “that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”
Joseph Smith
The Book of Mormon isn't a "Covenant" So It can't be talking aobut the book of Mormon, it's more like "You have taken lightly JEsus (found in the New Testament (see covenant), and the Book of Mormon, and the Commandmetns you've been given.

Yeah, Jjoseph SMith was 100% not including the Bible in that. Do you know how foolish he would have sounded to say people would draw closer to God from that book than any other when He drew closer to God through the Bible- Context is key and I believe Joseph was talking about books in general, not including the Bible. Also- fiuitfully, as I look across the LDS landscape, I'm not sure I see a lot of people closer to God than I do other Christians- so the fruits of that comment don't ring true to me- and they read the BoM, one could say it might be a false prophecy if it means how mormon's commonly interpret it.
King James bible was created by King James and his employees. None of them claimed inspiration from anything except money and fear of the crown.

Before it was the Ecumenical Councils or Vatican Inquisition that created biblical canon, usually by using stuff like canons to blow people who disagreed up and bury them with their families.

Jeshua didn't receive a bible either.

Disciples of Christ are to follow the Christ. So what did the CHrist use? Vatican bible? Didn't exist. English alnguage? nope. King James? Ain't no King james in Jeshua's time.

So Jeshua used what he had because god can make use of anything or anyone. And so did JOseph Smith.
If only Mormon's were taught correct history about hte Bible.

Were there books that were generally accepted... BEFORE the Vatican existed... oh there is. It's like God couldn't do His work all of a sudden to mormons. We believe in the Same God yesterday today and forever and all of a sudden GOd is like I sent my Son, cause I love you and knew He was gonna die t osave you ... but oooooh you crossed the line now so I'm gonna ignore humanity for almost 2000 years!

If only there were history which says there are multiple translations of hte bible, which almost always agree.. Hmm I guess there is... If only there were Books that the JEws agreed on as a scripture... which many are included in the Bible... Oh there is. If Only we had thousands of transcripts that say virtually the same thing - New and old Testametn... we do.

Was the book of MOrmon written in English originally? Seems that Joseph liked to use the translation of hte King James version for HIS translation.

Not sure why you think I am talking about ol' King James- as if the Bible doesn't exist outside of King James. We have so much knowledge on that stuff now- there is a reason the King James is still prominent, because the Translation was pretty spot on. Maybe a word here or there, but heck, you wanna go that route, people gonna have a struggle believing the BoM in Spanish, in Portuguese, in Russian, in all the other languages... cause they weren't J Smith... We have a really messed up view of the Bible and it shouldn't be that way.

Disciples of Chrsit are to follow Christ, I agree. How can I Follow someone if I don't know how they lived and what they taught? The Bible offers so much more than the BoM on that. I get 4 gospels and then Apostles who knew Him personally from the Bible... from the Book of Mormon I get a few chapters in 3 Nephi. The Bible teaches us that us receiving the Holy Ghost is how we follow Christ, that the SPirit is what transforms us into His image as we yield- and JEsus is the goal and we are able to see what Jesus required of His desciples and what we ought to aim for ourselves. Jesus WAS the message of God to the world. It is why He is so important, the Way, the Truth and the Life. "In the Last days God spoke to us BY His Son." Jesus is the word made flesh. IT wasn't through His Son, or that His SOn said His words, His SOn WAS the message. His life lived IS the message and Him Giving His life SEALED His message and gives us life if we believe.

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4079

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by ransomme »

Cruiserdude wrote: April 27th, 2023, 8:40 am
CuriousThinker wrote: April 27th, 2023, 8:32 am
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 11:34 pm

I guess RMN was correct about lazy learners.

Original October 5th Joseph Smith journal entry
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... y-1844/123

1st draft manuscript changing Joseph's original journal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... r-1843/143

Final manuscript
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... l-1844/118

Published printing
https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-6-chapter-2
That makes me sick. I only ever heard the official version. How can they justify this?!
This appears pretty blatant and drastic of a change.
I wonder if there is there more to the story?
I think that they were proud and never thought anyone would see it.

B.Young and company needed Joseph to be polygamist so that they could practice it openly.

They needed a revelation. So they changed this entry, possibly others, and also used it for part of a manufactured revelation to justify their actions.

If one actually reads 132 it contradicts itself let alone other scripture as well.

User avatar
Ymarsakar
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4470

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Ymarsakar »

ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 9:47 am
Cruiserdude wrote: April 27th, 2023, 8:40 am
CuriousThinker wrote: April 27th, 2023, 8:32 am

That makes me sick. I only ever heard the official version. How can they justify this?!
This appears pretty blatant and drastic of a change.
I wonder if there is there more to the story?
I think that they were proud and never thought anyone would see it.

B.Young and company needed Joseph to be polygamist so that they could practice it openly.

They needed a revelation. So they changed this entry, possibly others, and also used it for part of a manufactured revelation to justify their actions.

If one actually reads 132 it contradicts itself let alone other scripture as well.
I have seen no evidence Brigham Young was part of this conspiracy, nor at the Carthage Jail. From where do people get their testimonies on this claim?

Bronco73idi
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3675

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Bronco73idi »

ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 5:16 am
Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 12:35 am
ransomme wrote: April 26th, 2023, 11:34 pm

I guess RMN was correct about lazy learners.

Original October 5th Joseph Smith journal entry
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... y-1844/123

1st draft manuscript changing Joseph's original journal
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... r-1843/143

Final manuscript
https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper ... l-1844/118

Published printing
https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/volume-6-chapter-2
The last link was good, gives a nice review of the life in Nauvoo during that time.

His October 5 address on plurality of wives is well worded to say the least.
Too bad it's a lie. But, you will see what you want to see.
Thursday, 5.—This morning I rode out with Esquire Butterfield to the farm.

Instructions Respecting Plurality of Wives.
In the afternoon, rode to the prairie to show some of the brethren some land. Evening, at home, and walked up and down the streets with my scribe. Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives: for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred; and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise.

This is a lie? The only evidence is that of a scribe….

This is why I go back to the law, Old Testament…..

You people and your hearsay and drama lol

User avatar
Mindfields
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1895
Location: Utah

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Mindfields »

Adding all of these words to previous revelations is nothing but fraud. Probably best tossed in the pile of historical religious rubbish.


Image

Image

User avatar
Shawn Henry
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4711

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Shawn Henry »

Luke wrote: April 27th, 2023, 7:00 am Wish we had the 1886 Revelation as Sec. 139…
Why? John Taylor didn't come in at the gate per section 43. Neither he, nor BY, were appointed by JS, "none else shall be appointed unto this gift except it be through him".

The whole purpose of section 43 is to be "a commandment for a law unto my church", so that "you may not be deceived".

Luke: "receive not the teachings of any that shall come before you as revelations or commandments".

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4079

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by ransomme »

Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 11:23 am
ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 5:16 am
Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 12:35 am

The last link was good, gives a nice review of the life in Nauvoo during that time.

His October 5 address on plurality of wives is well worded to say the least.
Too bad it's a lie. But, you will see what you want to see.
Thursday, 5.—This morning I rode out with Esquire Butterfield to the farm.

Instructions Respecting Plurality of Wives.
In the afternoon, rode to the prairie to show some of the brethren some land. Evening, at home, and walked up and down the streets with my scribe. Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives: for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred; and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise.

This is a lie? The only evidence is that of a scribe….

This is why I go back to the law, Old Testament…..

You people and your hearsay and drama lol
The Old testament was not pro-polygamy either. Have fun with your looking upon other women, and turning heart.

Bronco73idi
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3675

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Bronco73idi »

ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:03 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 11:23 am
ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 5:16 am

Too bad it's a lie. But, you will see what you want to see.
Thursday, 5.—This morning I rode out with Esquire Butterfield to the farm.

Instructions Respecting Plurality of Wives.
In the afternoon, rode to the prairie to show some of the brethren some land. Evening, at home, and walked up and down the streets with my scribe. Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives: for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred; and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise.

This is a lie? The only evidence is that of a scribe….

This is why I go back to the law, Old Testament…..

You people and your hearsay and drama lol
The Old testament was not pro-polygamy either. Have fun with your looking upon other women, and turning heart.
Half truths are lies

I asked if that article was the truth and like a politician you evaded the question.

Abraham had incest with a woman the lord wanted him to be with. His only decent relationship was with the Egyptian, to the standard you preach!

How do you lie to yourself that the Bible is of God and your worldly views today are also of God.

“I know you not.”

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4079

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by ransomme »

Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:09 pm
ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:03 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 11:23 am

Thursday, 5.—This morning I rode out with Esquire Butterfield to the farm.

Instructions Respecting Plurality of Wives.
In the afternoon, rode to the prairie to show some of the brethren some land. Evening, at home, and walked up and down the streets with my scribe. Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives: for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred; and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise.

This is a lie? The only evidence is that of a scribe….

This is why I go back to the law, Old Testament…..

You people and your hearsay and drama lol
The Old testament was not pro-polygamy either. Have fun with your looking upon other women, and turning heart.
Half truths are lies

I asked if that article was the truth and like a politician you evaded the question.

Abraham had incest with a woman the lord wanted him to be with. His only decent relationship was with the Egyptian, to the standard you preach!

How do you lie to yourself that the Bible is of God and your worldly views today are also of God.

“I know you not.”
Are you the devil? Because you like to accuse people often.

And manipulating something to say the exact opposite is not a half truth. That is a full blow lie.

Also you don't read the scriptures very carefully. Sarai was not Abraham's half sister.
Sarai was Terah's daughter-in-law not his daughter (Genesis 11:31). Sarai may have been a cousin or niece, or just a sister in the faith.

Three strikes and you are out bronco.

Bronco73idi
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3675

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by Bronco73idi »

ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:51 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:09 pm
ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:03 pm
The Old testament was not pro-polygamy either. Have fun with your looking upon other women, and turning heart.
Half truths are lies

I asked if that article was the truth and like a politician you evaded the question.

Abraham had incest with a woman the lord wanted him to be with. His only decent relationship was with the Egyptian, to the standard you preach!

How do you lie to yourself that the Bible is of God and your worldly views today are also of God.

“I know you not.”
Are you the devil? Because you like to accuse people often.

And manipulating something to say the exact opposite is not a half truth. That is a full blow lie.

Also you don't read the scriptures very carefully. Sarai was not Abraham's half sister.
Sarai was Terah's daughter-in-law not his daughter (Genesis 11:31). Sarai may have been a cousin or niece, or just a sister in the faith.

Three strikes and you are out bronco.
I’m of the devil? Because I can read?

Genesis 20
12 And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.

Half sister to me….. I would hate to see your family tree lol

So back to the question you keep evading…. This was the link you posted, is this true or false?

“Thursday, 5.—This morning I rode out with Esquire Butterfield to the farm”

Instructions Respecting Plurality of Wives.

“In the afternoon, rode to the prairie to show some of the brethren some land. Evening, at home, and walked up and down the streets with my scribe. Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives: for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred; and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise.”

User avatar
ransomme
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4079

Re: What Sections in the D&C are truly suspect?

Post by ransomme »

Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 3:07 pm
ransomme wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:51 pm
Bronco73idi wrote: April 27th, 2023, 2:09 pm

Half truths are lies

I asked if that article was the truth and like a politician you evaded the question.

Abraham had incest with a woman the lord wanted him to be with. His only decent relationship was with the Egyptian, to the standard you preach!

How do you lie to yourself that the Bible is of God and your worldly views today are also of God.

“I know you not.”
Are you the devil? Because you like to accuse people often.

And manipulating something to say the exact opposite is not a half truth. That is a full blow lie.

Also you don't read the scriptures very carefully. Sarai was not Abraham's half sister.
Sarai was Terah's daughter-in-law not his daughter (Genesis 11:31). Sarai may have been a cousin or niece, or just a sister in the faith.

Three strikes and you are out bronco.
I’m of the devil? Because I can read?

Genesis 20
12 And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.

Half sister to me….. I would hate to see your family tree lol

So back to the question you keep evading…. This was the link you posted, is this true or false?

“Thursday, 5.—This morning I rode out with Esquire Butterfield to the farm”

Instructions Respecting Plurality of Wives.

“In the afternoon, rode to the prairie to show some of the brethren some land. Evening, at home, and walked up and down the streets with my scribe. Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives: for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred; and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise.”
A perfect case in point. Thx Bronco.

As you said you are reading from the final published version which was an altered version crafted to mean the exact opposite of the original. Why not quote the original in Joseph Smith's journal? Oh, that's right, the original document doesn't say what you want it to say.

And again you don't read the scriptures very carefully. Rather you read what you want. "Terah took his son Abram, his grandson Lot (the son of Haran), and his daughter-in-law Sarai..." (Genesis 11:31)

1st, stop cherry-picking and 2nd maybe look into how words are used, their context, etc.

The Hebrew word "achoth" (Strong's H269) is used literally and figuratively, the same as "ach" (H251) for brother.

"Achoth" translates as: sister(s) (both literal and figurative); beloved; figurative of intimate connection; symbolic of Judah, Samaria, Sodom & Jerusalem; or even as the word 'another'

"Ach" - alike (1), another (16), brethren (17), brother (218), brother with his brothers (1), brother's (21), brotherhood (1), brothers (195), brothers' (1), companions (1), countryman (10), countryman's (2), countrymen (10), fellow (2), fellow countryman (3), fellow countrymen (2), fellows (1), kinsman (3), kinsmen (27), nephew* (2), other (7), relative (7), relatives (80).

Post Reply