Stick of Ephraim question

[Lemarque]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

[davedan]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

Joseph Smith taught that Ishmael was a descendant of Ephraim. S,o we had Lehi from Manasseh, Mulek from Judah, and Ishmael from Ephraim. But the scripture in Ez says the "stick of joseph" would be in the "hand of Ephraim" which represents the Latter-day Saints.

[Robin Hood]

It's "stick of Joseph".

[logonbump]

I am beginning to think it has more to do with the spiritual lineage of the end-times servant and the formation of his message. How the Lord grafts and grows trees in his vineyard, using stems and branches, roots and such... He is creating a desired fruit

[Niemand]

Ephraim represents a lot of European people (and some elsewhere in the world), so I think the implication is that one was aimed at Jews (Judah) and the other at non-Jews.

[LDS Watchman]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

[Niemand]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

The two can be synonymous.

A scroll is often held on sticks.



The words Bible, book, library - all common European words in some form - are all plant related. Ancient Celtic works were commonly written on branches as well. A number of druidic works in Ireland were burnt as bundles of sticks by Christian missionaries.

[Lemarque]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

Atticus, please listen to the words of the prophets. Do you have a single utterance from a prophet that states that the stick of Ephraim is a tribe? You are walking a dangerous road by directly contradicting what modern day revelation has taught us.

Russel M Nelson: "Today, Saints living in many nations of the earth gratefully hold the Bible (the stick of Judah) and the Book of Mormon (the stick of Ephraim) bound as one in their hands."

Ulisses Soares: "Ezekiel spoke about the stick of Judah (the Bible) and the stick of Ephraim (the Book of Mormon) being brought together as one."

Boyd K Packer: "The sticks, of course, are records or books."

Gordon B. Hinckley (referencing Ez. 37) : "If the Book of Mormon is true, the Bible is true. The Bible is the Testament of the Old World. The Book of Mormon is the Testament of the New. The one is the record of Judah, the other is the record of Joseph, and they have come together in the hand of the Lord in fulfillment of the prophecy of Ezekiel."

Orson Pratt: "Here then was a symbol represented before their eyes in language that could not be misunderstood; it was a symbol of two records; for it is well known that records were kept in ancient times on parchment, rolled upon sticks, the same as we keep our maps at this day."

N. Eldon Tanner: "Here again, by direct revelation and by direct revelation only, do we understand clearly what Ezekiel meant. Here, the stick of Judah as referred to is the Bible, and the stick of Ephraim, which is written for Joseph and all the house of Israel his companions, is the Book of Mormon. Through the power of God and by direct revelation, this Book of Mormon, which contains the gospel in its fullness, was translated, and it with the Bible, became "one in thine hand." How clear and simple the words of Ezekiel become if we will but listen to the prophet's voice!"


It's simple and clear, Atticus. Just listen to the prophet's voice!

[Lemarque]

It's "stick of Joseph".

I didn't catch the statement in verse 19 before. "I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim."

In verse 16 it just says the stick of Ephraim, but the clarification in verse 19 makes it make more sense to me.

For me it now reads that "The tribe of Ephraim will bring forth a book, which is a record of the seed of Joseph."

Previously I was interpreting it as "the record of Ephraim" which didn't make as much sense to me.

[LDS Watchman]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

The two can be synonymous.

A scroll is often held on sticks.



The words Bible, book, library - all common European words in some form - are all plant related. Ancient Celtic works were commonly written on branches as well. A number of druidic works in Ireland were burnt as bundles of sticks by Christian missionaries.

The stick equals book interpretation is the one put forth by the church. I understand why they interpret it that way and it may very well be a correct layer of interpretation. But I believe that the most correct interpretation is that stick equals tribe or people.

Look at this verse in D&C 27:5

"...Moroni, whom I have sent unto you to reveal the Book of Mormon, containing the fulness of my everlasting gospel, to whom I have committed the keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim"

I don't believe that he is saying that Moroni gave Joseph Smith the record of the book of Ephraim. I think stick in this case clearly means the people of Ephraim themselves and not a book.

[LDS Watchman]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

Atticus, please listen to the words of the prophets. Do you have a single utterance from a prophet that states that the stick of Ephraim is a tribe? You are walking a dangerous road by directly contradicting what modern day revelation has taught us.

Russel M Nelson: "Today, Saints living in many nations of the earth gratefully hold the Bible (the stick of Judah) and the Book of Mormon (the stick of Ephraim) bound as one in their hands."

Ulisses Soares: "Ezekiel spoke about the stick of Judah (the Bible) and the stick of Ephraim (the Book of Mormon) being brought together as one."

Boyd K Packer: "The sticks, of course, are records or books."

Gordon B. Hinckley (referencing Ez. 37) : "If the Book of Mormon is true, the Bible is true. The Bible is the Testament of the Old World. The Book of Mormon is the Testament of the New. The one is the record of Judah, the other is the record of Joseph, and they have come together in the hand of the Lord in fulfillment of the prophecy of Ezekiel."

Orson Pratt: "Here then was a symbol represented before their eyes in language that could not be misunderstood; it was a symbol of two records; for it is well known that records were kept in ancient times on parchment, rolled upon sticks, the same as we keep our maps at this day."

N. Eldon Tanner: "Here again, by direct revelation and by direct revelation only, do we understand clearly what Ezekiel meant. Here, the stick of Judah as referred to is the Bible, and the stick of Ephraim, which is written for Joseph and all the house of Israel his companions, is the Book of Mormon. Through the power of God and by direct revelation, this Book of Mormon, which contains the gospel in its fullness, was translated, and it with the Bible, became "one in thine hand." How clear and simple the words of Ezekiel become if we will but listen to the prophet's voice!"


It's simple and clear, Atticus. Just listen to the prophet's voice!

The stick equals book interpretation is the one put forth by the church. I understand why they interpret it that way and it may very well be a correct layer of interpretation. But I believe that the most correct interpretation is that stick equals tribe or people.

Look at this verse in D&C 27:5

"...Moroni, whom I have sent unto you to reveal the Book of Mormon, containing the fulness of my everlasting gospel, to whom I have committed the keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim"

I don't believe that he is saying that Moroni gave Joseph Smith the record of the book of Ephraim. I think stick in this case clearly means the people of Ephraim themselves and not a book.

[Niemand]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

The two can be synonymous.

A scroll is often held on sticks.



The words Bible, book, library - all common European words in some form - are all plant related. Ancient Celtic works were commonly written on branches as well. A number of druidic works in Ireland were burnt as bundles of sticks by Christian missionaries.

The stick equals book interpretation is the one put forth by the church. I understand why they interpret it that way and it may very well be a correct layer of interpretation. But I believe that the most correct interpretation is that stick equals tribe or people.

Look at this verse in D&C 27:5

"...Moroni, whom I have sent unto you to reveal the Book of Mormon, containing the fulness of my everlasting gospel, to whom I have committed the keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim"

I don't believe that he is saying that Moroni gave Joseph Smith the record of the book of Ephraim. I think stick in this case clearly means the people of Ephraim themselves and not a book.

Symbols can have multiple meanings, so both interpretations could be correct.

[Lemarque]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

Atticus, please listen to the words of the prophets. Do you have a single utterance from a prophet that states that the stick of Ephraim is a tribe? You are walking a dangerous road by directly contradicting what modern day revelation has taught us.

Russel M Nelson: "Today, Saints living in many nations of the earth gratefully hold the Bible (the stick of Judah) and the Book of Mormon (the stick of Ephraim) bound as one in their hands."

Ulisses Soares: "Ezekiel spoke about the stick of Judah (the Bible) and the stick of Ephraim (the Book of Mormon) being brought together as one."

Boyd K Packer: "The sticks, of course, are records or books."

Gordon B. Hinckley (referencing Ez. 37) : "If the Book of Mormon is true, the Bible is true. The Bible is the Testament of the Old World. The Book of Mormon is the Testament of the New. The one is the record of Judah, the other is the record of Joseph, and they have come together in the hand of the Lord in fulfillment of the prophecy of Ezekiel."

Orson Pratt: "Here then was a symbol represented before their eyes in language that could not be misunderstood; it was a symbol of two records; for it is well known that records were kept in ancient times on parchment, rolled upon sticks, the same as we keep our maps at this day."

N. Eldon Tanner: "Here again, by direct revelation and by direct revelation only, do we understand clearly what Ezekiel meant. Here, the stick of Judah as referred to is the Bible, and the stick of Ephraim, which is written for Joseph and all the house of Israel his companions, is the Book of Mormon. Through the power of God and by direct revelation, this Book of Mormon, which contains the gospel in its fullness, was translated, and it with the Bible, became "one in thine hand." How clear and simple the words of Ezekiel become if we will but listen to the prophet's voice!"


It's simple and clear, Atticus. Just listen to the prophet's voice!

The stick equals book interpretation is the one put forth by the church. I understand why they interpret it that way and it may very well be a correct layer of interpretation. But I believe that the most correct interpretation is that stick equals tribe or people.

Look at this verse in D&C 27:5

"...Moroni, whom I have sent unto you to reveal the Book of Mormon, containing the fulness of my everlasting gospel, to whom I have committed the keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim"

I don't believe that he is saying that Moroni gave Joseph Smith the record of the book of Ephraim. I think stick in this case clearly means the people of Ephraim themselves and not a book.

That's pretty bold, saying that you think you have the "most correct" interpretation after multiple prophets have stated clearly and simply what the stick is.

You can't be more correct than the prophets.

Even if you have a verse of scripture that you interpret in a way that suits your preferred interpretation.

If you can find the words of modern prophets that support your view, I would love to see them so I can grow in my understanding.

If you can't find the words of modern prophets that support your view, and are relying on your personal interpretation of a single verse, that's a dangerous path to be walking. Stay on the straight and narrow, don't wander into forbidden paths thinking you know better than holding steadfastly to the iron rod.


As for your D&C verse, here are my thoughts (in good faith).

D&C 25:5-14 goes through a list of different servants of Christ from different dispensations. It mentions the 'keys' Christ committed to each of the following:

Moroni: Keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim

Elias: Keys of bringing to pass the restoration of all things

Elijah: Keys of the power of turning the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers

Joseph Smith: Keys of ministry and keys of Christ's Kingdom

The phrase "to whom I have committed the keys of" to me means "to whom I gave the special mission of"

So I understand the following: "Moroni, whom I have sent unto you to reveal the Book of Mormon, containing the fulness of my everlasting gospel, to whom I have committed the keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim"

As saying: "Moroni had the special mission to preserve the record that would become the book of Ephraim, which is why he was sent to you to reveal where it was hidden."

Just like how Elias, Elijah, and other prophets not mentioned in this specific section of the D&C each came to Joseph Smith because of their specific callings they had in their time.

[Luke]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

Atticus, please listen to the words of the prophets. Do you have a single utterance from a prophet that states that the stick of Ephraim is a tribe? You are walking a dangerous road by directly contradicting what modern day revelation has taught us.

Russel M Nelson: "Today, Saints living in many nations of the earth gratefully hold the Bible (the stick of Judah) and the Book of Mormon (the stick of Ephraim) bound as one in their hands."

Ulisses Soares: "Ezekiel spoke about the stick of Judah (the Bible) and the stick of Ephraim (the Book of Mormon) being brought together as one."

Boyd K Packer: "The sticks, of course, are records or books."

Gordon B. Hinckley (referencing Ez. 37) : "If the Book of Mormon is true, the Bible is true. The Bible is the Testament of the Old World. The Book of Mormon is the Testament of the New. The one is the record of Judah, the other is the record of Joseph, and they have come together in the hand of the Lord in fulfillment of the prophecy of Ezekiel."

Orson Pratt: "Here then was a symbol represented before their eyes in language that could not be misunderstood; it was a symbol of two records; for it is well known that records were kept in ancient times on parchment, rolled upon sticks, the same as we keep our maps at this day."

N. Eldon Tanner: "Here again, by direct revelation and by direct revelation only, do we understand clearly what Ezekiel meant. Here, the stick of Judah as referred to is the Bible, and the stick of Ephraim, which is written for Joseph and all the house of Israel his companions, is the Book of Mormon. Through the power of God and by direct revelation, this Book of Mormon, which contains the gospel in its fullness, was translated, and it with the Bible, became "one in thine hand." How clear and simple the words of Ezekiel become if we will but listen to the prophet's voice!"


It's simple and clear, Atticus. Just listen to the prophet's voice!

I don’t think any of these (except maybe Orson Pratt) are authoritative enough to establish true doctrine. I don’t see a problem with either Atticus’ or your interpretation, though.

[LDS Watchman]

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

Atticus, please listen to the words of the prophets. Do you have a single utterance from a prophet that states that the stick of Ephraim is a tribe? You are walking a dangerous road by directly contradicting what modern day revelation has taught us.

Russel M Nelson: "Today, Saints living in many nations of the earth gratefully hold the Bible (the stick of Judah) and the Book of Mormon (the stick of Ephraim) bound as one in their hands."

Ulisses Soares: "Ezekiel spoke about the stick of Judah (the Bible) and the stick of Ephraim (the Book of Mormon) being brought together as one."

Boyd K Packer: "The sticks, of course, are records or books."

Gordon B. Hinckley (referencing Ez. 37) : "If the Book of Mormon is true, the Bible is true. The Bible is the Testament of the Old World. The Book of Mormon is the Testament of the New. The one is the record of Judah, the other is the record of Joseph, and they have come together in the hand of the Lord in fulfillment of the prophecy of Ezekiel."

Orson Pratt: "Here then was a symbol represented before their eyes in language that could not be misunderstood; it was a symbol of two records; for it is well known that records were kept in ancient times on parchment, rolled upon sticks, the same as we keep our maps at this day."

N. Eldon Tanner: "Here again, by direct revelation and by direct revelation only, do we understand clearly what Ezekiel meant. Here, the stick of Judah as referred to is the Bible, and the stick of Ephraim, which is written for Joseph and all the house of Israel his companions, is the Book of Mormon. Through the power of God and by direct revelation, this Book of Mormon, which contains the gospel in its fullness, was translated, and it with the Bible, became "one in thine hand." How clear and simple the words of Ezekiel become if we will but listen to the prophet's voice!"


It's simple and clear, Atticus. Just listen to the prophet's voice!

The stick equals book interpretation is the one put forth by the church. I understand why they interpret it that way and it may very well be a correct layer of interpretation. But I believe that the most correct interpretation is that stick equals tribe or people.

Look at this verse in D&C 27:5

"...Moroni, whom I have sent unto you to reveal the Book of Mormon, containing the fulness of my everlasting gospel, to whom I have committed the keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim"

I don't believe that he is saying that Moroni gave Joseph Smith the record of the book of Ephraim. I think stick in this case clearly means the people of Ephraim themselves and not a book.

That's pretty bold, saying that you think you have the "most correct" interpretation after multiple prophets have stated clearly and simply what the stick is.

You can't be more correct than the prophets.

Even if you have a verse of scripture that you interpret in a way that suits your preferred interpretation.

If you can find the words of modern prophets that support your view, I would love to see them so I can grow in my understanding.

If you can't find the words of modern prophets that support your view, and are relying on your personal interpretation of a single verse, that's a dangerous path to be walking. Stay on the straight and narrow, don't wander into forbidden paths thinking you know better than holding steadfastly to the iron rod.


As for your D&C verse, here are my thoughts (in good faith).

D&C 25:5-14 goes through a list of different servants of Christ from different dispensations. It mentions the 'keys' Christ committed to each of the following:

Moroni: Keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim

Elias: Keys of bringing to pass the restoration of all things

Elijah: Keys of the power of turning the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to the fathers

Joseph Smith: Keys of ministry and keys of Christ's Kingdom

The phrase "to whom I have committed the keys of" to me means "to whom I gave the special mission of"

So I understand the following: "Moroni, whom I have sent unto you to reveal the Book of Mormon, containing the fulness of my everlasting gospel, to whom I have committed the keys of the record of the stick of Ephraim"

As saying: "Moroni had the special mission to preserve the record that would become the book of Ephraim, which is why he was sent to you to reveal where it was hidden."

Just like how Elias, Elijah, and other prophets not mentioned in this specific section of the D&C each came to Joseph Smith because of their specific callings they had in their time.

I'm not saying the prophets are wrong. I'm saying that their interpretation is only one layer of interpretation, while I believe that the more correct interpretation of these scriptures is that stick equals nation or tribe.

If you look at the context of the stick of Joseph and the stick of Judah scripture in Ezekiel I believe that it's talking about the two separate nations/tribes eventually coming together and no longer vexing each other as it says in Isaiah.

I look at it kind of like how isolated scriptures were taken out of context and applied to the first coming of the Savior, while the context clearly shows that it refers to the last days. This doesn't mean that Mathew or whoever was wrong, it just means that it's only one layer of interpretation and that a more literal interpretation is also correct and perhaps even more correct.

[Lemarque]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

Atticus, please listen to the words of the prophets. Do you have a single utterance from a prophet that states that the stick of Ephraim is a tribe? You are walking a dangerous road by directly contradicting what modern day revelation has taught us.

Russel M Nelson: "Today, Saints living in many nations of the earth gratefully hold the Bible (the stick of Judah) and the Book of Mormon (the stick of Ephraim) bound as one in their hands."

Ulisses Soares: "Ezekiel spoke about the stick of Judah (the Bible) and the stick of Ephraim (the Book of Mormon) being brought together as one."

Boyd K Packer: "The sticks, of course, are records or books."

Gordon B. Hinckley (referencing Ez. 37) : "If the Book of Mormon is true, the Bible is true. The Bible is the Testament of the Old World. The Book of Mormon is the Testament of the New. The one is the record of Judah, the other is the record of Joseph, and they have come together in the hand of the Lord in fulfillment of the prophecy of Ezekiel."

Orson Pratt: "Here then was a symbol represented before their eyes in language that could not be misunderstood; it was a symbol of two records; for it is well known that records were kept in ancient times on parchment, rolled upon sticks, the same as we keep our maps at this day."

N. Eldon Tanner: "Here again, by direct revelation and by direct revelation only, do we understand clearly what Ezekiel meant. Here, the stick of Judah as referred to is the Bible, and the stick of Ephraim, which is written for Joseph and all the house of Israel his companions, is the Book of Mormon. Through the power of God and by direct revelation, this Book of Mormon, which contains the gospel in its fullness, was translated, and it with the Bible, became "one in thine hand." How clear and simple the words of Ezekiel become if we will but listen to the prophet's voice!"


It's simple and clear, Atticus. Just listen to the prophet's voice!

I don’t think any of these (except maybe Orson Pratt) are authoritative enough to establish true doctrine. I don’t see a problem with either Atticus’ or your interpretation, though.

I was trying to use a few quotes over a wide range of years to show it's been clearly defined as a book. Most of them are more recent because of the individual I was responding to.

There are a lot in the earlier church history that show this knowledge/interpretation. This link shows well over 20 references in the journal of discourses to the verses in Ezekial. https://scriptures.byu.edu/#07e25::c07e2515c0

Here's an entire discourse by Orson Pratt titled "The Stick of Joseph and of Judah—Times of the Gentiles—Apostasy From the Ancient Order—Restoration of the Everlasting Gospel"
https://scriptures.byu.edu/#07e25:t2712 ... c07e2515c2

[ransomme]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

No, the bible and book of Mormon POV is a bad Mormon-centric interpretation of those verses. Read the whole chapter, Ezekiel 37.

The stick of Judah is the Jews. The stick of Joseph is remnant of Jacob and Israel and Joseph. It's about the reuniting of Israel into one nation again. It's an Endtime vision about the restoration of all things and the Davidic servant.

As Moroni said, "...the record of the stick of Ephraim"

The record (the Book of Mormon) belongs to the stick (the people) of Ephraim

Like it says in the book of Mormon:
"Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel;...to show unto the remnant of the house of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers;"

Then read 3 Nephi 21

BTW
The Hebrew word there translated as sticks everywhere else translates as tree/trees/wood, like the trees of the garden

[Lemarque]

It isn't a book.

The sticks, of course, are records or books

I'm not saying the prophets are wrong.

[LDS Watchman]

It isn't a book.

The sticks, of course, are records or books

I'm not saying the prophets are wrong.

It looks like you're trying to pick a fight. Either that or it's a reading comprehension issue.

In case it's a reading comprehension issue, let me say it again in plain English. I believe that both interpretations have validity. In isolation the term stick CAN apply to books, but when looked at in context, I believe that it refers more literally to groups of people. Just like some last days prophecies also had an application to the coming of Christ in the meridian of time.

[simpleton]

Somebody get either stick do some spanking.

[ransomme]

It isn't a book.

The sticks, of course, are records or books

I'm not saying the prophets are wrong.

James E. Faust was wrong in saying that, and you know what it happens to everyone

[Alexander]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

Atticus is Logan/Matthias confirmed.

[LDS Watchman]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

Atticus is Logan/Matthias confirmed.

No, I'm obviously ransomme since he thinks its referring to the same thing, too.

[ransomme]

This is something I've wondered about since I was a teenager.

In Ezek. 37 it talks about there being a stick of Judah, and a stick of Ephraim. That is taught as the bible and the Book of Mormon.

But Lehi is a descendant of Manasseh, not Ephraim.

Not saying the BoM isn't the stick of Ephraim, I've just wondered about that distinction for a while now.

The stick of Ephraim is the tribe of Ephraim. It isn't a book.

The two can be synonymous.

A scroll is often held on sticks.



The words Bible, book, library - all common European words in some form - are all plant related. Ancient Celtic works were commonly written on branches as well. A number of druidic works in Ireland were burnt as bundles of sticks by Christian missionaries.

Moroni taught us well, "...the record of the stick of Ephraim"

The record (the Book of Mormon) belongs to the stick (the people) of Ephraim.

That should be easier for us to understand than reading the whole chapter (Ezekiel 37) in context. picking verses usually leads to misinterpretations. in this car the deviation isn't a big one, but none the less there is a difference

[Reluctant Watchman]

Atticus is Logan/Matthias confirmed.

Turn out is was admittedly Logan/Matthias/Atticus/LDS Watchman.