NOM

The phrase above is found in two places in the scriptures. In John 11, we read of Caiaphus using it to justify the execution of Jesus. In 1st Nephi 4, we read of the Spirit using it to justify Nephi slaying Laban. I have thought it very curious that those two deaths should be justified by the same phrase. The account in John 11 further suggests that Caiaphus was phophesying (by the Spirit?) when he says this. Fortunately, it is illegal for a person to be condemned to death for religious reasons in today's society. But what can we take away from this curious coincidence?

deacon blues wrote: ↑Mon Jun 19, 2017 8:21 am The phrase above is found in two places in the scriptures. In John 11, we read of Caiaphus using it to justify the execution of Jesus. In 1st Nephi 4, we read of the Spirit using it to justify Nephi slaying Laban. I have thought it very curious that those two deaths should be justified by the same phrase. The account in John 11 further suggests that Caiaphus was phophesying (by the Spirit?) when he says this. Fortunately, it is illegal for a person to be condemned to death for religious reasons in today's society. But what can we take away from this curious coincidence?

Increasingly, I am simply inclined to ascribe this as another point from Joseph Smith's mind. His knowledge of the bible was enough to include lots of biblical references and vast swathes of Isaiah. The Nephi sections were transcribed last and Joseph includes this dynamic Nephi character that looks a lot like an aspiration of Joseph Smith.

The retrieval of the Brass Plates needed some kind of dramatic arc. Laban's homicide is a powerful literary tool as it references a morally conflicted justification for killing.

You may recall the attempt at filming the story of 1 Nephi and how it turned into a fairly forgettable movie. The "Infants on Thrones" podcast included an interview with a non-LDS movie reviewer discussing "The Book of Mormon Movie, Volume 1: The Journey". One of the insights from someone not raised LDS was how the reviewer had a difficult time seeing Nephi as the hero of this story after he kills Laban. This story event does not work in a modern movie very well.

Corsair wrote: ↑Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:01 amYou may recall the attempt at filming the story of 1 Nephi and how it turned into a fairly forgettable movie. The "Infants on Thrones" podcast included an interview with a non-LDS movie reviewer discussing "The Book of Mormon Movie, Volume 1: The Journey". One of the insights from someone not raised LDS was how the reviewer had a difficult time seeing Nephi as the hero of this story after he kills Laban. This story event does not work in a modern movie very well.

Here's a clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSW6WmNKoh0

So inspirational.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Mon Jun 19, 2017 1:40 pm

Corsair wrote: ↑Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:01 amYou may recall the attempt at filming the story of 1 Nephi and how it turned into a fairly forgettable movie. The "Infants on Thrones" podcast included an interview with a non-LDS movie reviewer discussing "The Book of Mormon Movie, Volume 1: The Journey". One of the insights from someone not raised LDS was how the reviewer had a difficult time seeing Nephi as the hero of this story after he kills Laban. This story event does not work in a modern movie very well.

Here's a clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSW6WmNKoh0

So inspirational.

Can any modern LDS leader conceive of a situation where they would counsel an LDS youth to "follow the guidance of the spirit" when the youth feels impressed to murder someone? If some LDS youth is hearing any kind of spiritual promptings or voices telling them to end a human life, they should immediately reconsider their life choices.

This scene is wrong on so many levels. I recognize how the director tried his best to make Nephi more sympathetic with his merciful hesitation, but that's the only vaugely redeeming aspect of the scene. The director was a believer and simply could not change the story or his LDS audience would have cried foul. The Voice of God seems like kind of a jerk and seems to need Nephi to kill Laban in the most inconvenient and messy way possible. Strangling Laban with his cloak would have been a lot easier and avoided the absolute fountain of blood arising from cutting off a head, for example.

Instead, some time the next day some poor guy is going to discover the naked, headless, blood soaked body of a prominent citizen of Jerusalem. This is the introductory scence of a parituclarly grisly episode of "CSI: Jerusalem", not an inspirational story for Sunday School. It's the plot of "Hannibal" or "Dexter", not a teaching moment for impressionable youth.

Nephi could so easily hear the "spirit" and obviously could communicate with the "spirit". He should have said, "Lord, how about you give him a massive heart attack instead. I don't want to have this existential weight on my conscience for the rest of my life. I really don't want to clean up a gallon of blood either." I should probably skip Gospel Doctrine class the day that 1 Nephi chapter 4 comes around.

I've been pondering the Caiaphus quote, "Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not." It seems ironic that Caiaphus, as quoted by the author of John, in the King James version, seems to being saying that Jesus must die, in order to fulfill the Messianic mission of saving the Jewish nation. Yet many say the actions of a few Jews, like Caiaphus, caused the suffering by the Jewish nation in the ensuing centuries. Other translations give a slightly different slant to it. Was Caiaphus unconsciously prophesying Jesus fulfilling Messianic mission?

Thanks for the reference to the Book of Mormon movie. Good old Nephi.

deacon blues wrote: ↑Mon Jun 19, 2017 7:06 pm I've been pondering the Caiaphus quote, "Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not." It seems ironic that Caiaphus, as quoted by the author of John, in the King James version, seems to being saying that Jesus must die, in order to fulfill the Messianic mission of saving the Jewish nation. Yet many say the actions of a few Jews, like Caiaphus, caused the suffering by the Jewish nation in the ensuing centuries. Other translations give a slightly different slant to it. Was Caiaphus unconsciously prophesying Jesus fulfilling Messianic mission?

Thanks for the reference to the Book of Mormon movie. Good old Nephi.

First of all, doctrinal. I call foul on God, again. We recently had a 2nd Coming lesson and one of the passages was the Jews being punished for Jesus's death. It's somewhere in the D & C. I see that and wonder how no one who has lived post-Holocaust doesn't find that appalling. So, Jesus dying saving a nation and then those few Jews responsible for Jesus's death being Hitler's justification for genocide. Wow. Just wow.

Next. Private thoughts I've had for quite awhile. I have a friend who is divorced and part of the reason he's divorced is she left the church. The other part of the reason is she had an affair. He was so panic stricken at the thought of his wife raising their children outside the gospel, he contemplated murder. He used this verse to justify his thoughts. Bearing in mind my parents and a few other people I know, I privately think that if someone says that divorce is inexcusable, then I think they must consider homicide a preferable alternative. Finally, along those same lines, y'all know how upset I can get about how stupid the church is about abuse and said stupidity can cost lives? And they don't care? Or they tell me to have faith while this continues unabated?

I sometimes wonder if the powers that be are justifying the allowing abuse to continue with these references.

I'm going to go do something else, now.

http://www.mormondiscussionpodcast.org/ ... rder-foul/

This podcast is amazing. For the first time I processed that Nephi actually became Laban in the end. Both wanted to steal the other's property and kill them. Nephi succeeded. (Apparently with god's help.)

A great listen.

LDS interpretation of scripture is one of linking no matter how weak the link may be. Linking the words in a late-D&C scripture to a 3,500 year old document from an ancient civilization with nothing in common with 19th century US culture is completely valid. Most of the local LDS scripture gurus were people who were great at linking scripture. Heck, most Mormons love Hugh Nibley, and he was the king of all linkers: when I read "Temple and Cosmos" it was like reading one giant chain of scriptures from seminary.

When I was a believer this was one of my favorite scripture links. They were mirror images of each other, where they look the same but reversed. One was an evil man (Caiaphas) justifying the murder of a great man (Jesus) while the other was a great man (Nephi) justifying the murder of an evil man (Laban) for the same means. One was misguided (Caiaphas) and one was truly led by God (Nephi). Like all things in life, the justifications can be very similar, but the results for ourselves can be disastrous if we use justifications by man vs. justifications by God.

About two years before I left the church I stopped linking scripture. When I started studying a bit of biblical criticism and exegesis I realized that linking in this fashion tells us nothing. Linking scripture is only appropriate when it is the intention of the author to do so, like in the gospel of St. Matthew.

However, this approach to linking scripture can also be an undoing. When you lose some level of faith in the book of Mormon, you realize that all of these deep links with the bible are because Joseph was caking things and lifting things from the Bible. When coupled with a reading of the first edition of the book of Mormon, which reads like someone just dictating off the top of their head, I realized that he was using phrases he was reading in his bible in an attempt to make things sound, well, biblical. All those links I thought were deep were suddenly examples of why the book of Mormon was written by Smith and not by a bunch of authors.

The links between the book of Mormon and the bible are just too close, often word for word with the King James translation. Even when authors were specifically linking their writings with that of older scripture, often the translations come out differently. Much of Matthew's links to the earlier Jewish writings don't match up in translation, because he doesn't quote them exactly. That is what we would expect to find in Nephi's or Mormon's writings. Nope, we just biblical quotes left and right.