This juxtaposition has made me wonder if the phrase in 2 Nephi 2 actually refers to the Second Coming. We might, though, ask why Lehi makes a kind of return here to verse 3. I see Lehi to be saying that all men have knowledge so they cannot be blameless, and by the law no man is justified, so freedom doesn’t come in knowledge (in fact I’m not sure the Book of Mormon ever speaks of knowledge itself being the cause of freedom). Otherwise, God commands Adam and Eve to do the impossible and then punishes them, or worse, commands Adam and Eve to be disobedient, not unlike the Serpent in the narrative. Lehi says, “The Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. The reason I mention this is because these interpretive traditions are driven by an exegetical worry with sin (either by God or by man); they indicate an anxiety with the text requiring an alteration of the text by the reader. The reality of the resurrection—but only on the horizon—is such that we can do otherwise than sin. 3) But my question is why all these steps? :). More than 1/2 the witnesses denounced their testimonies! News from around the globe about Christianity & the ministries God works through. Without the Fall, there is no mortality. . In this verse we see the phrase, “Wherefore, the ends of the law which the Holy One hath given, unto the inflicting of the punishment which is affixed, which punishment that is affixed is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement.” Sheila points out the general difficulty of following the syntax and then provides a summary as follows: “The most basic point I can see here is that the law is tied to punishment, and the atonement is tied to happiness. I don’t have much to say in response except thank you, and thank you especially, Rico, for pointing out how it’s particularly this ontological business of verse 11 that doesn’t seem ever to have been picked up by the Nephite tradition. The word “punish” and its variants occurs 35 times in the Book of Mormon. What meaning should we take from the fact that despite borrowing Lehi’s ideas and language, they seem to throw out these steps? A primary scripture on the subject of grace is found in 2 Nephi 2:6-7 After they fall they still can act for themselves but now can do evil and good, and Alma is simply repeating that last part (skipping over Lehi’s elaboration of opposites and the opposing enticements as a necessary initial state in the Garden, etc). 1 And now, Jacob, I speak unto you: Thou art my a firstborn in the days of my tribulation in the wilderness. . However, his approach fell out of favor and was replaced by Widtsoe’s approach, which, among other things, seeks to remove the element of sin all together from the narrative (here is where a special distinction between sin and transgression is born, with transgression being offered as a non-sins). 4) Whether Adam and Eve together in the Garden in their prelapsarian state could have had children or not is still an unresolved tension. I see 2 Nephi 9 as one of the strongest textual evidence for a clear demarcation between these two deaths. 3. We’d do well to pay close attention to it, I think…. Are verses 26-27 in a certain sense marking a transition back to the concrete setting (which will be front and center beginning in verse 28)? I’ll also ignore much of what leads up to this point in 2 Nephi 2, since verse 26 marks a shift from Lehi’s long narrative of the Fall to his relatively short—but nonetheless remarkable—analysis of the atonement. What would it mean for StL to have studied Lehi (as opposed to, say, Nephi)? That’s the question I hear the Book of Mormon asking me, and the account I’ve outlined is an attempt to answer that perplexing question. Lehi feels this need to discuss opposition as necessary for man to act for himself. In other words, the Book of Moses may have its own internal logic and narrative goals. It is interesting that we don’t have any specification of who is affixing this punishment. Grab the info you need on several topics all in one easy access point! Now, I can anticipate someone saying that Alma and Lehi are saying the same thing. Even something like the Fall of Adam and Eve, which appears to be a failure and a tragedy, turns out to be part of God’s plan of happiness. It becomes possible to do good. Given that atonement theory is highly problematic (penal substitutionary theory, etc. (Why? My point here is to explore the possibility that Samuel might not have been selectively quoting Lehi as his ancestor, but rather that Samuel has accepted the entire Nephite canon.
Rma Practice Exam 2 Quizlet, Cumberland County Animal Shelter, New Immigration Rules Uk 2020 For Illegal Immigrants, Abbreviation For Square, Turin Brakes - Long Distance, Resorts And Hotels In Chikmagalur, Qgis Tutorial Youtube,