3 Nephi 16: 9

3 Nephi 16: 9

“And because of the mercies of the Father unto the Gentiles, and also the judgments of the Father upon my people who are of the house of Israel, verily, verily, I say unto you, that after all this, and I have caused my people who are of the house of Israel to be smitten, and to be afflicted, and to be slain, and to be cast out from among them, and to become hated by them, and to become a hiss and a byword among them—”
Notice once again the Lord’s motivation for speaking these words: The Father’s “mercies” and the Father’s “judgments” are what drives the coming events in history. The Father is in control and Christ does not question or gainsay the results. The Father’s mercy is not questioned by Christ, nor is there any degree of shame shown for the terrible circumstances which follow from His “mercies.” Nor does Christ hesitate to announce the Father’s “judgments” despite the anxiety which some may feel at hearing the future.
Truth should be delivered in a forthright and plain manner, whether the result is fearful or vindicating; whether you take joy in the news or you cower at what is to come.
Notice, however, that when the Father’s judgment has been given, then the Lord assumes personal responsibility for the punishment to be inflicted. He does not say it is the Father’s punishment. It is His own. Christ will personally be the one who “caused my people who are of the house of Israel to be smitten.” Christ will personally “afflict” and “slay” the people. The Father decides, Christ fulfills. He seeks no cover, looks to no-one else to be held to account, He does as His Father judges.
Why would Christ assume responsibility to “smite” to “afflict” and to “slay” when it is the Father’s judgment?
What does this tell us about Christ’s acceptance of the Father’s decisions?
Is (or has) there been some good result from those whom Christ calls “my people” (i.e., His people) being smitten, afflicted, slain, and cast out by the Gentiles? If so, what good has come to the Lord’s people?  How can these things that have lasted now for over two hundred years have been beneficial to the Lord’s people?  What can we learn about the Lord calling afflicted, smitten and outcast people as “His people” despite their centuries of subordination?
What does the Gentile “hatred” of the Lord’s people do to diminish the Lord’s plans for them? What does casting them out and making them a “hiss and a byword” by the Gentiles do to remove the Lord’s promised blessing and covenant to “His people?”
What foolish pride allows the Gentiles to measure the Lord’s people as stricken, smitten of God and afflicted?  (Isa. 53: 4.)
Why would the Gentiles be put in this position? Why would Israel? What does it do to the Gentiles’ ability to see through the deception of their time into truth which is timeless?  (D&C 93: 24.)
How should the Gentiles view their momentary triumph and unchallenged possession of the land promised to others?
Why are those smitten and afflicted called by the Lord “my people” and the Gentiles referred to as “Gentiles?”
Is the irony of this beginning to dawn on you?  Maybe you should re-read the title page of the Book of Mormon.

4 thoughts on “3 Nephi 16: 9

  1. All humble followers of Christ who earnestly seek Him and to do the Father’s will in their lives will enjoy the Father’s mercies. All Christens in this nation who are truly Christian will enjoy His mercies. Have we rejected Christ as a church? No, we are seeking Him daily. Are we encumbered by false tradition; yes, and we are seeking to overcome false traditions. Are we filled with the Lord’s power, No! But we are seeking to become so. Have we parted the veil to enter His presence; not many, but perhaps that time has also come, as we better understand His gospel and are enabled to come unto Him fully. Christ’s declaration is not about anyone who wants to follow Him and who is seeking to do so.

    How are we to look at errant brothers and sisters in the gospel? We are to look at them as Moses looked at the Children of Israel. Moses did not leave them in the dessert to enter the Holy Land but stayed with, succored, taught, and helped nurture a people in the admonition of the Lord. He brought them along. We have not rejected Jesus; we are still being brought along. As you, I, Denver, and others receive of the fullness, we are to help others do the same. We are to help reshape expectations and to help create certitude among our people regarding a true hope in Christ.

    We are not to condemn, find fault, and prophecy destruction to a people that is still striving to know the Lord. That is not the Lord’s way; it never has been His way. Denver, if you have truly parted the veil and entered Christ’s presence; and, if you have been succored, instructed, and comforted by Christ and prepared in all things to gain access to the Father, then you are blessed.

    But when discussions deteriorate and do not follow the pattern set forth in Section 50 of the D&C, then those discussions are not from the Lord; they are from man. I hope this discussion will not deteriorate but will follow that pattern.

    Also, I’ve read the 42 page document a couple of times so far. I’ll probably read it again. Most of the note taking is gibberish. I suspect the conditions that prevailed during this discourse were difficult. I don’t believe we are to seek to strain truth from mud as it were. The Lord generally speaks very plainly. Too much of the King Follett notes are not plain; I suspect that is why this discussion is not in Latter-day scripture.

  2. What does it take to be truly Christian? The Christ calls it a cross. What do we see with the trodden down people of Israel? I think we can call that a cross. What would any Gentile Church member, LDS or not, say if they lived like the House of Israel does today? Would they still praise their God?

    Also, if Denver can’t prove a point using a beloved, yet unofficial transcript of our Prophet, then we condemn ourselves. You don’t have to strain anything out of mud if you get it from the source, but using a favorite set of sermons may help make the truth more palatable for others who wouldn’t accept it from unlikely sources. To knock down people’s beliefs in such ideas, brushing them aside because one recorded attempt at teaching them is scanty, may be the very type of murder spoken about in the last post’s comments.

    Sorry JDS, I couldn’t disagree with you more, but the olive leaf I will reach out to you is that all my frustration above is not at you, but at those thoughts (which I use to espouse, and I used to murder people with). In fact, I only skimmed what you wrote, so I may have taken you completely wrong, so forgive me. Look at the above as my own tears for past behavior in myself.

  3. Like Denver, I don’t seek ratification for my thoughts and words. They are mine and I take responsibility for them. I will add that as an author, researcher, and note taker, I see things probably differently than many who would read these transcripts. Today we have the benefit of talks being recorded. Those who give those talks are even allowed to make final edits before publication in the Ensign. None of that existed when this Sermon was given. Some take notes slowly, some more quickly; have you ever missed part of what someone was saying while taking a note? Of course you have. There is one other element to these notes. Each was influenced by the perspective, maturity, and spiritual growth of those listening to Joseph and taking notes. Do we all read the Book of Mormon exactly the same and get the same message from reading it? No, neither do we all hear the word the same or take notes in the exact manner the speaker would have had those notes written. We might have even been up all night with the baby the night before and have had a bad day taking notes. To disregard these issues is certainly anyone’s right; however they are legitimate issues and reflect the reality under which these people labored who left behind these transcripts. I don’t discard them; I take them seriously, enough to ask Heavenly Father to help me understand them better. Nothing in the transcripts scares me or makes me uncomfortable. I simply feel ambivalent about them at this point and have learned from experience, that when this is the case to not seek to draw conclusions that the Spirit does not authorize. Perhaps tomorrow I will have a revelation on the subject. Not so yet.

  4. Ah, yes, nice to see your perspective a little more clearly. I like my comment for sharing a counter-opinion to an extreme take on your post. I thought the issue needed to be raised whether or not you fully meant what I was thinking about. Sorry to piggy-back off you that way. But, I did mean that the thoughts Denver shared can be taken from many other sources that aren’t as muddled as the King Follett discourses. Much clearer ones for sure.

Comments are closed.