Summary of Orson Pratt's Talk from September 19, 1880 Making Reference to the First Vision (Deseret News, September 20, 1880)

"Tabernacle Services," Deseret News (September 20, 1880): 3 (summarizing a speech by Orson Pratt delivered September 19, 1880):

 

 

The speaker gave illustrations to prove this, and to substantiate his assertion that for centuries the world had been without the light of the gospel, without divine authority, and without a Christian Church. The beginning of a new revelation was coincident with the setting up of this Church of Latter-day Saints. The speaker then described the first vision of the Prophet Joseph—something far different to that the world had been accustomed for centuries . . .

Orson Pratt Making Explicit Reference to the First Vision in a Discourse Delivered February 24, 1869

  

When did the Lord first manifest himself to this man? Read our history if you wish to understand all the particulars; on this occasion I shall barely refer you to the early history of this church in print. The Lord revealed himself to that person, not in his manhood, but in his youth. We have heard much said, by those who know nothing of the matter, about "old Joe Smith." how old was Joseph Smith when the Lord first manifested Himself to him? He was about fourteen years and four months old. Was that a very aged man? Look around here in this assembly and hunt up children fourteen years of age, and you will immediately admit that they do not look very aged.

 

What were the circumstances that enabled him to have manifestations from Heaven at that early period of this life? He was very anxious, as most of mankind are to be saved; and he was also very anxious to understand how to be saved. But on this point he was at a loss, he did not understand the way to be saved. . . . When he was about fourteen years old there was what is called a religious revival or reformation in the neighborhood in which he lived. It was not confined to any one particular sect. The Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, and the various denominations in that district or country were all engaged more or less in this revival. Several of the relatives of this youth had taken part in this revival, and had united themselves with the Presbyterian church. This young man was also requested to unite himself with this church. First one and then another of the different persuasions would come and converse with him and try to influence him to join his lot with them; and seeing so much confusion, each sect claiming that they were the true people of God, he became at a loss what to do. He occasionally devoted an hour, when his labors on the farm would permit, to reading the Bible, and while doing so his eyes happened to fall on a certain passage of scripture, recorded in the epistle of James, which says that if any man lack wisdom let him ask of God who giveth liberally to all men and upbraideth not. . . . he went out into a little grove near his father's house, in the town of Manchester, Ontario County, State of New York, and there he knelt down in all the simplicity of a child and prayer to the Father in the name of Jesus that He would show him which, among all the churches, was the true one. Said he, "show me, Father, who are in possession of the truth, let me know, O Lord, the right way, and I will walk therein."

 

He had now come to a Person who was able to teach him. All his inquiries previously had been futile and vain, but he now applied to the right source. Did the Lord hear him? Yes. But he had to exercise faith. This young man, while thus praying, was not discouraged because he was tempted; but he continued praying until he overcame the powers of darkness which tried to prevent him from calling upon God. The Lord hearkened; being the same God who lived in ancient times. He was able to hear and answer prayers that were offered up in this sincere manner, and he answered the prayers of this youth. The heavens, as it were, were opened to him, or in other words, a glorious pillar of light like the brightness of the sun appeared in the heavens above him, and approached the spot where he was praying; his eyes were fixed upon it and his heart was lifted up in prayer before the Most High. He saw the light gradually approaching him until it rested upon the tops of the trees. He beheld that the leaves of the trees were not consumed by it, although its brightness, apparently, was sufficient as he at first thought to consume everything before it. But the trees were not consumed by it, and it continued to descend until it rested upon him and enveloped him in its glorious rays. When he was thus encircled about with this pillar of fire his mind was caught away from every object that surrounded him, and he was filled with the visions of the Almighty, and he saw, in the midst of this glorious pillar of fire, two glorious personages, whose countenances shone with an exceeding great lustre. One of them spoke to him, saying, while pointing to the other, "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, hear ye him." . . . Mr. Smith, this young man, in the simplicity of his heart, continued saying to these personages "which church shall I join, which is the true church?" He then and there was commanded, in the most strict manner, to go nto after them, for they had all gone out of the way; he was told there was no Christian church on the face of the earth according to the ancient pattern, as recorded the in New Testament; but they had all strayed form the ancient faith and had lost the gifts and powers of the Holy Ghost; they had lost the spirit of revelation and prophecy, the power to heal the sick, and every other gift and blessing possessed and enjoyed by the ancient Church. "Go not after them," was the command given to this young man; and he was told that if he would be faithful in serving the true and living God, it should be made manifest to him, in a time to come, the true church that God intended to establish. ("Discourse by Elder Orson Pratt, delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Feb. 24th, 1869," Deseret News [February 27, 1869]: 2)

 

Announcement of the First Vision and Related Joseph Smith Accounts Being Published in Danish (Deseret News, July 2, 1877)

The following is from Deseret News (July 2, 1877): 3. It is important as it is the announcement of the First Vision and other Joseph Smith-related accounts in Danish:

Joseph Smith, the Prophet.—The first number of this work, in the Danish language, will be issued tomorrow. The compilers and editors, Brother A. Jensen and J. A. Bruun, publishing it in monthly parts. The one which will appear to-morrow will have two chapters, the contents of which are as follow—

 

Parentage of Joseph Smith, the Prophet—Early Education—Youth—Religious Impressions—First Vision—Visit of the Angel Moroni—Receives the records with the Urim and Thummim, and the Breast-plate.

Joseph Smith's First Vision Mentioned in the May 29, 1852 Issue of the Deseret News

"Lifeof Joseph Smith," Deseret News 2, no. 15 (May 29, 1852): 1

 

 

I gave [Erastus Holmes] a brief relation of my experience while in my juvenile years, say from six years old up to the time I received the first visitation of angels, which was when I was about fourteen years old; . . .

Alma L. Smith (November 11, 1875) Having Knowledge of the First Vision

Alma L. Smith, letter to Editor, November 11, 1875, in Deseret News (December 11, 1875): 4 (recounting a conference in Laie, Oahu, Sandwich Islands):

 

 

During the afternoon and part of the evening he [Edwin D. Woolley] read considerable in several of our books, read the account in the "Pearl of Great Price," of the first vision to the Prophet Joseph, his finding of the plates, the organizing of the Church, &c.

Excerpts from Orson Pratt, “Restoration of the Aaronic and Melchisedek Priesthoods" (April 25, 1857)

 On the location of the place of the ordination of Joseph and Oliver by Peter, James, and John:

 

The precise date and place of the ordination of Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, under the hands of Peter, James, and John, are not published in the History. It may have been in the chamber of Mr. Whitmer, or it may have been in the wilderness near the banks of the Susquehanna river. Whether they appeared to them more than once is not stated. (Orson Pratt, “Restoration of the Aaronic and Melchisedek Priesthoods,” The Latter-day Saints’ Millennial Star 19, no. 17 [April 25, 1857]: 259)

 

On the issue of “the chamber of Mr. Whitmer,” see:

 

Michael Hubbard MacKay, “Event or Process? How ‘the Chamber of Old Father Whitmer’ Helps Us Understand Priesthood Restoration,” BYU Studies 60, no. 1 (2021): 73-101

 

 

On the “line upon line” process of the development of priesthood offices, etc:

 

It will be perceive that the Lord did not restore the full authority of the Melchisedek Priesthood at once, but conferred little by little: first, the Aaronic Priesthood which is only an appendage of the Melchisedek; secondly, the office of Elder and Apostle; thirdly, the office of Bishop; fourthly, the Melchisedek Priesthood; fifthly, the President of that Priesthood; sixthly, the organization of the first Presidency of three, and standing High Council of Twelve; seventhly, the organization of the Council of the Twelve Apostles; and eighthly, the organization of the Councils of Seventies. (Orson Pratt, “Restoration of the Aaronic and Melchisedek Priesthoods,” The Latter-day Saints’ Millennial Star 19, no. 17 [April 25, 1857]: 259-60)

 

 

On changes to the revelations:

 

Joseph, the Prophet, in selecting the revelations from the Manuscripts, and arranging them for publication, did not arrange them according to the order of the date in which they were given, neither did he think it necessary to publish them all in the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, but left them to be published more fully in his History. Hence, paragraphs taken from the revelations of a later date, are, in a few instances, incorporated with those of an earlier date. Indeed, at the time of compilation, the Prophet was inspired in several instances to write additional sentences and paragraphs to the earlier revelations. In this manner the Lord did truly give ‘line upon line, here a little and there a little,’ the same as He did to a revelation that Jeremiah received. And even though this revelation was burned by the wicked king of Israel, the Lord revealed the central message again with great numbers of additional content. (See Jeremiah xxxvi. 32.) (Orson Pratt, “Restoration of the Aaronic and Melchisedek Priesthoods,” The Latter-day Saints’ Millennial Star 19, no. 17 [April 25, 1857]: 260)

 

For more on this, see:

 

Biblical Prophets Changing Their Words and the Words of Previous Prophets

William V. Harris on why Christians Favored Codies over Bookrolls

  

One theory has it that the Christians preferred codices to bookrolls because, being of the lower orders, they were accustomed to codices and regarded upper-class book-rolls with suspicion. This cannot be right: the Christians who made most use of books must in the main have been quite familiar with book-rolls (and what passes for "popular" literature was in fact almost all written on rolls, at least in Egypt, where virtually all our evidence comes from), whereas the more plebeian of the Christians came from backgrounds in which no books of any kind were in regular use. This last fact may have been important: many Christians felt no conscious attachment at all to the old written culture and may for this reason have been especially willing to jettison the old kind of book. But for the positive attraction of the codex form we have to look elsewhere. It certainly made it possible to encompass a longer text within a single physical "book"-an entire Iliad or Aeneid, for instance, which previously required a number of rolls each. But the suspicion must remain strong that the Christians saw some other specific advantage in the codex form, and, as others have suggested, this is likely to have been the greater ease with which a particular passage can be found in a codex. To find the passage which you want to read to the faithful or use against your opponent in a theological squabble, you would commonly have had to unroll up to ten feet of papyrus. How much easier to mark a page and turn to it immediately! It is interesting that in the lists of second-century codices that are unconnected with Christianity or Judaism, of which seventeen are currently known, six or more are texts which may have been needed for consultation and quotation more than for ordinary reading. Some are also texts which are likely to have been wanted in "one-volume" editions, such as Plato's Republic. Thus the codex had a number of advantages over the book-roll, and it should in general have made it easier for people to read literary texts. It certainly made it easier to look things up in a technical handbook, or in a legal textbook or in a collection of enactments such as was to be found in the new legal codes of the 290s. The victory of the codex over the book-roll was natural in an age in which religious books were gaining in relative importance,·and in which consultation and quotation instead of independent and disinterested reading were becoming commoner. (William V. Harris, Ancient Literacy [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1989], 295-97)

 

H. A. G. Houghton on Matthew 26:36

  

26:36 εως [ου] (while)

 

The textual tradition is split between εως (‘until’; 01 04 0281 33 700 etc.), εως αν (‘until’; 05 019 032 037 etc.), εως ου (‘until when’; 03 036 067 and the majority of minuscules) and εως ου αν (‘until when’ 𝔓^53vid 02). All forms apart from the last one are paralleled elsewhere in Matthew, albeit often with textual variation omitting a following ου or αν which may be indicative of later changes in the Greek language . . . For this reason, one of the longer readings is preferable. The context suggests that the sense of εως here is, unusually for Matthew, ‘while’ or ‘during’ rather than ‘until’: the choice of ου may support this (cf. Matt. 14:22), also is also seen in the SBLGNT and THGNT. (H. A. G. Houghton, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: A Companion to the Sixth Edition of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament [Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2025], 61, emphasis in bold added)

 

Trent Dee Stephens on Genesis 4:2 vs. the Popular LDS View that the Garden of Eden and Adam-ondi-Ahman was in the New World

Against the popular Latter-day Saint view that the Garden of Eden and Adam-ondi-Ahman were in the New World, Trent Dee Stephens wrote that:

 

The problem with the Garden of Eden and Adam-ondi-Ahman being in the American continent is that Genesis 4:2 states that “ . . . Able was a keeper of sheep . . .” There is absolutely no archaeological, anthropological, paleontological, or historical evidence that there were ever sheep on the American continent before they were brought here by European settlers in the seventeenth century. (Trent Dee Stephens, Who is Adam? Where Science Meets Religion [Pocatello, Idaho: Castle Book Publishing, 2023], 210-11; cf. Trent Dee Stephens on Adam-ondi-Ahman and D&C 116)

 

On Book of Mormon “sheep,” see the discussion Defending anachronisms in the Book of Mormon with Jerry Grover (part 2). Here is the text of the relevant x4 slides:

 

[1]

 

ALLEGED ANACHRONISM: SHEEP

 

The only mention of “sheep” in the Nephite record is quotations from the Old World (generally Isaiah) or Jesus Christ, or as alliteration or allegories in religious teachings (as previously discussed).

 

The mentions are as follows:

 

Old World/Isaiah: 1 N3phi 22:25; 2 Nephi 17:21, 23:14; Mosiah 14:6-7, 15:6

 

Jesus Christ: Mosiah 26:20-21; 3 Nephi 14:15, 15:17, 21, 24, 16:1, 3, 18,31, 20:16, 21:12

 

Religious teaching references: Alma 5:37-39, 59-60, 25:12; Helaman 15:13

 

The one direct reference implying sheep is the mention of “lamb-skin” that the Gaddianton robbers were wearing (3 Nephi 4:7). As the Gaddianton appear to be using the lamb in some sort of military ritual, one would look for an animal that was used beyond the Nephite polity.

 

However, because sheep are mentioned often, and because they are on of the animals that may be sacrificed, potential animals for sheep will be evaluated as part of the first group of animals that Nephi mentions.

 

[2]

 

Sheep: the best New World candidate for sheep is the whitetailed deer as it is found in northeastern South America as well as Mesoamerica.

 

[3]

 

Reasons for this is based on the following reasons:

 

1. White-tailed deer are kosher, and since the lamb is a sacrifice under the Law of Moses that can be made by each household, an animal that is ubiquitous throughout the area is the most likely candidate.

 

2. It is the most common ritually sacrificed animal in ancient Mesoamerican cultures. Deep is the primary source of meat in Mesoamerican cultures.

 

3. In Brian Stubb’s research, the word for deer in much of Uto-Aztecan is derived from the Hebrew raaheel meaning “ewe.”

 

4. The word deer, while mentioned oft in the Bible, is nowhere mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

 

[4]

 

Studies in domestic animals in the PreColumbian city of Mayapan suggests that white-tailed deer were either raised in captivity or were carefully managed in habitats surrounding the city. (Marily A. Masson, 2008)

 

Deer are good candidates for sheep, there is never any mention of wool in the New World in the Book of Mormon. It is interesting that when Abinadi mentioned that the “sheep before the shearer is dumb” he was careful to point out that it was “even as Isaiah said.” So they would know that it was the Old World sheep being referred to.

 

H. A. G. Houghton On Luke 22:17-20

  

22:17-20 verses 17, 18, 19, 20 {B}

 

These four verses appear in the traditional order in the majority of Greek manuscripts, including the oldest surviving copies and early translations 𝔓⁷⁵ 01 02 03 04 etc.). They present an unusual form of the institution narrative, with a cup of wine and bread before the meal followed by another cup after the meal. Although this strong external attestation for what seems to be a more difficult reading has led to its adoption in the editorial text, this has been questioned: some suggest that the second cup with the result of an attempt to bring Luke into correspondence with the other accounts of the Last Supper (1 Cor. 11:23-26, Mark 14:22-25; Matt. 26:26-29), not least because Luke 22:19b-20 corresponds closely to 1 Cor. 11:24b-25 and contrasts with Lukan style. A shorter reading is seen in Codex Bezae and some Old Latin manuscripts, which lack the second half of Luke 22:19 and all of Luke 22:20 (το υπερ ημων . . . εκχυνομενον, ‘which is given for you . . . poured out for you . . . in my blood’), and with it the problematic description of a second cup: this is one of the ‘Western non-interpolations’) . . . The most variant tradition is the Syriac: The Curetonian Syriac has the verses in the order 19, 17, 18, resulting in the bread followed by a single cup (but with part of 1 Cor. 11:24 added to the first verse); the Sinaitic Syriac displays the same order with parts of verse 20 distributed in between; the Peshitta and some Coptic manuscripts only have verses 19 and 20 (the bread followed by a cup after the meal). Given that all the variants match the order of the other institution narratives, they are usually considered to be later corrections inspired by ecclesiastical practice. Nevertheless, the possibility that even the earliest attested text of Luke had also been subject to this sort of interference, leading to its peculiar form, cannot entirely be discounted. (H. A. G. Houghton, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: A Companion to the Sixth Edition of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament [Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2025], 178-79)

 

Darrell L. Bock on Ezekiel 37

  

Ezekiel 37: The Covenant of Peace

 

This is a famous chapter, and its context also matters. In Ezek 34-36, the prophet has spoken of the nation lacking shepherds and promises that he will supply the guidance and protection that is lacking. In Ezek 36, the promise has been made that God will bring the Spirit into their hearts having washed them from their uncleanness (36:24-31). This will happen as he gathers them into the land, and they realize the depths of their previous sin! There follows in Ezek 37:1-10 the famous image of the dry bones brought back to life, a picture of Israel being resurrected from death. It is a powerful image of restoration. We move from despair to hope within the vision of the chapter. Again, we see the idea that exile and judgment for the nation does not lead to ultimate exclusion.

 

The picture of the dry bones vision is interpreted in Ezek 37:11-14, where the bones are the whole house of Israel and the promise of providing the Spirit is repeated in v. 14 with mention of the land yet again in v. 12. This shows the link back to Ezek 34-36. Ezekiel pictures two sticks, one for Ephraim and another for Judah that are made one as he regathers the people scattered across the earth and beings them again to the land (vv. 15-22). He will make them his people again and he will have one shepherds and they will dwell in the land (vv. 24-25). Ezekiel calls this a covenant of peace, yet another promise of God that he commits himself to keeping in the land (v. 26). He will dwell with them, and they will be his people (v. 27). Even the nations will see this is so (v. 28). So the vision contains elements that show Israel and not the nations are the topic here.

 

This last verse is important because it makes clear that the nations see how God treats Israel in distinction from the nations. In whatever way nations are blessed in the end, their blessing does not exclude a place or role for Israel. Gentile inclusion does not mean Israelite exclusion. God has commitments he has made to the nation. That promise began with Abraham and extends to Ezekiel. That restoration comes with a promised Davidic ruler and includes peace in the land. This hope could not be clearer. It is made with and is for Israel, a regathered and restored nation, even as God also works to restore the nations of the earth. (Darrell L. Bock, “Israel’s Future as a Nation and Reconciliation,” in The Future Restoration of Israel: A Response to Supersessionism, ed. Stanley E. Porter and Alan E. Kurschner [McMaster Biblical Studies Series 10; Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf and Stock, 2023], 94-95)

 

Darrell L. Bock on Isaiah 2:1-4

  

Isaiah 2:1-4: Nations Gathered with Israel

 

The prophet Isaiah is challenging a stubborn people caught in disobedience. He offers this world of hope in Isa 2:1-4. The entire section is called “a word from the LORD.” This marks it out as an important message. This ḥāzā points to an utterance giving divine insight (Lam 2:9; Ezek 7:26). It is a special disclosure from God.

 

Isaiah gives a message about Judah and Jerusalem. He announces that the mountain of the LORD’s temple will endure into the latter days (Deut 4:30; Jer 23:20; Ezek 38:16; Hos 3:5). This time period for Isaiah is simply the last days of human history. He has no more detailed calendar of events than this. This is when full deliverance finally comes in all its fullness. IN that time, he declares, nations will stream to Jerusalem. They will worship on the LORD’s high mountain and come to learn the LORD’s standards. Zion will be the center for instruction. Literally, the Torah will go out from there. Torah in this context is about God’s will and ways as the previous parallelism shows. Cases will be settled among nations there. Swords will be beaten into plowshares and spears into pruning hooks. They will no longer train for war. The picture is of a world at peace before the one God. All the nations, side by side, gathered before the one God. This reconciliation to peace involves all the nations and Israel is at its center. Judah and Jerusalem in the midst of the nations will have this role. In the context of the book, such hope to come should lead to faithfulness within Israel now.

 

This is an important text. While other Old Testament texts speak of judgment of the nations as righteousness comes, this text pictures the aftermath and result of what God will bring, righteousness, instruction, and peace. It is not a melding in of people, but a gathering of nations who no longer battle as they had. Also significant is that this note of hope comes at the beginning of the book. It is a note of introduction that is to abide in one’s thinking as one moves through the book and all the ideas it presents.

 

Another note from this text is important. This redemption comes to this earth and this history. This is not a dualistic vision of something happening above or in a newly created reality emerging out of what had been. It is an account of God’s resolution of conflict in the current stream of history and reality. Other Old Testament texts travel this same road, speaking to this same reality (Isa 14:1-2; 45:22-23; 49:26; 56:7; 60:1-14; 66:18-21; along with the texts that follow). As Watts puts it, “Jerusalem has an abiding place in God’s future.” (Darrell L. Bock, “Israel’s Future as a Nation and Reconciliation,” in The Future Restoration of Israel: A Response to Supersessionism, ed. Stanley E. Porter and Alan E. Kurschner [McMaster Biblical Studies Series 10; Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf and Stock, 2023], 91-92)

 

M. Russell Ballard Being Neutral on the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews (2015)

  

The author of Hebrews further noted that when we “lay hold upon the hope set before us,” that hope becomes “as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast” (Hebrews 6:18-19). (M. Russell Ballard, Yesterday, Today, and Forever: Timeless Gospel Messages [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2015], 5-6)

 

 

Notes on the Use of Isaiah in 2 Nephi from Martin Evans, "Second Nephi as a Legal Document"

  

Much of Nephi’s Isaiah-centric writing can fairly be described as exegetical. This is not to say that he exceeded his remit as a scribe. Exegetical techniques of the period were accepted and expected as core scribal activities. These included manipulation, harmonization, paraphrasing, allusion, and, in some cases, the addition of new material to expand on existing themes.

 

To accurately characterize texts from that era, it is helpful to classify them according to scribal intervention. Accordingly, textual reproductions may be categorized broadly as conservative or revisionistic. Such classifications help us more fully appreciate the process by which text was recorded, and can avoid anachronistic labelling. Of course, not all texts fall neatly into any given category in their long histories. Some manuscripts may come down to us as the result of a mixed treatment.

 

. . .

 

[When discussing the differences between Isa 11:4-6//2 Nephi 21:4-6//2 Nephi 30:9-12]

 

Nephi values Isaiah’s words, but his children do not understand Isaiah (2 Nephi 25:1-3). And yet, Nephi seeks to preserve Isaiah’s words for his people (2 Nephi 11:8). An easy way to resolve this dilemma would be to modify Isaiah’s words. Nephi has the tools to do this, but Nephi appears not to do so in 2 Nephi 12-24. The data in Table 2 [RB: showing the differences between the above-mentioned texts] suggests that Nephi needed both to comment on this text and change a few words. Instead, Nephi re-writes these verses in a later section. Such fidelity, we would expect with a document with a formal extrinsic purpose, such as a certified copy or a verbatim disposition. Given the textual freedom enjoyed by scribes in Nephi’s day, it seems clear that they copied text verbatim as a deliberate choice. (Martin Evans, “Second Nephi as a Legal Document,” in Defending the Book of Mormon: Proceedings of the 2023 FAIR Virtual Conference, ed. Scott Gordon, Trevor Holyoak, and Jared Riddick [Redding, Calif.: FAIR, 2025], 251-52, 253-54, comment in square brackets added for clarification)

 

A "Cutlerite" Interpretation of the One Mighty and Strong (D&C 85) and Promised Seer (2 Nephi 3)

While reading a biography of Alpheus Cutler (1784-1864), I came across the following discussion of D&C 85 (LDS ed.) and the “One Mighty and Strong,” as well as the prophesied seer in 2 Nephi 3. What is interesting is that the authors (1) believe they are one and the same person and (2) the ser in 2 Nephi 3 was not fulfilled in the person of Joseph Smith but a then-future prophetic figure. After quoting D&C 85, the authors claim that:

 

This revelation promises first that the leader whom the Lord will raise up will be mighty and strong, or in other words will enjoy a greater portion of God's Spirit because he has a special work to perform. He will hold the scepter of power in his hand, showing that he does have the Holy Spirit and authority through the priesthoods to act in the name of Jesus Christ, and will have light and understanding to guide him in his work. This is the same man referred to in Section 100, RLDS Doctrine and Covenants, whom God has promised to raise up unto his people to lead them out of bondage, even as Moses led the children of Israel out of Egypt.

 

Joseph of old spoke of this man, calling him a seer, and promised that he would have power to unite the scriptures to the laying down of contention and the establishing of peace among the fruit of the loins of Joseph, his brethren, and to bring them to the knowledge of the covenants which God has made with their forefathers, that in the latter days this gospel would go to every kindred, tongue, and people (II Nephi: 2).

 

Now if the one mighty and strong is to arrange by lot the inheritances of the saints, how can he do it if all hold their properties in their own names? Where would the mighty and strong man find any property, whether real or personal, to arrange as inheritances for the saints? We will also notice that he is to set in order the house of God; if this is so then it is only reasonable to assume that when he comes he will find the house of God out of order. One of the first things the saints will be called upon to do is to come up with all that they have and consecrate it to the Lord, and in that way this leader would be able to assign each member or steward with a stewardship or inheritance. (Rupert J. Fletcher and Daisy Whiting Fletcher, Alpheus Cutler and The Church of Jesus Christ [Independence, Miss.: The Church of Jesus Christ, 1974], 236)

 

The Church of Jesus Christ (“Cutlerite”) added a note following this page of this work. While they disagree with the authorson some points in the above, they do not contest the identification of the future seer of 2 Nephi 3 with the One Mighty and Strong in LDS D&C 85:

 

NOTE

 

At the time this book was written in 1974, we all believed, as Mr. Fletcher did, that the "Moses Man", as described in Sec. 100 RLDS B of C, and the "one mighty and strong", as described in Sec. 85 (Utah Doc. & Cov.), as well as in Isaiah Chap. 34, verses 16 and 17, were one and the same, but after extensive search and study, our findings forced us to accept the fact that they were two separate beings. Section 100 (RLDS) reads, quote, Behold, I say unto you, the redemption of Zion must needs come by power; there- fore, I will raise up unto my people a man, who shall lead them like as Moses led the Children of Israel, for ye are the Children of Israel, and of the seed of Abraham; and ye must needs be led out of bondage by power, and with a stretched out arm, so shall the redemption of Zion be, end of quote. Sec. 85 (Utah edition) 7th verse, reads, quote, I, the Lord God, will send one mighty and strong, holding the sceptre of power in his hand, clothed with light for a covering, whose mouth shall utter words, eternal words; while his bowels shall be a fountain of truth, to set in order the House of God and to arrange by lot the inheritances of the Saints whose names are found, and the names of their fathers, and of their children, enrolled in the book of the law of God, end of quote. Vs. 16 & 17, 34 Chap. Isaiah, reads, quote, Seek ye out of the Book of the Lord, and read the names written therein; no one of these shall fail; none shall want their mate; for my mouth it hath commanded and my Spirit it hath gathered them. And I have cast the lot for them, and I have divided it unto them by line, and they shall possess it forever; from generation to generation they shall dwell therein, end of quote. In light of the above, we must admit we were mistaken, as were many others, in our interpretation that they were one rather than two beings.

 

Respectfully; The Church of Jesus Christ.

 

Martin Evans on Jacob Being Called "Brother of Nephi" (vs. "son of Lehi") in Second Nephi in Light of Babylonian Legal Documents

 In an interesting paper comparing Second Nephi to ancient legal documents, Martin Evans commented on the term “brother of Nephi”:

 

Another aspect comparable to that found in legal records is the term “brother of Nephi.” Reference to a speaker’s brother never occurs in biblical superscriptions. Biblical superscriptions typically use a patronym. Yet, Jacob is not referred to as “son of Lehi”; instead, he is the “brother of Nephi.” Such titles, though uncommon, are found in Neo-Babylonian legal records. In YOS 7,10 we read,

 

ḫašdaya, brother of Iddinaya, and said thus in the assembly. (Martin Evans, “Second Nephi as a Legal Document,” in Defending the Book of Mormon: Proceedings of the 2023 FAIR Virtual Conference, ed. Scott Gordon, Trevor Holyoak, and Jared Riddick [Redding, Calif.: FAIR, 2025], 239-40)

 

For those curious, here is the background and translation of this Babylonian text:

 

3. Reports about Theft in High Places

Text: YBC 4176

Copy: Tremayne 1925 (YOS 7), No. 10

Translation/Discussion: Dandamaev 1984, 429–30; Joannès 2000a, 29; 2000b, No. 160 (pp. 217–18); Holtz 2009, 103–4

Place of Composition: Uruk

Date: 1.II.1 Cyr (22 April, 538 BCE)

 

Nabû-rēṣua, a slave of Lâbāši-Marduk, reports to the šatammu and the royal official in charge of the Eanna that his master’s son, Iddinaya, stole and hid a gem, apparently from a cultic image that was in Ištar-aḫa-iddin’s care. Nabû-lū-dāri, another slave, confirms Nabû-rēṣua’s testimony. Ḫašdaya, brother of the suspected thief, Iddinaya, also reports finding the stolen object on Lâbāši-Marduk’s property after it had been taken from Ištar-aḫa-iddin’s storehouse.

 

. . .

 

(9–11) And Nabû-lū-dāri, slave of Bāniya son of Taribi testified, and Ḫašdaya, brother of Iddinaya, said thus in the assembly: (Shalom E. Holtz, Neo-Babylonian Trial Records: Translation [Writings from the Ancient World 35; Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2014], 20, 21)

 

The following is Holtz’s transliteration of the Babylonian text:

 

9.         ù ^dNA₃-lu-u-da-a-ri lu₂qal-la šá ba-ni-ia A-šú

10.       šá ta-ri-bi uk-ti-in ù ^mḫaš-da-a ŠEŠ šá SUM-na-a

11.       ina UKKIN iq-bi um-ma NA₄ mur-ḫa-ši-tu šá ⸢ul⸣-tu E₂ šu-⸢tu⸣-um-mu (Shalom E. Holtz, Neo-Babylonian Trial Records: Text [Writings from the Ancient World 35; Atlanta, Ga.: Society of Biblical Literature, 2014], 21-22)

 

Jonathon Lookadoo on Ignatius, To the Ephesians 18.2

  

He follows the declaration of Jesus’s baptism with a purpose clause. Jesus was baptized “in order that he might cleanse the water by his suffering” (ινα τω παθει το υδωρ καθαριση; Eph. 18.2). The precise relationship between the baptism and the purpose clause is far from clear in Eph. 18.2. If Jesus’s baptism occurred for the purpose of cleaning the water through his suffering, this account would run into an obvious chronological challenge since the baptism occurred prior to the suffering. Ignatius may see Jesus’s baptism and passion as united by the act of Jesus’s obedience. If so, Jesus’s obedience led him both to be baptized and to suffer so that the waters were cleansed by Jesus’s dual acts of submission to the Father’s will. Yet although the unity of Jesus’s baptism and passion is strongly intimated in Eph. 18.2, it may be better to find the specific link in the power of Jesus’s passion to make his baptismal purification efficacious. Jesus’s death on the cross purifies the water and thereby marks his baptism as a significant event for Ignatius and the Ephesians to recall. While the precise referent of the water is unclear, Jesus’s baptism was interpreted later in the second century with reference to the presence of the Spirit and the subduing of the waters of chaos (Clement of Alexandria, Ecl. 7; Tertullian, Adv. Jud. 8.14). Yet it may be best to leave open the specific nature of the connection between the baptism and passion in Eph. 18.2. Ignatius links the baptism and passion together with refence to Jesus’s embodiment so that incarnation, purification, and crucifixion are intimately associated with baptism. (Jonathon Lookadoo, The Christology of Ignatius of Antioch [Studies in Early Christology; Eugene, Oreg.: Cascade Books, 2023], 36-37)

 

William R. Schoedel on Ignatius, To the Ephesians 18.2

  

For our God, Jesus the Christ, was carried in the womb of Mary according to God’s plan—of the seed of David and of the Holy Spirit—who was born and baptized that by his suffering he might purify the water. (Ignatius, To the Ephesians 18.2)

 

 

The connection between Christ’s baptism and passion also seems to be traditional. It is apparently reflected in Luke 12:50 and Mark 10:38–39; and it may shine through small details in the Synoptic account of Christ’s baptism. Barnabas finds it relevant to inquire into the prophecies particularly “concerning the water and concerning the cross” (11.1). Justin has a collection of biblical testimonies in which the “wood” (the cross) and “water” (baptism) are connected in such a way that the former is thought of as energizing the latter (Dial. 86; cf. 138). In the Sibylline Oracles (8.244–47) the cross is said to “illuminate” the elect with water (cf. 8.310–17). The connection could only have been strengthened by the mythology of the primeval dragon since conflict with the powers of darkness plays an especially important role with reference to the cross. Thus John Chrysostom (Hom. in 1 Cor. 24.4) will link Christ’s resurrection with victory over the dragon of the deep. The connection between Christ’s baptism and passion was also known in Gnostic circles. The Gospel of Philip ([NHC 2] 77, 7–15) asserts not only that Jesus “made perfect the water of baptism” but also that he thereby “emptied death.” It is, however, a matter of eliminating death, not of undergoing it. Consequently the theme seems out of place, and Gaffron is surely right in suggesting that it is not “genuinely Gnostic” but stems from an older tradition. The underlying problem for a Gnostic is illuminated by Irenaeus’ (Adv. haer. 1.21.2) observation on the Marcosians that they take Luke 12:50 and Mark 10:38 to refer not to the passion but to another baptism (the so-called redemption which has to do with “Christ” and “perfection”) distinct from the first (which is connected with “the phenomenal Jesus” and “forgiveness of sins”). Ignatius has no such problem, and his overriding concern for the reality of the cross makes the link between the baptism and passion of Christ logical. (William R. Schoedel, Ignatius of Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch [Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985], 85-86)

 

John S. Daly vs. Michael Davies on the Nature of Doctrinal Development

 I am a fan of the works of the late Michael Davies (1936-2004), such as his three-volume Liturgical Revolution series. However, as was noted by John S. Daly (a Sedevacantist [who also holds to “Totalism”]) noted, Davies (and many modern Roman Catholic apologists) have an approach to the “development of doctrine” that is opposed to Catholic dogmatic theology:

 

J.S.D. John-Paul II subscribed to heresy by endorsing the Vatican II Decree on Ecumenism, which teaches salvation outside the Catholic Church.

 

M.D. That is not heretical. Non-Catholics can certainly be saved.

 

J.S.D. But the Church has frequently and solemnly defined that there is absolutely no salvation outside the Church. For instance [reaching for copy of Denzinger], Pope Boniface VIII in Unam Sanctam said: We declare, say, define and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff.

 

M.D. Yes, I know; but that doctrine has developed. It is perfectly orthodox Catholic belief that Protestants, Jews and pagans can all be saved despite their errors if they are sincere and obey their consciences. “No salvation outside the Church” is taken to mean no salvation for those culpably outside the Church.

 

J.S.D. Do you think that Pope Boniface VIII meant that in his “ex cathedra” definition?

 

M.D. Oh, no. He meant that non-Catholics could never go to Heaven at all. But that is where doctrinal development comes in. You see, Cardinal Newman explained that doctrines can develop provided that each change is compatible with what went before.

 

J.S.D. And you maintain that the doctrine that there is salvation outside the Church is “compatible” with the doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church?

 

M.D. Yes. It’s surprising just how much doctrines can develop. I am thinking of doing a doctorate with the Open University on this subject, showing how Catholic beliefs can change dramatically but still remain the same Faith. Salvation outside the Church is the best example.

 

J.S.D. But don’t you accept that supernatural faith is necessary for salvation?

 

M.D. Non-Catholics have implicit faith. For instance, a Hindu woman who commits suttee will go to Heaven because she believes in good faith that she is doing the right thing.

 

J.S.D. But surely good faith [sincerity in one’s religious convictions, whatever they may be] is not the same thing as supernatural faith [the infused theological virtue by which we firmly believe what God has revealed as made known by His Church] .... (John S. Daly, Michael Davies: An Evaluation [rev ed.; Saint-Sauveur De Meilhan, France: Tradibooks, 2015], 483-84, emphasis in bold added. This is based on a phone call conversation between the author and Michael Davies in August 1983)

 

H. A. G. Houghton on John 1:28

  

1:28 εν Βηθανια εγενετο (took place in Bethany) {C}

 

The Byzantine tradition is split between the place names Bethany (εν Βητανια) and Bethabara (εν Βηθαβαρα). The former has the predominant early attestation (𝔓⁶⁶ 𝔓⁷⁵ 01* 02 03 04* etc.), whereas the latter is found in the Textus Receptus (01² 04² 029^vid 044^c etc.). The variation was known to Origen, who preferred Bethabara both on etymological grounds (‘House of Preparation’) and because of local tradition on his visit to the area, when he was unable to identify a ‘Bethany across the Jordan.’ Given the predominance of the place name Bethany in the gospels, it is possible that a copyist substituted it for the less common Bethabara. Alternatively, Origen’s choice may have influenced the later manuscripts (compare Matt. 8:28 above). The balance between these two possibilities makes for uncertainty, although the manuscript support for Bethany leads to its adoption. (H. A. G. Houghton, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: A Companion to the Sixth Edition of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament [Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2025], 200)

 

H. A. G. Houghton on Acts 20:28

  

20:28 του αιματος του ιδιου (the blood of his own Son) {A}

 

The majority of Greek manuscripts read του ιδιου αιματος (‘his own blood’; 614 1409 1642 etc.). The rest of the tradition has του αιματος του ιδιου (𝔓⁴¹ 𝔓⁷⁴ 01 02 03 04 05 etc.), whose attestation strongly suggests that this is the earliest form. This can be translated either as ‘his own blood’ too (with ιδιος as an adjective, ‘his blood, his very own’), or ‘the blood of his own’ (with ιδιος as a noun). It has been suggested that ιδιος (‘his Own’) may have been an early Chrisitan term for Christ, which was later misunderstood and simply read as an adjective, hence the change to the corresponding standard word order in Byzantine tradition (cf. Heb. 9:12). If it is taken as a noun, translations may need to supply another noun for clarification, such as ‘Son.’ The choice of reading in the previous variation unit (as to whether ‘his’ refers to ‘God’ or ‘the Lord’) may also affect the choice of interpretation here: taking this phrase to mean ‘[God’s] own blood’ could have prompted the introduction of κυριος in the previous variation unit. (H. A. G. Houghton, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: A Companion to the Sixth Edition of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament [Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2025], 321)

 

Aelfric of Eynsham (10th century) Commenting on Mathtew 16 and Peter

  

The Lord said to Peter, “You are of stone.” He received that name for the strength of his faith and for the steadfastness of his profession, because he attached himself with firm mind to Christ, who is called “stone” by the apostle Paul: “And I will build my Church upon this stone,” that is, on that faith which you profess. All God’s Church is built on that stone, that is, upon Christ, for he is the foundation of all the buildings of his own Church. All God’s churches are considered as one congregation, and that is constructed of chosen people, not of dead stones, and all the building of those living stones is founded on Christ, for through that faith we are considered his limbs, and he is the head of us all. Whoever builds away from that foundation, his work falls to great destruction.

 

The savior said, “The gates of hell can do nothing against my Church.” Sins and false doctrine are the gates of hell, because they lead the sinful as if through a gate into the torment of hell. The gates are many, but none of them can do anything against the holy Church, which is built upon that fast sone, Christ; for the faithful one, through Christ’s protection, avoid the dangers of diabolical temptations.

 

He said, “I will entrust you with the key to the kingdom of heaven.” That key is not gold nor of silver, nor forged of any material, but is the power which Christ gave him, that no one comes into God’s kingdom unless the holy Peter opens the entrance for him. “And whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; and whatever you unbind on earth will be unbound in heaven.” He gave this power now to Peter, and also afterward, before his ascension to all his apostles when he blew on them, saying, “Receive the Holy Spirit: the sins of those you forgive will be forgiven; and from those from whom you withhold forgiveness, forgiveness will be withdrawn.”

 

The apostles will not bind any righteous person with their excommunication, nor mercifully, unbind the sinful unless he returns with true repentance to the way of life. The almighty has granted the same power to bishops and holy Mass priests, if they carefully hold it according to the gospel decree. But the key is especially entrusted to Peter, so that all peoples may certainly know that whoever deviates from the unity of the faith which Peter professed to Christ, to him will be granted neither forgiveness of sins nor entrance into the kingdom of heaven. (Aelfric, “The Passion of the Apostles Peter and Paul,” in The Old English Catholic Homilies—The First Series [trans. Roy M. Liuzza; Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 86; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2024], 451, 453)

 

 

Aelfric of Eynsham (10th century) Teaching "Baptism of Blood" in the Context of Matthew 2 and the "Feast of the Holy Innocents"

  

Christ did not despise his young warriors, though he was not physically present at their slaughter; but he sent them from this life of misery to his eternal kingdom. They were born blessed to suffer death for his sake. Happy is their age which could not yet confess Christ, and yet might suffer for Christ. They were the savior’s witnesses, though they did not yet know him. They were not ripened for slaughter, yet they blessedly died to life. Blessed was their birth, because they found eternal life at the entrance of this present life. They were snatched from their mothers’ breasts, but they were immediately entrusted to the blossoms of angels. The wicked persecutor could not benefit those little ones by any service as greatly as he benefitted them by the fierce hate of persecution. They are called blossoms of martyrs, because they were like blossoms springing up in the midst of the chill of unfaithfulness, as it were consumed by the frost of persecution. Blessed are the wombs which bore them, and the breasts that sucked them. Indeed the mothers suffered through their children’s martyrdom, the sword that pierced their children’s limbs entered their mothers’ hearts, and they must be sharers in the eternal reward, when they were companions in suffering. They were killed while small and without reason, but they will arise at the Last Judgment in full growth and with heavenly wisdom. We will all come to the same age at the universal resurrection, although we now leave this world at various ages.

 

The gospel says that “Rachel wept for her children, and would not be comforted. Because they are no more.” Rachel was the wife of the patriarch Jacob, and she signified God’s Church, which weeps for its spiritual children; but it will not be so comforted that they should return again to worldly strife, once they have overcome the world by a triumphant death, and escaped from its miseries to be crowned with glory with Christ. (Aelfric, “Feast of the Holy Innocents,” in The Old English Catholic Homilies—The First Series [trans. Roy M. Liuzza; Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 86; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2024], 103, 105)

 

Aelfric of Eynsham (10th century): The Apostle John was Bodily Assumed into Heaven

  

When the apostle was ninety-nine years old, the Lord Christ appeared to him with the other apostles whom he had taken from this life, and said, “John, come to me, it is time that you should feast with your brothers at my banquet.” John arose and went toward the savior, but he said to him, “On Sunday, the day of my resurrection, you will come to me.” And after those words, the Lord returned to heaven.

 

The apostle rejoiced greatly in that promise and, rising early at dawn, he came to the church, and from cockcrow until midmorning taught the people God’s law, sang Mass for them, and said that the savior had invited him to heaven on that day. He then ordered his grave to be dug opposite the altar, and the soil to be removed; then he went alive and whole into his grave, and with our outstretched hands cried to God, “Lord Christ, I thank you that you have invited me to your banquet; you know that I have desired you with all my heart. I have often prayed that I might go to you, but you said that I should wait, so that I might win more people to you. You have preserved my body against every uncleanness, and you have always enlightened my soul, and have nowhere forsaken me. You have put the word of your truth in my mouth, and I have written down the teaching which I heard from your mouth, and the wonders I saw your work. Now, Lord, I commit you to those children which your Church, virgin and mother, has gained for you through water and the Holy Spirit. Receive me among my brothers with whom you came and invited me. Open the gate of life to me, that the princes of darkness might not find me. You are Christ, Son of that living God, who saved the world at your Father’s request, and sent us the Holy Spirit. We praise and thank you for your manifold benefits throughout the eternal world. Amen.”

 

After this prayer, heavenly light appeared above the apostle, inside the grave, shining so brightly for an hour that no one’s sight could look upon the beams of light; and with that light, he gave his spirit to the Lord, who had invited him to his kingdom. He departed from this present life just as free from the pain of death as he has been exempt from bodily defilement. Later his grave was found filled with manna—manna was the name of the heavenly food which fed the people of Israel for forty years in the wilderness. Now this food was found in John’s grave, and nothing else; and that food is increasing in it to the present day. Many miracles have been revealed there, and the sick healed and released from all dangers through the apostle’s intercession. The Lord Christ grants this to him, to whom is honor and glory with the Father and the Holy Spirit, forever without end. Amen. (Aelfric, “Assumption of John the Evangelist,” in The Old English Catholic Homilies—The First Series [trans. Roy M. Liuzza; Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 86; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2024], 91, 93, 95)

 

Aelfric of Eynsham (10th century): John the Evangelist was the Bridegroom of John 2 and a Perpetual Virgin

  

John the Evangelist, Christ’s beloved, was taken on this day to the joy of the kingdom of heaven, through God’s visitation. He was the son of Christ’s maternal aunt, and he particularly loved him, not so much for their kinship as for the purity of his unblemished virginity. He was chosen by God in virginity, and he remained forever in undefiled virginity. It is read in historical accounts that he wanted to marry, and Christ was invited to his wedding. Then it happened that the wine at the wedding ran out. The savior then ordered the servants to fill six stone vessels with pure water, and with his blessing he turned the water into fine wine; this is the first miracle that he openly worked in his human state. John was so inspired by that miracle that he immediately left his bride in virginity and ever afterward followed the Lord, and was deeply loved by him because he had withdrawn himself from fleshly lusts. Indeed, the savior entrusted his mother to this beloved disciple when he redeemed mankind by hanging on the cross, so that his pure life might look after the pure virgin Mary; and she dwelled in the household of her sister’s son. (Aelfric, “Assumption of John the Evangelist,” in The Old English Catholic Homilies—The First Series [trans. Roy M. Liuzza; Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 86; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2024], 73, 75)

 

David G. Firth on Psalm 45

  

Although clearly recognizable as a royal psalm because of its concern with the king, Psalm 45 is unique within the Psalter as the only one to praise a human. Its title mentions a ‘song of love’ that links to the poem’s content since it is addressed to a royal couple on their wedding day. Unusually, it addresses both the king and his bride, albeit in idealized terms, encouraging them to fulfil their respective royal roles. By general consent (contra Postell 2019, who argues it was intentionally messianic), it was written for a royal wedding and its associated celebrations, but it lacks details that would allow identification with a particular wedding (cf. Starbuck 1999: 114). This is somewhat ironic given the composer’s vow to ensure the king’s name is remembered perpetually, but that promise does not depend on this poem alone. (David G. Firth, Psalms [Apollos Old Testament Commentary 14; London: Apollos, 2025], 253)

 

 

. . . the hyperbole reaches a new level in verse 6, where the king is addressed as ‘God’ when he is assured that his throne endures for ever. Although Israel recognized only one God, the word translated ‘God’ (’ĕlōhîm) can be flexible in meaning. Here, it perhaps indicates that God stands so closely with the king because of the Davidic covenant (cf. 2 Sam. 7:1–17), and as one appointed by God, that he can be addressed as God (cf. Exod. 7:1; 21:6; 22:8–9, 28; Ps. 138:1; cf. Cheung 2016: 330). God’s throne is genuinely eternal, so the endurance of the king’s reign reflects this. Moreover, that God is the one whose reign is marked by righteousness indicates that the king’s reign should be modelled on God’s reign. To the extent that the king’s reign demonstrates a love of righteousness and rejection of wickedness, the king truly reigns as God’s representative and so can be addressed this way. But that the king is ultimately not God is made clear by the statement in verse 7 that God has anointed the king (cf. A. P. Ross 2013: 63). The king was addressed as God, but there is one who stands above him who is truly God, and the king reigns because God has anointed him (cf. Ps. 2:7). Hence, even as the psalm borrows the courtly language of its time, it limits its implications in a manner distinctive to Israel. Nevertheless, as the one anointed by God, the king enjoys wealth and comfort, symbolized by superior garments, luxury goods such as ivory and musical instruments, all natural elements of a wedding party ultimately focused on the queen (perhaps the queen mother, not the bride; cf. Schroeder 1996: 428), who stands with her own signs of wealth. (David G. Firth, Psalms [Apollos Old Testament Commentary 14; London: Apollos, 2025], 254-55)

 

Examples of Early Christian Interpretations of John 19:27

  

Now the Hour Has Come. Gregory the Great: The virgin mother, when wine was lacking, wanted Jesus to do a miracle. She was at once answered, “Woman, what have I to do with you?” as if to say plainly, The fact that I can do a miracle comes to me from my Father, not my mother. For it was from the nature of his Father that he could do miracles but from the nature of his mother that he could die. When he was on the cross, then, in dying he acknowledged his mother whom he commended to the disciple, saying, “Behold your mother.” And so, when he says, “Woman, what have I to do with you? My hour is not yet come,” he is in effect saying, In the miracle, which I did not from your nature, I do not acknowledge you. When the hour of death shall come, however, I shall acknowledge you as my mother, since it is from you that I can die. Letter 10.39.

 

A Devoted Son. Augustine: The good teacher does what he thereby reminds us ought to be done, and by his own example he instructed his disciples that care for their parents ought to be a matter of concern to pious children, as if that tree to which the members of the dying One were affixed were the very chair of office from which the Master was imparting instruction. From this salutary doctrine it was that the apostle Paul had learned what he taught in turn, when he said, “But if any does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he has denied the faith and is worse than an infidel.” And what are so much home concerns to anyone, as parents to children or children to parents? Of this most wholesome precept, therefore, the very Master of the saints set the example from himself, when—not as God for the handmaid whom he had created and governed but as a man for the mother of whom he had been created and whom he was now leaving behind—he provided to a certain degree another son in place of himself. Tractates on the Gospel of John 119.2.

 

Honoring One’s Parents. Cyril of Alexandria: Christ here wanted to confirm the commandment that is clearly emphasized in the Law: “Honor your father and mother that it may be well with you.” … Honoring one’s parents is surely a very precious virtue. And how else would we learn the importance of that love—even when we are overwhelmed by a flood of intolerable calamities—except by this primary example that Christ offers us? It is one thing to be mindful of the holy commandments in times of peace and quietness and quite another to fulfill your duty during the storms and troubles of life. Commentary on the Gospel of John 12.

 

A Tradition About Mary Living with John. The Passing of Mary: Therefore, when the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ was hanging on the tree fastened by the nails of the cross for the life of the whole world, he saw about the cross his mother standing, and John the Evangelist, whom he peculiarly loved above the rest of the apostles because he alone of them was a virgin in the body. He gave him, therefore, the charge of holy Mary, saying to him, “Behold your mother!” And he said to her, “Behold your son!” From that hour the holy mother of God remained especially in the care of John, as long as she lived. And when the apostles had divided the world by lot for preaching, she settled in the house of his parents near Mount Olivet. The Passing of Mary 1. (John 11-21, ed. Joel C. Elowsky [Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 2007], 319-20)

 

Theodore of Mopsuestia on John 19:27

  

[19:26] Here is your son, and to him, [19:27] Here is your mother, showing with these words his great love for him and that he considered John as his other self since Jesus wanted him to take his place with his mother. And so John, moved by these words, immediately received her, and she remained with him. It would seem that the Lord loved John for many reasons and with good cause; indeed, he alone among all the disciples remained with him after these tribulations. (Theodore of Mopsuestia, Commentary on the Gospel of John [trans. Marco Conti, Ancient Christian Texts; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic: An Imprint of InterVarsity Press, 2010], 156)

 

H. A. G. Houghton on 1 Corinthians 10:9

  

10:9 Χριστον (Christ) {B}

 

There is strong external support for Χριστον (‘Christ’; 𝔓⁴⁶ 06 012 and the majority of minuscules) even though this is the harder reading, as the Old Testament narrative does not mention Christ. On the other hand, Paul’s identification of the rock as Christ in 1 Cor. 10:4 makes this consistent with the context. (H. A. G. Houghton, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: A Companion to the Sixth Edition of the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament [Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2025], 425)

 

Excerpts from "Genesis A" and "Genesis B" in the Juniux XI Manuscript (10th cenutry)

  

Genesis A, Genesis B . . . are found in Junius XI in the Bodleian Library, Oxford; . . . Both Junius XI and the Exeter Book date from the latter part of the tenth century and were copied at a time when the Anglo-Saxons took a great interest in their culture’s poetic tradition. The authors of these poems are not known, nor are the original dates of composition. (Daniel Anlezark, “Introduction,” in Old Testament Narratives [Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 7; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2011], vii)

 

Pre-Lapsarian Nature and Status of Adam and Eve

 

It did not then seem fitting to the guardian of the skies that Adam should be alone any longer, the keeper and custodian in paradise, the new creation. Therefore the high king, the Lord almighty, furnished support; the origin of life’s light created a woman and then gave her as a help to the dear man. He drew that substance from Adam’s body, and carefully pulled a rib from his side. He was fast asleep and softly slumbered, felt no soreness, no share of pain, nor did any blood come from the wound, but the prince of angels drew out from his body a living bone, the man unwounded, from which God made a noble woman.

 

He put life into her, an eternal soul. They were like the angels when Eve, Adam’s bride, was adorned with a spirit. Beautiful in youth, they both were born into the world by the creator’s powers. They did not know how to do or commit sin, but the burning love of the Lord was in the breast of both. Then the happy-hearted king, creator of all things, blessed the first two of the human race, father and mother, woman and man. Then he made speech:

 

“Now be fruitful and multiply, fill the all-green earth with offspring, the progeny of you two, with sons and daughters. The salt water and all the worldly creation shall remain under your rule. Enjoy fruitful days and the sea’s bounty and the birds of heaven. Blessed cattle and wild beasts are given into the power of you two, and those living things that treat the land, and that fecund race that stirs up the current across the whale-road. All who obey you two.” (“Genesis A,” in Old Testament Narratives [trans. Daniel Anlezark; Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 7; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2011], 15, 17)

 

Noah’s sacrifices and his  “righteousness” not being imputed:

 

Then our savior, the guardian of the kingdom of heaven, spoke to Noah, in a holy voice: “A native seat is again opened up for you, delight on land, rest from the voyage, fair upon the earth. Go walking safely out of the ark, and from the tall building lead your household onto the earth’s lap, and all the offspring that I kindly saved from the wave attack, while the sea triumphantly devoured the third homeland.” He did so and obeyed the Lord with great eagerness climbed over the current-wall, as the voice commanded him, and then led from the vessel the survivors of the rages.

 

Then Noah, the prudent one, prepared a sacrifice, and from all his possessions that the Lord had given the wise man for his benefit, he quickly took a portion as an offering, and then the bright-minded man dedicated the oblation to God himself, the king of the angels. Indeed our savior made it known when he blessed Noah together with his sons that he had given that tribute in thanks and that in his youth he had merited by good deeds that almighty God was generous with graces for him, the righteous with blessings. Then the Lord, the ruler of glory, still spoke a word to Noah: “Multiply and propagate, enjoy glory with cheerful peace; will the earth, increase all things. Into your power is given dominion and the holdings of the sea, birds of the heaven and wild beasts, the earth all green and fecund cattle. (“Genesis B,” in Old Testament Narratives [trans. Daniel Anlezark; Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 7; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2011], 107, 109)

 

Genesis B Retelling Genesis 20 and Abraham Instructing Sarah to Tell Pharaoh They are Siblings:

 

Abraham made a speech—he saw the radiant gabled halls and lofty cities of the Egyptians shining brightly—then the husband, the wise-minded man, began to instruct his bride in words: “When many proud men in Egypt have gazed with their eyes on your face, then the princely men will think, woman of elven beauty, that you are my radiant bedfellow, who some man wishes to have for himself. Then I might fear that some hostile man will deprive me of life by the weapon’s edge because of his sexual desire.

 

“Sarah, say that you are my sister, a blood relative, when the alien men of this country enquire what the relationship might be between us two foreigners, arriving from afar. Firmly conceal the true explanation from them; thus you shall save my life, if the Lord of peace, our ruler, allows me longer life in the kingdom of this world, the one almighty, as did before. He ordained this journey for us, that we should desire welfare, seek mercy and help among the Egyptians.”

 

Then the courageous man went journeying, Abraham with his possessions, into Egypt, where the countrymen were alien to him, friends unknown. Many proud men, resplendent in wealth, spoke in words about his wife’s beauty; it seemed to many of them, to the king’s attendants, that the woman was noble in bearing. They made that known to their nation’s lord and before the prince, that they accounted for few women fairer, but Sarah much more so, they praised her beautiful countenance with words, until he summoned the lovely woman to his own hall. (“Genesis B,” in Old Testament Narratives [trans. Daniel Anlezark; Dumbarton Oaks Medieval Library 7; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2011], 129, 131)

 

David G. Firth on Psalm 106 and Phinehas (cf. Numbers 25)

  

Verses 28–31 then look back to Numbers 25:1–10. There, Israel participated in the worship of other gods. Mention here of the sacrifices of the dead is not entirely clear even if those sacrifices are in view. Such worship could be sacrifices offered to the dead or sacrifices that demanded the death of people (cf. v. 37), but perhaps it is better to think here of them as sacrifices offered to gods who are themselves dead (cf. niv; Kraus 1989: 320). These sacrifices have no positive value, but turn people from worshipping Yahweh. Whichever is intended, the result there was plague that was only stopped through Phinehas’s intervention, an intervention here counted to him as enduring righteousness, aligning him with Abraham (Gen. 15:6). (David G. Firth, Psalms [Apollos Old Testament Commentary 14; London: Apollos, 2025], 578-79)

 

Brant A. Gardner on Alma 55:4-7 in Book of Mormon Minute: A Scripture Commentary

  

Moroni knew where the prisoners were and decided to take them without an exchange. To do so, he creates a ruse that will make the process easier. What he requires is to “find a man who was a descendant of Laman.” He finds one who was one of the guards who had to flee when Amalickiah’s men killed the Lamanite king. The simplest reading of this ruse would be that Moroni was looking for someone who looked like a Lamanite and who had a dark skin.

 

 

The actual event proves the opposite. There was no visible difference between the Lamanite and the Nephites who went with him. If there were one dark-skinned man accompanied by several visibly “white” men, the ruse couldn’t have worked. It is therefore much more reasonable that what was needed was someone to speak in a language and perhaps an accent that would be convincing. Indeed, it was only the man named Laman who is depicted as speaking. (Brant A. Gardner, Book of Mormon Minute: A Scripture Commentary, volume 3)

 

Further Reading:

 

Brant A. Gardner on Alma 55:4-8 (transcription taken from Second Witness: Analytical and Contextual Commentary on the Book of Mormon)

Noel D. Osborn and Howard A. Hatton on Exodus 14:31

  

And Israel saw that great work which the Lord did upon the Egyptians: and the people feared the Lord, and believed the Lord, and his servant Moses (וּבְמֹשֶׁה עַבְדּוֹ/καὶ Μωυσῇ τῷ θεράποντι αὐτου). (Exodus 14:31)

 

 

And they believed in the Lord, literally “and they believed him,” may be expressed as “they had faith in the Lord” (14:31 tev) or they “put their trust in him” (14:31 niv). The word “Amen” comes from this word. And in his servant Moses means that they trusted Moses as well. The word for servant is the same word used for “slave,” but here it becomes a title of respect, recognizing Moses as the one appointed by God to be their leader. (Noel D. Osborn and Howard A. Hatton, A Handbook on Exodus [UBS Handbook Series; New York: United Bible Societies, 1999], 351)