Wednesday, July 29, 2026

Thomas S. Maley and Rolland D. Sprague (RLDS) Defending the Traditional Restorationist Interpretation of Ezekiel 37 and the Stick of Ephraim

  

We are amused and entertained by the quote from Ezekiel 37 made into song about the head bone to the neck bone and so on. Dramatic song producing though this tale of restoration may be, to me it does not exceed in quality the thoughts portrayed in verses 15 through 20 of the same chapter.

 

Being somewhat attracted to the text, I was gratified when I procured the New English Bible and turned anxiously to find how the subject would be treated by the newer translators. Perhaps a quote of the text would provide fruit for thought if not justifying note for those who read:

 

Ezekiel 37:15-20 NE: "These were the words of the Lord to me: Man, take one leaf of a wooden tablet and write on it, 'Judah and his associates of Israel.' Then take another leaf and write on it, 'Joseph, the leaf of Ephraim and all his associates of Israel.' Now bring the two together to form one tablet; they will be a folding tablet in your hand. When your fellow-countrymen ask you to tell them what you mean by this, say to them, These are the words of the Lord God: I am taking the leaf of Joseph, which belongs to Ephraim and his associate tribes of Israel, and joining to it the leaf of Judah. Thus I shall make them one tablet, and they shall be one in my hand. The leaves on which you write shall be visible in your hand for all to see."

 

The text goes on to tell of the restoration of the Israelites from their places of exile and the re-establishment of a unified Israel. Whether the foreseen re-establishment will prove viable in the face of modern day politics is a question by itself. The question of that which precedes the unification is what interests us at this point.

 

Did you notice that the "Sticks" of the King James Version are rendered in this case "Leaves of a wooden tablet"? Also their unification? Also, did you become aware how that the leaf of Joseph was to be taken and joined to the leaf of Judah? Would this imply a prior possession of the leaf of Judah? Does the fact that the matter would be readable become evident to you?

 

While the balance of the Chapter portrays the unification of the restored families, this re-establishment does not occur until the instance of the tablet-leaves is a completed thing, for the text proceeds with, "Then say to them," etc, denoting a prior completion of the legible instruments and their unification.

 

Interesting to note also is the fact that a gathering "to their own soil" would come after the literate incident, suggesting that it should be for one moment felt that the historically current advent of a peopled Israel is the resolution of at least the beginning of that restoration prophesied, we can safely concede that the event of the tablet must have already occurred. The door is closed now for any new event to which the tablet incident might relate!

 

Whether my gratification at the portrayal was hinged upon wishful thinking or upon a lack of stiff neckedness is for history and the one who reads to judge.

 

For me, my faith in the Book of Mormon as the "Leaf of Joseph" has been justified. He who judges, though his decision may be adverse is party to the same thinking or pliability as am I. If there be truth, let the Spirit of God witness. (Thomas S. Maley, “Ezek. 37,” The Book of Mormon Foundation [April-June 1971]: 1)

 

 

In attempting to answer this question it is necessary to ask two more: 1. Whence came they? 2. Why did they come?

 

It seems fitting that the search for answers should start in Genesis with Jacob as he blesses his children, beginning with Judah, 49:8-12.

 

"Judah thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thy enemies; thy father's children shall bow down before thee.... Judah is a lion's whelp: from the prey, my son, thou art gone up: he stooped down, he couched as a lion, and as an old lion; who shall rouse him up? The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet until Shiloh come: (The lawgiver is, of course, Jesus Christ.) and unto him shall the gathering of the people be. Binding his foal unto the vine, and his ass's colt unto the choice vine; he washed his garments in wine, and his clothes in the blood of grapes. His eyes shall be red with wine and his teeth white with milk."

 

Then to verses 22-27: "Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose branches (plural) run over the wall. The archers have sorely grieved him, and shot at him, and hated him. But his bow abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob: (From thence is the Shepherd, the stone of Israel:)—(Is not this also a reference to Jesus Christ? If so, is he not of Judah and of Joseph?)—even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the Almighty, who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb: The blessings of thy father have prevailed above the blessings of my progenitors unto the utmost bounds of the everlasting hills: They shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of him that was separate from his brethren."

 

Ephraim, given the choice of blessing, is the crown, the heir, since the birthright of Reuben, the first-born, was given to Ephraim and Manasseh. But included is the blessings on both Ephraim and Manasseh. This point is very important.

 

Jacob says, in Gen. 48:15-22, "The angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads, and let my name (Israel) be named on them." Since the birthright was taken from Reuben and was given to them, they were to be Israel. This is why Judah is not called Israel. It is important to note that the greater blessing was to Joseph, and in turn was passed on to his two sons.

 

Concerning Ephraim, the crown, we turn to the prophet in Ez. 37:16. "...take another stick, and write upon it, for Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:" To write for Joseph it must be for both the sons, and a record "for all the house of Israel." The first stick was "for Judah and for the children of Israel his companions." The first was to include children of Israel; the second was for Joseph entirely, and all the house of Israel.

 

Of great importance is the statement, "whose branches (plural) run over the wall." There is no doubt Lehi was of Manasseh, and therefore of Joseph, (see Alma 8:3), and he came to this, "the land of promise" which was to be Joseph's land; (see Ether 6:6-8 and III Nephi 9:50); therefore the land of both Ephraim and Manasseh, for the blessing of Joseph was put upon both his sons. It is indicated in Gen. 49:26 that his blessing would be at the "utmost bound of the everlasting hills." Deut. 33:13-17 describes Joseph's land further, mentioning "the ends of the earth." These blessings were pronounced in Egypt and the land of Canaan, which is geographically situated so that the land farthest in any direction is the American continent. The same description of his land found in Deut. 33 is repeated over and over in the Book of Mormon as the writers describe the precious things found in their promised land.

 

Let us consider the fact that there were other blood-lines besides Lehi's who came to Joseph's land, also. Among them were Zoram, the servant of Laban, (I N. 1:35–1:41); Ishmael and his family (I N. 2:7–11); and Lehi's wife, Sariah, of whose genealogy there is no record of reference. Then there was Mulek who also came out of Jerusalem to the promised land. (Hel. 3:55–57) and Omni 1:26). He was a son of Zedekiah, king of Judah. By reading II K. 24:1–18 we learn that Zedekiah's original name before he was made king of Judah, was Mattaniah, and that he was an uncle of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon; and his mother was Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah. Who is to say that, among all these, there were not some who were descended of Ephraim?

 

It seems reasonable to assume that with these, or among these, there might have been some descendants of Ephraim, even as some of the house of Israel were among Judah, for Chronicles describes how Ephraim mingled among all the tribes, and even among the gentiles.

 

There was jealousy and enmity between Judah and Ephraim because of Ephraim's prevalence. Eventually Ephraim was conquered in 721 B.C. by Shallmaneser through the internal divisions of the Kingdom of Samaria. From here on Ephraim began to lose his identity, to be lost among the multitude of gentile nations. Being divided and lost, he kept no records.

 

Lehi's people kept a record and also recorded the records of others who came here of the house of Israel. This record is only an abridgement of the whole. Lehi (of Manasseh) did become a nation, and great. Those who search the ruins of that great nation only partially reveal how truly great he was. Yet to be unfolded is the whole story, filled with wonder and awe.

 

We note that Ez. 37 mentions two sticks on which a great deal of writing would be placed. It is obvious that very little could be written on a wooden stick, but history indicates that records were kept on a scroll which was rolled on a stick making it possible to write extensively with much room to keep the record intact yet without bulk. This item was customarily referred to as a stick. (See History of the Holy Bible, John Kitto, D.D., F.S.A., pp. 403).

 

Ephraim is still hid among the multitude of nations and is not yet identified as Israel. But at a future time he is to be gathered in from the four quarters of the earth and be one nation, Israel again, as the Lord said, "I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them from every side, and bring them into their own land. I will make them one nation." (Ez. 37:21-22; also II N. 9:46-50.)

 

Judah's record is in the Bible; also records of the children of Israel his companions, but not "... all the house of Israel his companions."

 

After Joseph was blessed by Jacob, there is very little more written of his personality; and shortly the record announces Joseph's death. Then follows the record of Ephraim for awhile until he is conquered and scattered and loses his identity; after which it is promised he will become a multitude of nations among the heathen and gentiles. Hosea 8 tells us that Ephraim was to be swallowed up and shall be among the gentiles. Therefore Ephraim, when gathered from among them, will need to be marked or identified for separation or designation.

 

Ezekiel says the stick of Joseph is in the hand of Ephraim, not that it was written by him since he was scattered. Thus it fell to Manasseh to keep the record of Joseph that it might be found in, or given into, the hand of Ephraim, this being a mark, or designation of his identity. The gentiles now have the Book of Mormon, which is Joseph's record kept by, or written by, Manasseh. This nation was set up for the specific purpose that this record might come forth unto a gentile nation.We are a gentile (that is, not Jewish) nation. Ephraim was lost among the gentile nations. Will any dispute these facts?

 

Now, I believe no one will condemn the mistakes and false doctrines of Joseph Smith more than myself. They have been a great stumbling block, a rock of offense. But to say that the idea or theory that Joseph Smith may have projected was error simply because he presented it is equally a stumbling block. Perhaps one of the most common mistakes, and most discouraging, is to keep Joseph Smith's misadventures and false revelations constantly before the people to his discredit. I believe it is enough to say he fell. It is better that we put what precious time we have into joining these two books one to another in our hands and let them be one in God's hands.

 

It is good to note that the Apostles had Ez. 37 in mind when asking Jesus questions in Acts 1:6: "When they therefore were come together they asked him, saying, Lord wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom of Israel?" Then Jesus explains that after they receive the Holy Ghost, they must go forth as witnesses that he has set the stage for this "restoring again," by his teachings, death and resurrection. This witnessing will be even to the uttermost part of the earth, which, as we have pointed out, is the American continent.

 

There are some closely related statements in Ez. 37, I N. 3 and II N. 2 and 12:42-63. Please turn, now, and read them as space will preclude my quoting them in entirety.

 

Verse 42 of II N. 12 refers to the same thought as Ez. 37:21. "And say unto them, thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land..." "I shall proceed to do a marvelous work among them, that I may remember my covenants which I have made unto the children of men, that I may set my hand again the second time to recover my people, which are of the house of Israel." The harmony becomes ever more apparent as we read all of this reference. "Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick for Judah, ... and another for Joseph, the stick of Ephraim ... join them together ... and they shall be one in thine hand." (Ez. 37:16-17). Then verse 19, "I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim (among the gentiles)... and will put them...with the stick of Judah, ... and they shall be one in mine hand."

 

It is necessary to read all of 1 N. 3 to get a clear picture; but I quote verses 195-196, “And the words of the Lamb shall be made known in the records of thy seed, as well as in the records of the twelve apostles of the Lamb; wherefore they both shall be established in one.” (Joined one to another into one stick). II N. 2:19-21: “Wherefore the fruit of thy loins shall write and the fruit of the loins of Judah shall write; (the sticks of Joseph and of Judah) and that which shall be written by the fruit of thy loins (Joseph) and also that which shall be written by the fruit of the loins of Judah shall grow together." (Established in one --- joined one to another into one stick.) The purpose also is set forth: "unto the confounding of false doctrines, and laying down of contentions, and establishing peace among the fruit of thy loins." II N.2:21.

 

When they are joined, then will be the time of the fulfilling of Ez. 37:26-28: "Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. My tabernacle also shall be with them, yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And the heathen shall know that I the Lord do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for evermore."

 

Remember that Jacob, in blessing his sons, Joseph's blessing was greater, and that upon Ephraim and Manasseh Jacob bestowed his name, Israel. In fact examination will show that the blessing upon Joseph and his offspring required about 777 words in English while the blessing upon all the other eleven sons together was made with 403 words only. Then, too, Joseph's land was to be a choice land above all other lands. (Ether 6:6-8) Can there be any doubt then that this is Ephraim's and Manasseh's land? If not, then the final conclusion remains; that is, to reunite Israel, to prove, "Then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and performed it, saith the Lord." (Ez. 37:14.)

 

It is so urgently necessary that all effort be confined to the purpose of joining these two books—records—sticks that came from God through Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) and Judah, to guide all the house of Israel back to God from out of the heathen nations where they have gone, to be "one nation in peace", to restore the kingdom to Israel again, that they shall be "one in mine hand."

 

An important step, perhaps the first to be taken, is to lay aside or put away all so-called "revelations" that attempt to place attachments or interpretations on these ancient records. Such superlatives have been the millstone around the neck of would-be believers in the Book of Mormon. The greatest potential danger and the most satanically successful is, that in trying to prove some fallacy in latter-day revelation, which in fact has no connection with the Book of Mormon and its purpose, many have been caused to turn against even the Book of Mormon itself. It is to be hoped that my efforts to clarify the identity of the "stick of Judah" and the "stick of Joseph" will in some measure dilute the doubts that may have been recently implanted in the hearts of some.

 

Our questions answered, we conclude by stating that Ez. 37, I N. 3 and II N. 2:42-63 summarizes the matter, as does Deut. 33:13-18. I quote verse 17: "His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns (plural) are like the horns of unicorns: (Bible and Book of Mormon), with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh." This is what shall be accomplished by the joining of the two sticks in God's hand. And God's purpose is to "restore again the kingdom of Israel".

 

I urge that we confine ourselves solely to this end. (Rolland D. Sprague, “Two Sticks” The Book of Mormon Foundation [April-June 1971]: 1-4)

 

Everett Landon (RLDS) on the Book of Mormon Not Being the Stick of Ephraim of Ezekiel 37

  

Those readers of this treatise who are aware of the belief that the two sticks discussed in Ezekiel 37 point to the Bible and Book of Mormon will find in our comments a departure from that viewpoint, along with reasons for that departure.

 

Having once believed the sticks did symbolize the said Scriptures, we differ in a spirit of considerable charity toward those who still so believe. Therefore, our comments are motivated solely by a love of truth and a desire to glorify God and edify our readers.

 

Tradition is a powerful influence in our minds. Not all are able to surmount it so as to gain a clear view of the truths often lying above some of our most cherished traditions.

 

Nevertheless, we hope some who read this may be able to do it objectively without the stifling shrouds of tradition drawn before their perceptions.

 

First, we firmly believe in the historicity of the vision in Ezekiel 37. That is to say, we believe that long ago in the kingdom of Babylon the hand of the Lord was upon Ezekiel, an exiled captive Jewish prophet. The Lord carried him in the spirit into a view of a valley or plain strewn with very dry bones.

 

The vision is a masterpiece of allegorical prophecy, a precise symbolism of the comfort God should in due time extend to the despairing Israel whose rent Kingdom, Judah and Ephraim (or Israel), had been carried captive away from their land of promise. We believe the Lord's purpose for giving the vision and the instruction following was for the comforting and encouragement of His despondent people.

 

The Lord's explanation to Ezekiel (v.11) is sufficient to establish the symbolism, for He said of the bones:

 

"Son of man, these are the whole house of Israel."

 

And the new flesh and new life which were to come upon them is explained in V.13-14:

 

"And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves, And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land; then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and performed it, saith the Lord."

 

Still more of the allegory is clarified—the dryness of the bones is explained, as the Lord speaks to Ezekiel:

 

"Behold they say, Our bones are dried and our hope is lost, we are cut off..."

 

Are we capable of comprehending the depth of despair crushing the hearts of those captives? Let us attempt to sense as nearly as we can the bitterness of their anguish and their need of comfort. (See Isa. 40:2-31)

 

The chapter is not all allegory and its explanation. The narrative turns at v.15 from a description of the vision to an account of certain instructions which the Lord gave Ezekiel for showing the people just how Jehovah would restore the Kingdom of Israel.

 

In verse 15 Ezekiel writes, "The word of the Lord came again unto me, saying 'Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, FOR JUDAH, AND FOR THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL HIS COMPANIONS: then take another stick, and write upon it, FOR JOSEPH, THE STICK OF EPHRAIM, AND FOR ALL THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL HIS COMPANIONS."

 

The words Ezekiel was to write were dictated to him by the Lord. We emphasize, he was to write upon two sticks, (or staves as stated in the Septuagint Bible). Not upon scrolls, plates, rolls, papyri, or in books or records. The traditional view of the sticks as books or records has been a stumbling block to many. Ezekiel understood fully what a roll of a book was, (Ez. 2:9) and did not need to mince words in saying "stick" if he actually meant "book" or "record". But God clearly foresaw the questions Ezekiel's actions would draw from the people. Writing on sticks was certainly unusual and unexpected. Naturally they would ask the meaning of this; with the explanation; "...Thus saith the Lord God; 'Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim...and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in my hand.'" It is necessary to understand here that the stick of Ephraim was to be PUT At the division of the original kingdom of Israel, what did Jeroboam (Ephraim) take away from Rehoboam (Judah)? Was it records, books, or archives? Not at all! He led away PEOPLE from the scepter of Judah and the house of David. (I Ki.11:28-32; Jere.31:6-21) Thus envy was created between the two.

 

But Isaiah 11:11-13 speaks of the last days when the Lord will reunite Ephraim and Judah under His law (scepter) written in their hearts. Then Ephraim and Judah will be one people again. The scepter, however will remain with Judah under the eternal rule of her KING DAVID—Christ. (See I Chr.5:2)

 

With these prophecies in mind we return to the Lord's words to Ezekiel as He explained the meaning of the sticks which were to become one in Ezekiel's hand (as they will one day be in God's hand). Ephraim's scepter was broken off from the whole scepter of Israel which had been in the hand of Judah, therefore would properly be re-joined to it in the restoration of Israel. We should also call attention to the fact that a staff is a stick, or rod, or pole. And a scepter is also a staff.

 

Please note that before the division of the Kingdom, Solomon had given Jeroboam charge over all the house of Joseph. As if to emphasize the significance of it, the prophet Ahijah committed ten of the tribes into Jeroboam's hand. (I Ki.11:28-32) Thus we see the breaking off of the ten tribes under the staff (or administration) of Ephraim. His power could continue only so long as the Kingdom of Israel remained divided from the throne of David. But since Ephraim had led them away, Ephraim must lead them back for their reunion with Judah. (Gen.49:8-12; Deut.33:17; Psalm 60:7; 108:8; Isa.78:17; Hos.14:9)

 

Thus, the Lord's revelation to Ezekiel was of the reuniting and restoration of the House of Israel under the scepter of the line of David. This would mark an end to the scepter of Ephraim and join both into one IN GOD'S HAND.

 

The scepter would no longer be wielded by men "And David my servant (Christ) shall be king over them and they all shall have one shepherd they shall also walk in my judgments, and observe my statutes and do them...And my servant David shall be their prince forever."

 

Let Book of Mormon believers be not dismayed. In the Bible and the Holy Spirit we have ample proof of the Book of Mormon. Prophecy abounds in the Book of Mormon confirming our belief that those two books are to join together to prepare Israel for her re-gathering and the reunion of her shattered scepter in the hand of her Rightful King. Both will prophesy, teach and testify to the instilling of God's statutes in the hearts of the people of Israel, to the outpouring of His Spirit in them in PREPARATION for their restoration to His scepter or kingdom.

 

Thus, while they are not the two sticks joined together restoring the authority of Rehoboam and Jeroboam, they ARE the joined WORD OF GOD. And His scepter for the government of all His people will be the gift of His Spirit in their souls by which it will become their nature to follow Him. (Jer. 31:33-34) Ezekiel did not write the Bible or the Book of Mormon and the symbolic sticks being joined would be fulfilled at the reunion of Ephraim and Judah. On the other hand the Bible and Book of Mormon have already come together and they are a chief means for the accomplishing of the Israelite reunion.

 

Hosea 8:12 does not at all indicate God gave Ephraim His law during the captivity in Assyria. He gave Ephraim His law at Sinai when it was given to all Israel. Ephraim's bondage resulted from his abandonment of it. (Hos.9:1-17; 13:1-16) Nor did Ephraim write the Bible or Book of Mormon. If Ephraim received law from God at another time, we think it far more likely it should have been received from Jesus after the Lord had completed His Nephite ministry and went to visit his "other sheep".

 

In summation, we say that the joining together of the Bible and Book of Mormon is a great and marvelous preliminary to the supreme and crowning circumstances when the people of God are brought together under the reign of King Jesus. There they will never more be fettered by the dominion of earthly rulers, then indeed, will Israel's kingdom flourish and her scepter rest in the hand if its proper claimant, the TRUE SHEPHERD OF ISRAEL, Who shall lead them in green pastures and beside the still waters. (Everett Landon, “Is the Book of Mormon One of the Stucks of Ezekiel 37?,” The Book of Mormon Foundation [January-March 1971]: 7-8)

 

Robin R. Tucker (RLDS) on the Book of Mormon Not Being the "Stick of Ephraim" (Ezekiel 37)

  

For all my life and for many years before, people have used the 37th chapter of Ezekiel as pointing towards the Book of Mormon. But after looking at Latter Day Saintism more closely I find that here is yet another point they have erred on.

 

Some say this passage suggests the Book of Mormon to be "the stick of Ephraim" because of a reference in Doctrine and Covenants (RLDS) Sec. 26:2a, b

 

"Behold, this is wisdom in me; wherefore marvel not, for the hour cometh that I will of the fruit of the vine with you on earth, AND WITH MORONI, WHOM I HAVE SENT UNTO YOU TO REVEAL THE BOOK OF MORMON, CONTAINING THE FULLNESS OF MY EVERLASTING GOSPEL; TO WHOM I HAVE COMMITTED THE KEYS OF THE RECORD OF THE STICK OF EPHRAIM; ...." (sic.)

 

Capital letters in the above set out the part that was added in 1835 to the "Revelation" as it was originally printed in the Book of Commandments. Close comparison shows fully 3/4 was made up and added in 1835 to usher in a masterpiece of deception.

 

Let us review Ezekiel 37:16, 17 & 19:

 

"Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: Then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand.... Say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God, Behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows, and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah, and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand."

 

We see in v.16 there will be one stick for Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions. More than one tribe is spoken of here. We also have one stick prophesied for Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions. Again we have more than one tribe spoken of. Now, we know that at the time of Rehoboam, there was a split in Israel. Judah ruled the southern kingdom of two or three tribes and Ephraim ruled the northern kingdom of nine or ten. From that time Ephraim is used as a name interchangeably with Israel as in Isa. 7:2

 

With this thought in mind then, we find several places where two sets of records are mentioned:

 

"Now the rest of the acts of Jehu, and all that he did, and all his might, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Israel?"

(II Ki. 10:34)

 

"...the acts of Hezekiah...written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?"

(Ibid.20:20)

 

"...the acts of Josiah...written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?"

(Ibid.23:28)

 

"...the acts of Asa...written in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel."

(II Chr. 16:11)

 

"...Hezekiah, and his goodness...written in the vision of Isaiah...and in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel."

(Ibid. 32:32)

 

We may have some of their records in the Bible, but when they were scattered into Assyria they would have taken most of their records with them to continue their history.

 

Ezekiel 37:19 says, "behold, I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in the hand of Ephraim," The reader is called to note the Book of Mormon is not in the "hand of Ephraim" for it is very plain that it came forth to and that we are GENTILES.

 

"And after that thy seed shall be destroyed and dwindle in unbelief, and also the seed of thy brethren, behold, these things shall be hid up, to come forth unto the Gentiles by the gift and power of the Lamb;" (I Ne. 3:185)

 

We also see where it is called the "stick of Joseph" in the nineteenth verse and the "stick of Ephraim" in the sixteenth. The reason for this is that Joseph and Ephraim are often used interchangeably as in Rev. 7:8-8 where Manasses is listed as a tribe in place of Dan, and Joseph is used for Ephraim.

 

The Book of Mormon, for it to be the "stick of Joseph" or "Ephraim", Lehi would have had to be of the lineage of Joseph through Ephraim. But he was not, according to the following:

 

"And Aminadi was a descendant of Nephi...the son of Lehi, who came out of the land of Jerusalem, who was a descendant of Manasseh...the son of Joseph, which was sold into Egypt...." (Alma 8:3)

 

Furthermore, the Book of Mormon covers but the history of two families, not "and all the house of Israel his companions." Also it tells of there being a record of the Jews, for the Nephites, and for the lost tribes of Israel.

 

"For behold, I shall speak unto the Jews, and they shall write it...the Nephites, and they shall write it; And...the other tribes of the house of Israel, which I have led away, and they shall write it; And...and all the nations of the earth...they shall write it. And it shall come to pass that the Jews shall have the words of the Nephites, and the Nephites shall have the words of the Jews: And the Jews shall have the words of the lost tribes of Israel; and the lost tribes of Israel shall have the words of the Nephites and the Jews." (2 Ne. 12:67-72)

 

The Book of Mormon can not be the "stick of Ephraim" as these evidences point out. (Robin R. Tucker, “The 37th Chapter of Ezekiel,” The Book of Mormon Foundation [January-March 1971]: 5-6)

 

Ken Penner on Isaiah 9:6 (LXX)

  

6 The conjunction Ὅτι parallels the one at the beginning of verses 4 and 5. All three provide the reason for the happiness described in 9:3: Lord has ended their oppression, their property will be returned, and now a great leader has been born to them. Since the καί before ἐδόθη is not at the beginning of the clause, it must be adverbial, which would be unexpected in an otherwise parallel set of statements. But in S (the first hand, at least) we do not have close parallelism, since the pronoun changes from first to second person. The noun ἄγγελος generally means a messenger. In biblical usage of course this often refers to an divine (angelic) messenger, but here, the messenger is from a council, so he might be termed an envoy. At first glance, the genitive relative pronoun in the relative clause οὗ ἡ ἀρχὴ ἐγενήθη ἐπὶ τοῦ ὤμου αὐτοῦ appears to modify ἡ ἀρχὴ (“whose beginning”), but by the end of the clause it appears that we have a genitive personal pronoun resuming the genitive relative pronoun (“on whose shoulders”). The three words Μεγάλη βουλῆς ἄγγελος are G’s original translation. Corrector ca added θαυμαστὸς σύμβουλος θεὸς ἰσχυρός ἐξουσιαστής, ἄρχων (ε)ἰρήνης πατὴρ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, matching the Hebrew. Corrector cb added the cross signs (+), and d added red dots seen in Figure 2.

 

Ziegler indicates that this section is marked by a obelus in 88 and the Syrohexapla. The same words added by ca, θαυμαστὸς σύμβουλος θεὸς ἰσχυρός ἐξουσιαστής, ἄρχων εἰρήνης πατὴρ τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος, are included in the manuscripts Alexandrinus, 106, 26, Venetus, 109, 736, the full Lucianic family of manuscripts (albeit with an asterisk in 22, 48, 51, 231, and 763) including 46, 233, 456, the corrector to 764, 87, 91, 309, 490, 377, 564, 565, 403, 613, 407, 538, 770, except that Alexandrinus and 26 omit θεος, 109 and 736 transpose θαυμαστος συμβουλος with θεος ισχυρος They are also added in the Syropalestinian translation, Eusebius (Dem. ev.), Athanasius, Chrysostom, and possibly Theodoret. Clement has the slightly shorter θαυμαστος συμβουλος θεος δυναστης πατηρ αιωνιος αρχων ειρηνης. Other manuscripts not listed here do not include these additional words. Most but not all of the words in the addition to S can be traced to interpolation from the Three; the exceptions are εξουσιαστης and του μελλοντος. Aquila has θαυμα- στος συμβουλος ισχυρος δυνατος πατηρ ετι αρχων ειρηνης. Symmachus has παραδο- ξασμος βουλευτικος ισχυρος δυνατος πατηρ αιωνος αρχων ειρηνης. Theodotion has θαυμαστος βουλευων ισχυρος δυναστης πατηρ αιωνιος αρχων ειρηνης. Ottley (1904, 1:2:155–156) summarized why these words are not “part of the true LXX. text:” they are not in the earliest manuscripts S* and B (or Q); they are largely a duplicate rendering of Μεγάλης βουλῆς ἄγγελος; the wording is close (but not identical) to that of the Three (Aquila, Symmachus, Theodotion). Ottley proposed that these words came from the versionTheodotion revised (known from Daniel). Le Moigne noted that not only here in 9:6 but also in 22:21 G refrains from giving a person the title “father” even though that is what the Hebrew text has; at the same time, G attributes royal features to these (2008). Because in comparison to the Hebrew, the human messianic figure’s role has been reduced to that of a messenger, Johann Lust (1998) and John Collins (2008) disagreed with those (e.g., Coppens 1968) who claimed G enhances the messianic character of Isaiah’s oracles. (See also van der Kooij 2002.) Trigg compared Origen’s use of the title “Angel of Great Counsel,” applied to Christ, to the image of the son as seraph in Isaiah 6 (1991). In place of γὰρ ἄξω, B’s reading is probably due to the absence of ἐγὼ, so that γὰρ falls in the second position in the sentence. Instead of ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ καὶ ἐν κρίματι, B’s reading ἐν κρίματι καὶ ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ follows the Hebrew order. (Ken Penner, Isaiah [Septuagint Commentary Series; Leiden: Brill, 2021], 412-14)

 

Here is Figure 2 (p. 413):

 







Examples of “Great Spirit” in the Old Testament (Hebrew and Greek)

  

“Great Spirit” in the Hebrew of the Old Testament:

 

And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord. And, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind (ר֣וּחַ גְּדוֹלָ֡ה) rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord, but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind and earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake. (1 Kgs 19:11)

 

And, behold, there came a great wind (ר֣וּחַ גְּדוֹלָ֡ה) from the wilderness, and smote the four corners of the house, and it fell upon the young men, and they are dead; and I only am escaped alone to tell thee. (Job 1:19)

 

But the Lord sent out a great wind (ר֣וּחַ גְּדוֹלָ֡ה) into the sea, and there was a mighty tempest in the sea, so that the ship was like to be broken. (Jonah 1:4)

 

“Great Spirit” in the LXX:

 

All translations are taken from the NETS:

 

And ye said, “You shall go out tomorrow and shall stand before the Lord on the mountain; behold, the Lord will pass by.” And there was a great, strong wind (πνευμα μεγα) splitting mountains and crushing rocks before the Lord, and the Lord was not in the wind, and after the wind a seismic upheaval; the Lord was not in the seismic upheaval. (1 Kgs 19:11)

 

Suddenly, a great wind (πνευμα μεγα) came from the wilderness and struck the four corners of the house, and the house fell on your children, and they died, but I alone escaped, and I came to tell you.” (Job 1:19)

 

By his great spirit (πνευματι μεγαλω) he showed what would be, forever, and he comforted those who mourned in Sion. (Sirach 48:24)

 

John R. Levison on Modified Citations of the Old Testament in the Epistle to the Hebrews

John R. Levison, “The Inspired Interpretation of Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3, the Writings of Philo Judaeus, and the Letter to the Hebrews,” in The Spirit Says; Inspiration and Interpretation in Israelite, Jewish, and Early Christian Texts, ed. Ronald Herms, John R. Levison, and Archie T. Wright (Ektasis: Religious Experience From Antiquity to the Middle Ages 8; Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2021), 285-87:

 

Modified Citations

 

In two texts, the spirit alters ancient texts to meet the needs of the community to which the letter is addressed.

 

Hebrews 3:7–11. The citation in this text is altered and attributed to the spirit. LXX Ps 94:9–10 reads:

 

Where your fathers tried me;
they put me to the proof and saw my works.
For forty years
I loathed that generation.

 

Heb 3:9–10 reads instead, “where your ancestors put me to the test, though they had seen my works for forty years. Therefore I was angry with that generation.” In LXX Psalm 94, God loathes Israel for forty years. In Hebrews, Israel tests God for forty years. This alteration heightens the protracted character of Israel’s rebellion, as well as what is at stake in persistent resistance to God—a key theme of the letter to the Hebrews.

 

This difference is not the product of a different Vorlage. The author cites the text of LXX Ps 94:9–10 when writing later, “But with whom was God angry forty years?” (Heb 3:17). The author knows LXX Psalm 94 as it now stands, but in Heb 3:9 the spirit speaks a modified version, which emphasizes the danger of becoming hardened toward God over a span of years. Such recalcitrance, cautions the author, invariably leads to irrevocable unbelief.

 

Hebrews 10:16–17. In Jeremiah 31, God makes a covenant with the house of Israel; in Hebrews 10, God makes a covenant “with them.” In Jeremiah 31, God “remembers their sins no more;” in Hebrews 10, the words, “and their lawless deeds,” are inserted: “their sins and their lawless deeds no more.” These changes, like the alteration in Hebrews 3, are not due to a different Vorlage, since the author earlier cited Jeremiah 31:31–34 more closely:

 

Jer 31:33, 34 (LXX 38:31, 34)

Heb 8:10–12

Heb 10:16–17

Because this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, quoth the Lord ...

This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord ...

This is the covenant that I will make with them. after those days, says the Lord ...

because I will be gracious regarding their injustices, and remember their sins

For I will be merciful toward their iniquities. and I will remember their sins

I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds

no more.

no more

no more

 

When the author attributes the words of Jeremiah to the holy spirit and interprets them as a present testimony to his hearers (“the Holy Spirit also testifies to us ...”), the words are tailored to accommodate the situation of the letter’s recipients. The words, “with them,” replace “the house of Israel” and allow the text of Jeremiah to include the readers of the letter. The addition of the words, “and their lawless deeds,” to Jer 31:34 accentuates concrete sinful activity and, as a consequence, emphasizes the scope and depth of God’s mercy (Heb 10:17).

Innocent III (1168-1216) on the Possibility of a Heretical Pope Losing Office

  

Qualiter ergo de quolibet alio prælato possit intelligi, satis apparet; sed qualiter intelligi debeat de Romano pontifice, non est adeo manifestum. Servus enim, secundum Apostolum, suo domino stat aut cadit (Rom. xiv). Propter quod idem Apostolus ait: Quis es, qui judicas alienum servum? (Ibid.) Unde cum Romanus pontifex non habeat hominem nisi Deum, quantumlibet evanescat, quis potest eum foras mittere, aut pedibus conculcare? cum illi dicatur: Collige causam tuam in sinum tuum. Verum non frustra sibi blanditur de potestate, neque de sublimitate vel honore temere gloriatur; quia quanto minus judicabitur ab homine, tanto magis judicatur a Deo. Minus dico; quia potius est ab hominibus judicari, vel potius judicatus offendi, si videlicet evanescat in hæresim; quoniam qui non credit, jam judicatus est (Joan. iii). In hoc siquidem casu debet intelligi de illo, quod si sal evanuerit, ad nihilum valet ultra, nisi ut mittatur foras, et conculcetur ab hominibus. (Sermon IV: On the Consecration of a Bishop, Migne, PL 217:665-72)

 

 

How this can be understood of any other prelate is sufficiently clear; but how it ought to be understood of the Roman Pontiff is not so obvious. For a servant, according to the Apostle, stands or falls to his own master (Rom. 14). Hence the same Apostle says: "Who are you to judge another's servant?" Therefore, since the Roman Pontiff has no superior but God, however much he may lose his savor (quantumlibet evanescat), who can cast him out or trample him under foot? For to him it is said, "Keep your case within your own bosom." Nevertheless, he should not flatter himself vainly because of his power, nor boast rashly of his exalted dignity or honor; for the less he is judged by men, the more he is judged by God—indeed, rather, I should say that it is better to be judged by men than by God. If, however, he should lose his savor by falling into heresy, then in this case the saying is to be understood of him: "If the salt loses its savor, it is good for nothing any longer except to be cast out and trampled under foot by men."

 

 

Blog Archive