Henry Alford (1810-1871) on John 3:5

  

There can be no doubt, on any honest interpretation of the words, that γεννηθῆναι ἐξ ὕδατος refers to the token or outward sign of baptism,—γ. ἐκ πνεύματος to the thing signified, or inward grace of the Holy Spirit. All attempts to get rid of these two plain facts have sprung from doctrinal prejudices, by which the views of expositors have been warped. Such we have in Calvin: “spiritum, qui nos repurgat, et qui virtute sua in nos diffusa vigorem inspirat cœlestis vitæ;”—Grotius: “spiritum aquæ instar emundantem;”—Cocceius: “gratiam Dei, sordes et vitia abluentem;”—Lampe: “obedientiam Christi;”—Tholuck, who holds that not Baptism itself, but only its idea, that of cleansing, is referred to;—and others, who endeavour to resolve ὕδατος καὶ πνεύματος into a figure of ἕν διὰ δυοῖν, so as to make it mean ‘the cleansing or purifying Spirit.’ All the better and deeper expositors have recognized the co-existence of the two, water and the Spirit. So for the most part the ancients: so Lücke (in his last edition), De Wette, Neander, Stier, Olshausen, &c. (Henry Alford, Alford's Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Guardian Press, 1976], 1:714)

 

On "Eastward" Movement in Scripture

  

In Genesis, eastward movement usually coincides with the themes of exile or apostasy. . . . For example, the “eastward” location of the Garden of Eden may thus be explained by its position relative to the Creator, who is “in the midst,” meaning literally in Hebrew “in the center” (Moses 3:8-9). Note that the initial separation of Adam and Eve from God occurred when they were removed from His presence to be placed in the garden “eastward in Eden” (Moses 3:8)—that I, east of the peak of the “mountain” where, in some representation of the symbolic geography of Paradise, He is said to dwell. This interpretation also seems to be borne out in later events, as eastward movement is repeatedly associated with increasing distance from God. after God’s voice of judgment visited Adam and Eve from the west (Moses 4:14), they experienced an additional degree of separation when, after the Fall, they left the garden through its eastern gate (Moses 4:31). Cain was “shut out from the presence of the Lord” as he went eastward to dwell “in the land of Nod” (Moses 5:41). The journey of Cain’s posterity continued in the same direction—“from the east” to the “land of Shinar”—toward Sodom and Gomorrah when he separated himself from Abraham (Genesis 13:11).

 

On the other hand, westward movement is often used to symbolize return and restoration of blessings—that is, atonement. For instance, according to B[ook of]G[iants], Enoch gathered his people west (W. B. Henning, Book of the Giants, Text G (Sogdian), p. 69; M. Goff, Sons of the Waters, p. 125; J. M. Bradshaw, Moses 6-7 and the Book of Giants, pp. 1132-33). Abraham’s “return from the east is [a] return to the Promised Land and . . . the city of ‘Salem’” (Genesis 14:17-20), being “directed toward blessing.” The Magi of the Nativity likewise came “from the east,” westward to Bethlehem, their journey symbolically enacting a restoration f temple and priesthood blessings that had been lost from the earth (Matthew 2:1; J. M. Bradshaw, God’s Image 1, pp. 161, 673-74). Additionally, the glorious return of Jesus Christ when He “shall suddenly come to his temple” (Malachi 3:1) is likewise represented as an east-to-west movement: “For as the light of the morning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, and covereth the whole earth, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be” (Joseph Smith—Matthew 1:26). (Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Enoch and the Gathering of Zion: The Witness of Ancient Texts for Modern Scripture [Orem, Utah: The Interpreter Foundation, 2021], 35, 238 n. 175)

 

Jeffrey Bradshaw on John 3:13 and "which is in heaven"

Commenting on John 3:13 (cf. Moses 6:57), Jeff Bradshaw wrote:

 

A disputed phrase in John 3:13 (“which is in heaven”), generally accepted as a late gloss, becomes more intelligible n context if we conjecture the possibility that an editor may have intended its referent to be “Man” rather than “Son of Man.” Note that the referent appears with two definite articles (ho huious tou anthrōpou), that is, “the Son of the Man” (English capitalization added), giving the reading “the Son of the Man which is in heaven,” which can be taken as meaning that “the Man,” rather than “the Son” is the one who is currently “in heaven.” Other scholars who accept the phrase “which is in heaven” (for example, R. L. Overstreet, John 3:13) have interpreted it differently as a witness to the omnipresence of Jesus, that is, that He is simultaneously on earth and in heaven. (Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Enoch and the Gathering of Zion: The Witness of Ancient Texts for Modern Scripture [Orem, Utah: The Interpreter Foundation, 2021], 286-87 n. 863)

 

An Important Textual Variant in OT1 and OT2 of Moses 7:2

In what is now Moses 7:2, OT Manuscript 1, p. 15 reads:

 

 

Enoch began to prophecy saying unto the people, that as I was journ[ey]ing and stood in the place Mahujah and I cried unto the Lord there came a voice out of heaven saying turn ye and get ye upon the Mount Simeon

 

In OT Manuscript 2, p. 23, we read:

 

 

Enoch began to prophecy, saying unto the people, that, as I was Jourieying And stood in the place Mahujah, & I cried unto the Lord, there came a voice out of Heaven, Saying, turn ye & get ye upon the mount Simeon.

 

As Jeff Bradshaw noted:

 

Note that the canonized version of Moses 7:2 reads Mahujah as a place name while OT1 renders Mahujah as a personal name. in other words, the original dictation seems to indicate that Enoch is “standing with” Mahujah, “not standing on” the place Mahujah. And OT1 also seems to indicate that the two of them prayed together. (Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Enoch and the Gathering of Zion: The Witness of Ancient Texts for Modern Scripture [Orem, Utah: The Interpreter Foundation, 2021], 91-92)

 

The Appearance of Jesus in the Kirtland Temple being called a "Vision"

In D&C 110:1-10, Joseph Smith records Jesus' appearance to him and Oliver Cowdery in the Kirtland Temple:

 

The veil was taken from our minds, and the eyes of our understanding were opened. We saw the Lord standing upon the breastwork of the pulpit, before us; and under his feet was a paved work of pure gold, in color like amber. His eyes were as a flame of fire; the hair of his head was white like the pure snow; his countenance shone above the brightness of the sun; and his voice was as the sound of the rushing of great waters, even the voice of Jehovah, saying: I am the first and the last; I am he who liveth, I am he who was slain; I am your advocate with the Father. Behold, your sins are forgiven you; you are clean before me; therefore, lift up your heads and rejoice. Let the hearts of your brethren rejoice, and let the hearts of all my people rejoice, who have, with their might, built this house to my name. For behold, I have accepted this house, and my name shall be here; and I will manifest myself to my people in mercy in this house. Yea, I will appear unto my servants, and speak unto them with mine own voice, if my people will keep my commandments, and do not pollute this holy house. Yea the hearts of thousands and tens of thousands shall greatly rejoice in consequence of the blessings which shall be poured out, and the endowment with which my servants have been endowed in this house. And the fame of this house shall spread to foreign lands; and this is the beginning of the blessing which shall be poured out upon the heads of my people. Even so. Amen.

 

Note the language: this is clearly and event that took place in time and space. Why is this noteworthy? Note the beginning of v. 11: “After this vision closed . . .” Here, it shows that, for Joseph, “vision” does not mean an event that took place in a dream state or an event that did not take place in space and time (as some think the First Vision was).

John Whitmer and Joseph Smith being the "author and proprietor of the Book of Mormon"

John Whitmer, History 1831-circa 1847, p. 94, reads as follows (strikethrough has been removed):

 

James Js Strang a Prophet Seer <&> Revelator unto my church for thou shalt shurly die a martor, thy Cup is bitter &c Shortly after this appointment of Strangs the mob gathered and took by Strategem Joseph & Hyrum Smith conveyed them to Carthage the Seat of Justice in & for the Co. of Caldwell. <Hancock> as if to try them by the law of the land, but insted of trying them by the law of the land for their crimes they murdered them & thus the Lords annointed fell by the brutal hand of men. & they are gone the way of all the earth. & Strangs Reigns in the place of Smith the author and proprietor of the Book of Mormon

 

Such shows that John Whitmer and early LDS did not believe that Joseph Smith being called the “author and proprietor” of the 1830 Book of Mormon did not mean it was anything but a translation of an ancient document.

Further Reading:

The 1830 Book of Mormon listing Joseph Smith as “Author and Proprietor”

Excerpts from "A Uniform System for Teaching Investigators" (August 1961)

I recently read “A Uniform System for Teaching Investigators,” August 1961. Here are some excerpts I found to be interesting:

 

There are many but not “33,000” (or some extraordinary [and false] number of Christian churches:

 

There are certainly a great many different Christian churches in the world today. (p. 10)

 

Joseph seeing the Father and Son is why he is a prophet:

 

Elder: . . .From what we have said here, Mr. Brown, WHY WAS JOSEPH SMITH A PROPHET?

 

Brown: Because he saw and spoke with the Father and the Son. (p. 12)

 

“Elias” meaning “messenger(s)”:

 

The word Elias, as it is used here [Matt 17:11], refers to messengers . . . (p. 19)