Rob Osborn

?

Given them means preached to such as Samuel the Lamanite upon the wall.

Because the way I understand these verses is that if one is under the law it's because it is given them to know by the prophets. Whether they thus reject it or not doesn't matter, if they have it given them they are thus within the law, there is no ignorance and thus by rejecting it they stand condemned having transgressed the law by not following it.

How do you thus reconcile- 25 Wherefore, he has given a law; and where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation; and where there is no condemnation the mercies of the Holy One of Israel have claim upon them, because of the atonement; for they are delivered by the power of him. 26 For the atonement satisfieth the demands of his justice upon all those who have not the law given to them, that they are delivered from that awful monster, death and hell, and the devil, and the lake of fire and brimstone, which is endless torment; and they are restored to that God who gave them breath, which is the Holy One of Israel. (2 Nephi 9:24-25) 22 For behold that all little children are alive in Christ, and also all they that are without the law. For the power of redemption cometh on all them that have no law; wherefore, he that is not condemned, or he that is under no condemnation, cannot repent; and unto such baptism availeth nothing. (Moroni 8:22)

Humm, not sure I agree with #6. Logic doesn't add up for me personally. If one rejects the law they would die within the law because it is available to them.

What are those two key points?

Much to dissect and discuss but kind of off topic. Nevertheless, late in Joseph's life his view regarding salvation from hell changed from not needing baptism to definitely needing it. I've brought it up before, and it's worth noting, that the line "the continued duration for completionn, in order that the heirs of salvation..." Applies to those who died without law and the heathen Nations. In the end it's what "we become" rather than "where we have been". So, unless we want to just chalk up all the "heathen Nations" and "they who died without law" as becoming nothing more than continued deniers and heathens the above quote doesn't make much sense in my opinion. But, does this then presuppose that the heathen Nations we're destined for only Terrestrial glory only?

Humm, I personally think that may be thinking too much into it. I really don't see there being a difference between those who die without law and those who die not knowing the law. They both are without law. The connotation here is that lived without the knowledge of the gospel, or, the justice of the law didn't apply to them.

Okay, so do you see those who are spoken of as those who died without law (vs. 72) as a separate group as those who were kept in Spirit prison (vs. 73)? If so, are they both designated as those who both received the gospel after death (vs. 74)?

Humm, so, are you suggesting then it's possible to know not the law yet die within it, and vice versa- know the law yet die without it?

But does the phrase "heathen Nations" refer to a judged separate group of "rebels" or to an entire population of people's who just do not know Christ? I would beg that "heathen Nations" refers to the masses of Nations throughout time who knew not God and thus children born into this predicament were born into that classification as the "heathen".

Here are the two phrases- "they that knew no law" "they who died without law" Logically, if one lived in mortality and knew no law, they also thus die without the law. One cannot be judged by the law if they knew no law. The only reason I perhaps see you trying to force a distinction here is because logically there should be a separation between the heathen Nations who just had no idea about Christ and thus perhaps Celestial candidates and those who were perhaps wicked yet died without the law, who also thus had no idea about Christ, but are not Celestial candidates. But does the actual text warrant such conclusion?

I just don't see how it relates the way you are prescribing. Sacrifice is a divine principle. We covenant in the temple to sacrifice all we have in building up the kingdom. It's rather simple, nothing to be confusing. The same goes for Christ sacrificing his life to save us, it's really simple and straightforward. By his death he becomes our advocate to the Father in our behalf and God can't deny the Son. In similar fashion, as we help others and sacrifice our time in helping others, we gain favor with God and in so doing he sends blessings upon us and those we ask in behalf of. I shouldn't think it should be more complicated than that.

I personally don't see a distinction between those who knew no law and those who died without law. They both have no law and knew no law in mortality.

Yeah, it's pretty confusing. I never liked the terminology of the "afternoon of the first resurrection". It's not like they are going to be resurrected years, decades or even centuries later but rather basically at the same time and spend the thousand years on the earth with Christ.

Still not seeing the connection of our blood vs. Christ's. The law of sacrifice does not mandate we sacrifice our own lives. The law of sacrifice includes many things as mentioned in your link devotional but in no way is it the same as the Sacrifice Christ made.

I'm curious as to what you guys think of this verse- 54 And then shall the heathen nations be redeemed, and they that knew no law shall have part in the first resurrection; and it shall be tolerable for them. (D&C 45:54) Compared with- 72 Behold, these are they who died without law; (D&C 76:72) Are these spoken of in section 45 Terrestrial heirs, Celestial heirs or a mixture? And why? Also, I interpret "heathen Nations" as those Nations who aren't or weren't Christian Nations, perhaps even the gentile Nations.

Humm, I guess I don't see it like that.

Yeah I'm not sure about all that I just believe that the whole point of the sacrifice of the lamb was that it was unblemished, symbolic of cleanliness and sinless; purity. Our blood means nothing, does nothing, it's just death. Christ's blood has life in it.

Hum, interesting. I've personally always seen the only symbolism that Isaac was symbolic of the Savior. We bring to the alter a broken and contrite spirit. The alter for the payment of sin ultimately is only through the sacrifice of the Savior and his blood shed.

Seen from a much broader perspective, the Nephites realized there was an ocean on the west of both the North and South countries and on the east. We use this same designation today. Even without technology the early explorers were aware of this fact also. They didn't differentiate the two oceans as north-south but rather east-west.

I personally see the isthmus of Panama as the only logical narrow neck. The main giveaway for me is that it provided a natural barrier for both the Jaredites and the Nephites. The Jaredites never settled society south of the isthmus and Hagoth built ships to go around or bypass the isthmus. Why? Because it was and is a jungle. Eventually it became passable by foot. One Lamanite army was determined enough that they were going to forge ahead and "cut" their way through with the sword. That to me describes very dense jungle and we see that only in Panama.

What has always bothered me is that the very intersection of science and religion are at odds and yet too often I see BoM scholars, who believe in the account discount evidence based on what science has to say. I hold no real value in scientific inquiry regarding archaeology, etc.

My favorite is still the wheat and the tares. Wheat is used to make bread and thus the bread of life as symbolic to Christ and the sacrament, or, life is in the wheat. We are the wheat. But, what's interesting is that in the Rexburg temple the wheat motif is symbolized throughout but only in the sealing or marriage room is the wheat motif blossomed and ready for harvest.

I will just say we have a ways to go before we are in the true pathways of doctrine regarding heaven and hell.