Should the Jews be Held Blameless

[Dravin]

The way I understand it is that the title Israel belongs to those who are baptized into the LDS church.

It also belongs to the literal descendants of Abraham/Israel/Jacob. There is a dualism here. We of the Church are a spiritual Israel because we are the spiritual descendants of Abraham, because we join his covenant. There is also the literal descendants of Abraham (and actually those of us who aren't already literal descendants of Abraham are adopted into it at baptism). Jews legitimately lay claim to the title of literal descendants of Abraham/Israel/Jacob even though they currently do not lay claim to the title of spiritual descendants (from an LDS perspective of course).

We believe in a literal gathering of Israel as mentioned in the official curriculum materials I linked to. Israel will literally and physically be gathered to the lands promised them.

Edited December 3, 2010 by Dravin

[Bensalem]

Hello Ben,

having read through the thread, there appear to be a couple of principles you have trouble understanding.

Firstly, to the OP: people are responsible for the choices they make. Their children do not inherit that responsibility; thus, no living Jew can be blamed for the crucifixion of the Saviour.

Second, and also to the OP: the fact that God uses the evil acts of free beings to accomplish His righteous purposes does not make those acts any less evil, or those who committed them any less free. In simple terms, God forsees what men will do in a given set of circumstances, sets up the circumstances He requires, puts the men in those circumstances, and lets them freely choose as He knows they will.

Thirdly, the notion that words are mathematically simple constructs that each deliver one meaning and only one, is naive at best, and gives rise to painfully muddled thinking. The Saints can modernly be called Israel because they inherit the promises made to ancient Israel. However, so do the Jews. Ultimately, of course, we anticipate that all branches of Jacob's descendants will be reunited in one fold; but the fact that this has not yet been accomplished does not remove the claims that the Jews have upon their inheritance, including but not limited to their land inheritance.

Regards,

Pahoran

Firstly, I don’t have a problem with naming the Jewish people (past and present) blameless. I made the point early on that even the Jews of Jesus’ day should be held blameless for the crucifixion because they were only fulfilling God’s word.

Secondly, I don’t agree with your presentation that God uses evil to produce the right end. I believe God speaks and righteous men are called into fulfillment of His words. Free choice allows unrighteous men to act against the word of God.

And thirdly, there can only be one Israel. Genesis tells the story of Jacob and Esau; the first born Esau deserved the birthright but it was given to Jacob. Likewise, the LDS church has received the blessing of the birthright and the promise of eternal progression. The Jews have been out maneuvered by Christ.

[Bensalem]

It also belongs to the literal descendants of Abraham/Israel/Jacob. There is a dualism here. We of the Church are a spiritual Israel because we are the spiritual descendants of Abraham, because we join his covenant. There is also the literal descendants of Abraham (and actually those of us who aren't already literal descendants of Abraham are adopted into it at baptism). Jews legitimately lay claim to the title of literal descendants of Abraham/Israel/Jacob even though they currently do not lay claim to the title of spiritual descendants (from an LDS perspective of course).

We believe in a literal gathering of Israel as mentioned in the official curriculum materials I linked to. Israel will literally and physically be gathered to the lands promised them.

The Jewish claim of blood line descent from Abraham does not get them into the LDS church and it will not gain them access to the kingdom of Israel in heaven.

[JohnnyRudick]

The Jewish claim of blood line descent from Abraham does not get them into the LDS church and it will not gain them access to the kingdom of Israel in heaven.

I am sure I missed something here:o

I missed the point where someone said it alone would:mellow:

[Dravin]

The Jewish claim of blood line descent from Abraham does not get them into the LDS church

Never said it did. The problem is you are operating from a Highlander premise which is false.

and it will not gain them access to the kingdom of Israel in heaven.

Never said it did. What it does do is extend some promises to them such as the aforementioned physical gathering of Israel.

[Bensalem]

UN Resolution 181 authorized a Jewish state.

Wow! No mention of Israel. So that settles it. The LDS church is the only Israel.

Now if you could get a copy of the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 to the map makers we could put an end to this misunderstanding.

[Bensalem]

Never said it did. The problem is you are operating from a Highlander premise which is false.

Never said it did. What it does do is extend some promises to them such as the aforementioned physical gathering of Israel.

Seems to me that the only true physical gathering would be paired with the only true spiritual gathering; both coming together in one place...the LDS church.

[Bensalem]

I am sure I missed something here:o

I missed the point where someone said it alone would:mellow:

The claim was made that blood line mattered; it does not.

[JohnnyRudick]

The claim was made that blood line mattered; it does not.

If I understand you right.

No, it does not matter.

All are invited.

[Guest]

Firstly, I don’t have a problem with naming the Jewish people (past and present) blameless. I made the point early on that even the Jews of Jesus’ day should be held blameless for the crucifixion because they were only fulfilling God’s word.Secondly, I don’t agree with your presentation that God uses evil to produce the right end. I believe God speaks and righteous men are called into fulfillment of His words. Free choice allows unrighteous men to act against the word of God.

And thirdly, there can only be one Israel. Genesis tells the story of Jacob and Esau; the first born Esau deserved the birthright but it was given to Jacob. Likewise, the LDS church has received the blessing of the birthright and the promise of eternal progression. The Jews have been out maneuvered by Christ.

I don't agree with the bolded statement above.

Nobody on earth is asked by God to do unrighteous things for the purposes of fulfilling the Plan of Salvation. Nobody.

I believe that God has complete understanding of what we are capable of doing so that He knows that we will choose to do unrighteous things. And hence, He sent His Son.

The fact remains that those who chose to be unrighteous will be judged accordingly, so that those who heard the teachings of the Son of God, yet cried for His crucifixion, chose to do so.

I will say that their knowledge and testimony of the Savior may not have been complete so that their judgement will not be as harsh as somebody who has the testimony and been baptized and then denounced such testimony.

Now, collectively calling those who cried for Christ's crufixion as "the Jews" (to imply the entire religion) is not accurate. "Some Jews" chose to crucify Christ is a better statement.

All the other Jews are just like all the Catholics, Baptists, Muslims, etc. etc... they have some truths but not all truths, but as promised, the time will come when they will know the truth of all things as well.

[bytor2112]

The way I understand it is that the title Israel belongs to those who are baptized into the LDS church. Other baptisms do not make you a part of Israel because the LDS church does not recognize other baptisms. Likewise, Jews are not a part of Israel because they reject the baptism which Christ preached.

I don't deny that the LDS church is the spiritual gathering place of Israel. But I also see it as the temporal gathering place. Christ did not set up a spiritual church only; the LDS church exists temporally as well. He doesn't have one spiritual Israel based in Utah and a temporal Israel stationed in the Middle East.

Zion is every where there are Latter Day Stakes. Those scattered will be gathered in the Stakes of Zion where they live. No mass migration to SLC.

[Pahoran99]

Firstly, I don’t have a problem with naming the Jewish people (past and present) blameless. I made the point early on that even the Jews of Jesus’ day should be held blameless for the crucifixion because they were only fulfilling God’s word.

In the which, you were wrong. Those who make morally wrong, or wicked, choices are accountable for those choices even if they have, all unknowingly, furthered our Heavenly Father's plan, or fulfilled a prophecy.

Secondly, I don’t agree with your presentation that God uses evil to produce the right end. I believe God speaks and righteous men are called into fulfillment of His words. Free choice allows unrighteous men to act against the word of God.

And divine foreknowledge allows God to factor the freely chosen wicked acts of unrighteous men into His plans. This does not render those acts morally blameless.

And thirdly, there can only be one Israel. Genesis tells the story of Jacob and Esau; the first born Esau deserved the birthright but it was given to Jacob. Likewise, the LDS church has received the blessing of the birthright and the promise of eternal progression. The Jews have been out maneuvered by Christ.

"Outmaneuvered by Christ?" As if they were an enemy that needed to be outmaneuvered in the first place? I'm sorry, but I don't see it.

Even if we accept your dictum that "there can only be one Israel," there is nothing at all to force Israel to exist as a single coherent body. The Latter-day Saints participate in the Abrahamic covenant by baptism; the Jews are the heirs of that covenant by birth. We anticipate the ultimate gathering of all the branches of Israel into a single community only as an eschatological event; until that time, Israel remains scattered throughout the world, and the work of gathering continues. It comes as news to me that those we are gathering are not actually Israel until they are gathered; all of the Latter-day prophets, from Joseph Smith down, seem to have taken it for granted that they are of Israel all along.

Anti-Semitism has little to recommend it, and LDS doctrine provides no aid or comfort to those who would embrace or advocate for anti-Semitic ideas.

Regards,

Pahoran

[volgadon]

If you wish to rewrite history by calling it a Jewish state instead of calling it Israel, then there's really no point in pursuing this conversation.

"In Basel I have founded the state of the Jews."

"בבאזל יסדתי את מדינת היהודים"

[volgadon]

The way I understand it is that the title Israel belongs to those who are baptized into the LDS church. Other baptisms do not make you a part of Israel because the LDS church does not recognize other baptisms. Likewise, Jews are not a part of Israel because they reject the baptism which Christ preached.

I don't deny that the LDS church is the spiritual gathering place of Israel. But I also see it as the temporal gathering place. Christ did not set up a spiritual church only; the LDS church exists temporally as well. He doesn't have one spiritual Israel based in Utah and a temporal Israel stationed in the Middle East.

Herein lies your mistake. We LDS don't hold that we are Israel in any way that robs the other children of Israel of any legitimacy.

[volgadon]

Your statements ignore the issue at hand. The UN action created a second Israel separate from the Israel Christ created in the LDS church. The biblical record says God will bring the lost tribes back to the land of Israel. Never has the UN claimed this act was God inspired or revealed.

Does the UN have to claim to be "God inspired" for God to work through them?

The UN gave international support and legitimacy for the creation of a Jewish state in the land of Israel.

On the other hand, the LDS has claimed revelation in regards to the formation and gathering of Israel.

And as can be seen in the case of Orson Hyde's mission, the legitimacy of the children of Israel by blood has been upheld.

My views are far from being anti-Semitic since I support the gathering of Israel in the LDS church. Furthermore, it doesn’t matter to me who claims the land now because according to the promise the land will eventually be in the hands of saints.

Oh please. Just a ridiculous as the claim that Arabs can't be anti-Semites because they are Semitic. Anti-Semitism is a term coined in Germany of the 1860s and '70s to mean hatred of or prejudice towards Jews.

[skippy740]

3 Nephi 16:10-11

10And thus commandeth the Father that I should say unto you: At that day when the Gentiles shall sin against my gospel, and shall reject the fulness of my gospel, and shall be lifted up in the pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people of the whole earth, and shall be filled with all manner of lyings, and of deceits, and of mischiefs, and all manner of hypocrisy, and murders, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, and of secret abominations; and if they shall do all those things, and shall reject the fulness of my gospel, behold, saith the Father, I will bring the fulness of my gospel from among them.

11 And then will I remember my covenant which I have made unto my people, O house of Israel, and I will bring my gospel unto them.

[Blackmarch]

...which raises the question, are the Jewish people Christ's enemy?

Does their denial of the Son make them enemies of God the Father?

I believe in the thought process here anyone who tries destroying you is generally considered an enemy. At the time of Christ, many of the leadership sought to destroy or remove christ in some manner or another, and ultimitely it was their doing that got him on the cross. Does this mean all of the jews are? no.

[Bensalem]

I don't agree with the bolded statement above.

Nobody on earth is asked by God to do unrighteous things for the purposes of fulfilling the Plan of Salvation. Nobody.

I believe that God has complete understanding of what we are capable of doing so that He knows that we will choose to do unrighteous things. And hence, He sent His Son.

The fact remains that those who chose to be unrighteous will be judged accordingly, so that those who heard the teachings of the Son of God, yet cried for His crucifixion, chose to do so.

I will say that their knowledge and testimony of the Savior may not have been complete so that their judgement will not be as harsh as somebody who has the testimony and been baptized and then denounced such testimony.

Now, collectively calling those who cried for Christ's crufixion as "the Jews" (to imply the entire religion) is not accurate. "Some Jews" chose to crucify Christ is a better statement.

All the other Jews are just like all the Catholics, Baptists, Muslims, etc. etc... they have some truths but not all truths, but as promised, the time will come when they will know the truth of all things as well.

The reason I am pushing for a blameless crucifixion is because the Bible supports it. It is recorded that the powers that be in Jesus' time considered it better for one man to die than an entire nation (Israel) to perish. Also, Paul in his doctrine of grace teaches that nothing of the Atonement can be credited to man, "lest any man should boast".

I also like a blameless crucifixion because it accentuates the wrongness of centuries of Jewish persecution at the hands of the Catholic church, not to mention other Christians acting according to their hatred, or even today with Muslim extremism at the door of the Jewish state in the Middle East. It all points to the Apostasy that existed in these churches and peoples.

Edited December 7, 2010 by Bensalem

[Bensalem]

Zion is every where there are Latter Day Stakes. Those scattered will be gathered in the Stakes of Zion where they live. No mass migration to SLC.

That is exactly what I am saying. Israel is where the LDS church is, not where people claim it is in the Middle East country by the same name.

[Guest]

The reason I am pushing for a blameless crucifixion is because the Bible supports it. It is recorded that the powers that be in Jesus' time considered it better for one man to die than an entire nation (Israel) to perish. Also, Paul in his doctrine of grace teaches that nothing of the Atonement can be credited to man, "lest any man should boast".

I also like a blameless crucifixion because it accentuates the wrongness of centuries of Jewish persecution at the hands of the Catholic church, not to mention other Christians acting according to their hatred, or even today with Muslim extremism at the door of the Jewish state in the Middle East.

Ooooh... be careful there. Jewish persecution at the hands of the Catholic church... THAT kind of statement is what is getting you in trouble in this thread. You are quick to assign actions/events to a collective group when that action/event does not define that group at all.

Jewish persecution was carried out by Catholics BUT THEY WERE NEVER PART OF CATHOLIC DOGMA... not then, not now, not EVER. The Catholic church has repeatedly squashed anti-semitism - from the rise of anti-semitism after the First Crusade all the way to now. It is basically like saying the Mormon Church issued the massacre at Mountain Meadows. Yes, Mormons massacred a group of travelers at Mountain Meadows but no, that was not a mandate from the Church. Just like the Muslim Religion did not blow up the towers on 9/11 even if the attack was carried out by muslims.

People act on their hatred because they are PEOPLE. Put a bunch of 5th graders together on a playground and you will soon notice that SOME of them will group into cliques rejecting other groups because of some "difference". How do you think these kids start to get labled as Nerds or Jocks or Geeks, etc? If it's not about them being Jews, it will be something else.

But, what we have here may be a misunderstanding stemming from the word "BLAME". I use "blame" as "sin" or "transgression". The people crying out for Christ's crucifixion transgressed. There is no getting around that. If they haven't transgressed or sinned, then Jesus Christ wouldn't have declared "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do". Because then there would have been nothing to forgive.

[Bensalem]

In the which, you were wrong. Those who make morally wrong, or wicked, choices are accountable for those choices even if they have, all unknowingly, furthered our Heavenly Father's plan, or fulfilled a prophecy.

And divine foreknowledge allows God to factor the freely chosen wicked acts of unrighteous men into His plans. This does not render those acts morally blameless.

"Outmaneuvered by Christ?" As if they were an enemy that needed to be outmaneuvered in the first place? I'm sorry, but I don't see it.

Even if we accept your dictum that "there can only be one Israel," there is nothing at all to force Israel to exist as a single coherent body. The Latter-day Saints participate in the Abrahamic covenant by baptism; the Jews are the heirs of that covenant by birth. We anticipate the ultimate gathering of all the branches of Israel into a single community only as an eschatological event; until that time, Israel remains scattered throughout the world, and the work of gathering continues. It comes as news to me that those we are gathering are not actually Israel until they are gathered; all of the Latter-day prophets, from Joseph Smith down, seem to have taken it for granted that they are of Israel all along.

Anti-Semitism has little to recommend it, and LDS doctrine provides no aid or comfort to those who would embrace or advocate for anti-Semitic ideas.

Regards,

Pahoran

I hope you are not claiming I am being anti-Semitic in my presentation of the concept of only one Israel and that being in the LDS church.

As to your point on the scattering of the tribes and who should be considered to be a part of Israel; you seem to suggest that Israel is anyone who claims to be. Tell me, could a man in Abraham's day say he was of the family of Abraham without being circumcised? Would Abraham accept him on his word? I think not.

Likewise, the claim to being part of Israel belongs to those who are baptized in the LDS church. Can you be in Israel and stand outside of Christ as the Jewish people prefer to do? Can a Christian claim to be of Israel when they deny the prophets of her restoration? No and no.

Preaching one baptism, one Spirit, one Church and one Israel in Christ is not being anti-Semitic…it is being true to the word of God.

[Pahoran99]

The reason I am pushing for a blameless crucifixion is because the Bible supports it. It is recorded that the powers that be in Jesus' time considered it better for one man to die than an entire nation (Israel) to perish. Also, Paul in his doctrine of grace teaches that nothing of the Atonement can be credited to man, "lest any man should boast".

But you're making a little leap there, Ben. It does not follow from the passages you've mentioned that morally reprehensible acts become "blameless" merely because they serve a greater good. And if you are referring to Ephesians 2:9 in that last one, I don't see a connection at all; sorry.

I also like a blameless crucifixion because it accentuates the wrongness of centuries of Jewish persecution at the hands of the Catholic church, not to mention other Christians acting according to their hatred, or even today with Muslim extremism at the door of the Jewish state in the Middle East.

You mean Israel.

It all points to the Apostasy that existed in these churches and peoples.

Actually the false doctrines of collective and/or inherited guilt do that.

The crucifixion was the greatest crime ever committed. Jesus pled with His Father to forgive his crucifiers precisely because they were committing a wicked act. If the act was "blameless" in itself, no guilt would attach, and there would consequently be nothing to forgive them for.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Bensalem]

"In Basel I have founded the state of the Jews."

"בבאזל יסדתי את מדינת היהודים"

I don't understand your comment or recognize the source; perhaps you could educate me with an explanation.

[Bensalem]

Herein lies your mistake. We LDS don't hold that we are Israel in any way that robs the other children of Israel of any legitimacy.

That is a fine line to walk because the LDS do claim to be the restoration of Israel and its gathering place. The LDS do not have to rob or deprive those that would claim to be Israel since they rob and deprive themselves. No need to pickpocket the bankrupt.

But let’s be clear. Is it your contention that the temple work the LDS do is all for not? Is there a way into Israel that bypasses the LDS church?

[Bensalem]

Anti-Semitism is a term coined in Germany of the 1860s and '70s to mean hatred of or prejudice towards Jews.

Then why would you accuse me of such a thing when I have shown no hatred or prejudice?