Absolutely
I've been interested in a couple of absolutes that I've seen in the scriptures lately. Here's one:
"Now I would that ye should see that they brought upon themselves the curse; and even so doth every man that is cursed bring upon himself his own condemnation" (Alma 3:19, emphasis added).
It's interesting to note that this comes shortly after this statement:
"For behold I say unto you, the sins of many people have been acaused by the iniquities of their kings; therefore their iniquities are answered upon the heads of their kings" (Mosiah 29:31, emphasis added).
I don't think those statements contradict each other. Mosiah acknowledges the latter as an inequality and in the end of that chapter, the people disavow their monarchical government and replace it with a judicial system so that they can all bear the consequences of their own actions - so that they can be free.
Hey, it's July fourth and I didn't even mean to write about freedom. I guess I can't help myself! :)
Anyway, the difference between those statements lies in the difference between sins and curses. So if you're sinning and you have a king, start asking yourself who's causing it. Of course, once you realize the answer to that question, all your excuses might just be gone. Then if you end up cursed, you've got no one to blame but yourself. Gotta love agency.
There's an interesting combination of these two concepts (sins and curses) in Alma 2-3, however. In them, the Amlicites go to battle against the Nephites. They (and the Lamanites) are the cursed ones that the first quotation references. The thing is, they (the Amlicites) got that way by seeking for a king. They chose Amlici to be their king and he led them to battle and to join the Lamanites, partaking in their curse as evidenced by the self-imposed mark of red in their foreheads. This mark is what Mormon calls the proof of their curse. But my question is, are the sins of the general mass of Amlicites on the head of Amlici, since he was a wicked king, or are they all equally accountable (equal partakers in the curse) since they made the decision to become subjects of a wicked man while they were still under the free judicial system set up by Mosiah?
Mormon may answer that question for us at the end of the chapter, now that I think about it, with another absolute:
"For every man receiveth wages of him whom he listeth to obey, and this according to the words of the spirit of prophecy; therefore let it be according to the truth" (Alma 3:27, emphasis added).
The Amlicites knew the mind of their leader perfectly well when they chose him, I think, so they would have been outside the category of those whose sins are caused by a wicked king and not their own dispositions. The wages of the Amlicites came through Amlici (they guy they were listening to), when he ordered them to mark themselves like the Lamanites do and attack the Nephites. That's when they became all - equally - partakers of the curse. Amlici, in turn, got his wages from whoever he was listening to (I think we know who that might have been). What do you think?
Here's one more absolute on a different subject:
"Wherefore, by this pattern ye shall know the spirits in all cases under the whole heavens" (Doctrine and Covenants 52:19, emphasis added).
I have more to say about that pattern in another post. For now, let it suffice that this verse has to do with a method given by the Lord for identifying his influence in the words and actions of others. You mean there's one way to figure out who is working for the Lord that works in every situation? Interesting. And very useful.
"Now I would that ye should see that they brought upon themselves the curse; and even so doth every man that is cursed bring upon himself his own condemnation" (Alma 3:19, emphasis added).
It's interesting to note that this comes shortly after this statement:
"For behold I say unto you, the sins of many people have been acaused by the iniquities of their kings; therefore their iniquities are answered upon the heads of their kings" (Mosiah 29:31, emphasis added).
I don't think those statements contradict each other. Mosiah acknowledges the latter as an inequality and in the end of that chapter, the people disavow their monarchical government and replace it with a judicial system so that they can all bear the consequences of their own actions - so that they can be free.
Hey, it's July fourth and I didn't even mean to write about freedom. I guess I can't help myself! :)
Anyway, the difference between those statements lies in the difference between sins and curses. So if you're sinning and you have a king, start asking yourself who's causing it. Of course, once you realize the answer to that question, all your excuses might just be gone. Then if you end up cursed, you've got no one to blame but yourself. Gotta love agency.
There's an interesting combination of these two concepts (sins and curses) in Alma 2-3, however. In them, the Amlicites go to battle against the Nephites. They (and the Lamanites) are the cursed ones that the first quotation references. The thing is, they (the Amlicites) got that way by seeking for a king. They chose Amlici to be their king and he led them to battle and to join the Lamanites, partaking in their curse as evidenced by the self-imposed mark of red in their foreheads. This mark is what Mormon calls the proof of their curse. But my question is, are the sins of the general mass of Amlicites on the head of Amlici, since he was a wicked king, or are they all equally accountable (equal partakers in the curse) since they made the decision to become subjects of a wicked man while they were still under the free judicial system set up by Mosiah?
Mormon may answer that question for us at the end of the chapter, now that I think about it, with another absolute:
"For every man receiveth wages of him whom he listeth to obey, and this according to the words of the spirit of prophecy; therefore let it be according to the truth" (Alma 3:27, emphasis added).
The Amlicites knew the mind of their leader perfectly well when they chose him, I think, so they would have been outside the category of those whose sins are caused by a wicked king and not their own dispositions. The wages of the Amlicites came through Amlici (they guy they were listening to), when he ordered them to mark themselves like the Lamanites do and attack the Nephites. That's when they became all - equally - partakers of the curse. Amlici, in turn, got his wages from whoever he was listening to (I think we know who that might have been). What do you think?
Here's one more absolute on a different subject:
"Wherefore, by this pattern ye shall know the spirits in all cases under the whole heavens" (Doctrine and Covenants 52:19, emphasis added).
I have more to say about that pattern in another post. For now, let it suffice that this verse has to do with a method given by the Lord for identifying his influence in the words and actions of others. You mean there's one way to figure out who is working for the Lord that works in every situation? Interesting. And very useful.
Comments
That's my two cents.