Comments on: Opposition, 5 – Recent Philosophical Engagement with 2 Nephi 2:11

By: 2 Nephi 2:11 – Opposition! « Lehi's Discourse

2 Nephi 2:11 – Opposition! « Lehi's Discourse — Sun, 17 Feb 2013 14:51:53 +0000

[...] of the history of interpretation of this passage (in the twentieth century): here, here, and here. I’ve also dealt with some of the major translations of this passage into non-English languages, [...]

By: Opposition, 8 – “Opposition” « Feast upon the Word Blog

Opposition, 8 – “Opposition” « Feast upon the Word Blog — Mon, 05 Nov 2012 14:12:31 +0000

[...] simply of inconsistency, of a kind of fundamental instability. This is an attractive possibility. We’ve already seen how some interpreters note that the opposition of this first sentence seems to be a kind of [...]

By: joespencer

joespencer — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:55:48 +0000

Thanks, Anarchist. I’ll try to get to your essay soon. It’s too late for me to include it in my review here, so thanks for posting the link for others to look at. I’ll say something about its uniqueness when I get to it.

In the meanwhile, I should make clear that I’ve said nothing so far in these posts about what I actually think about 2 Nephi 2:11. And I won’t for a few more posts still. The next four posts I’ll be putting up will review the history of translation of the text, and only after that will I begin to look at the text for myself. And you can guess that I’ll have a lot to say. :)

By: Robert C.

Robert C. — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 12:17:01 +0000

LDSA #7, thanks for the link to that interesting post and discussion. I’m in agreement with most of your general ideas, though I’m inclined to read “compound in one” in the opposite way that you do — that is, I think “compound in one” is contrasted with “one body.” I’m sure Joe’s later posts will address this issue in a careful way, so I look forward to discussing this matter more later, with you and others.

By: LDS Anarchist

LDS Anarchist — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:08:31 +0000

Okay, I just finished going through all five posts and I didn’t see my understanding of these passages anywhere, so I’m now glad I left the link above. If you read through that essay, Joe, please let me know if any of the other writings you are going over have expressed anything similar to what I have written. I’m curious if anyone else has come to these conclusions.

By: LDS Anarchist

LDS Anarchist — Wed, 10 Oct 2012 06:57:40 +0000

Uh, I just stumbled upon this Opposition series of posts (5 so far!), so I'm coming in a bit late into the game, but I wanted to give you the link to an expository essay I wrote about 2 Ne. 2:5-14, which of course covers verse 11. It may give you further thoughts to consider. This was written and published on 26 November 2007: Deep Waters: Lehi's model of the universe Now, having done that, let me go and read through all five of this series from the beginning and then I'll comment more if I have anything to add to this discussion...

By: rameumptom

rameumptom — Tue, 09 Oct 2012 13:48:33 +0000

Very interesting. Dunno, but for some reason I had pop into my mind that the first ontological argument (“compound in one”) made me think of the Big Bang theory. Here in 2 Ne 2, Lehi discusses the Creation and perhaps notes this concept as the beginning or Being stage for the universe. Prior to the Creation, when God separated land and water, earth and sky, light and darkness, there was just a void awaiting the “compound in one” to exist in a way that causes interactions, reactions, attractions, and repulsions, etc.

Then again, it may just be me placing modern scientific thought into the mouth of Lehi. But it was interesting to have that thought, nonetheless.

By: Robert C.

Robert C. — Sat, 06 Oct 2012 16:00:23 +0000

Yes, per Jacob’s comment: in what sense can we read George as challenging, or offering a vision that is different than John Lennon’s imagining, without religion, etc. — or, perhaps better, in what sense does Lennon force us to rethink what kind of opposition is in fact necessary, and what is artificially imagined and dispensable?

By: Opposition, 6.0 – 2 Nephi 2:11 in Translation « Feast upon the Word Blog

Sat, 06 Oct 2012 13:36:44 +0000

[...] comments jacob on Opposition, 5 – Recent Philosophical Engagement with 2 Nephi 2:11Opposition, 0 – Series Introduction « Feast upon the Word Blog on Opposition, 5 – [...]

By: jacob

jacob — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 21:36:53 +0000

As I read and re-read the Handley quotation: Is a life without oppositions and contrasts even a life? What does this mean in terms of Heaven and hell, salvation and exaltation? Will there be, must there be, oppositions in very sphere of existence? What conditions are we actually hoping for after this life? Lehi really opens up a can of worms with a farewell sermon about freedom and joy.

I’m really appreciating these posts and the questions they’re causing me to examine. I wish I had more to contribute but I’m still trying to sort out the implications.

By: Opposition, 0 – Series Introduction « Feast upon the Word Blog

Opposition, 0 – Series Introduction « Feast upon the Word Blog — Fri, 05 Oct 2012 13:57:50 +0000

[...] comments Opposition, 5 – Recent Philosophical Engagement with 2 Nephi 2:11 « Feast upon the Word … on Opposition, 4 – Early Philosophical Engagement with 2 Nephi 2:11joespencer on [...]