Is the Internet Confounding the Revision of History

[_GoodK]

I am glad to discuss matters... I'm not much for contentious argument. That's just how I am. Hope that is okay with you.

Sure is fine with me. Doug, my real intent was to get you to elaborate on the statements above. Nothing more. I'm not trying to win anyone over to 'my side'. And I'm not really interested in discussing or making light of your personal spiritual revelations, nor other sacred moments you might hold dear. I only want to know how you arrive at certain beliefs, specifically the belief that the Book of Mormon is not a truly divine book, only the Bible is. Here are some things you said originally that I was interested in discussing with you, I look forward to your response.

I do believe some of the people's who populated Central and South America in the past may have been a lost tribe, led there by the Lord, but there story is different than the Nephites.

Not that I am a prophet.
What I feel I can share and believe to be true with all my heart is this: That God really loves them, and He is about to do something that will bring many of them out of a form of bondage, which many of them are in, (those who will), and draw them into a much closer relationship with Himself.

And this is all a part of the work of the Father... where he will draw all that are His into ONE, even the lost tribes of Israel. Zion!

So, I went on with my belief in the Book of Mormon in faith, simply setting aside the archeology...until I saw Wayne May's presentation. It was a little like always believing in God all your life, but then dying and actually meeting Him.
It was awesome.

So... to begin, I've heard a little about what you don't believe. What do you believe? (if you don't mind my asking)

What do I believe... hmm... that's a tough one. You'll have to be more specific.

It has been my experience that many people withdraw from fellowship because it becomes uncomfortable for them to hear of things which prick their consciences. It is easier to stay home than go to Church and hear talks about tithing, and becoming temple worthy, etc. When people begin to be less familiar with ward members, they don't attend the social events. That is what I meant. I don't know of anyone who was refused fellowship, but I know of those who willingly withdrew from the company of the Saints.

It has been my experience that the most arrogant of religious people use this patronizing, self assuring type of nonsense when rationalizing and minimizing someone leaving the church.

Truth is, Charity has never met anyone that told her this. She just assumes that there could be no other reason to leave the church, other than not being good enough to follow the rules.

You don't believe in Santa anymore because it's too hard for you to stay on the Nice List.

[_hopeofzion]

I only want to know how you arrive at certain beliefs, specifically the belief that the Book of Mormon is not a truly divine book, only the Bible is.

Hmm... seems we really are mis-communicating! Sorry if I gave you that impression. I do believe the Book of Mormon is a true record. I don't believe the narrative found took place in Central America, but in North America...even as the prophet J.S. did.

If there is a question or something specific you wish to discuss in regards to my statements about the LDS or the Work of the Father, I will be happy to do so. What are you were wanting to know about it, more specifically.

What do I believe... hmm... that's a tough one. You'll have to be more specific.

Um, well... do you hold any religious or spiritual belief at all? If so... would you share a little. If not, do you have any thoughts about the source of all life, and the meaning of life...if there is any meaning at all to be found? I don't expect you to go into any more detail that you have time to. But if you might give me some idea about where you stand on the subject of religion.

For my part, I will tell you I have had more than enough experience with religion. I don't know that religion is always a negative thing. Probably not... but basically, about 2 years ago I gave it up. I gave up religion for relationship. That may not make any sense... I'd be happy to elaborate more if you like. But maybe that's a good place to start.

[_charity]

And my point about Joseph is that by the time he got around to making up Sec 132, making up scripture was easy. And in many ways, that didn't make him all that much different from the men who wrote the Old Testament.

Joseph didn't make up any revelations.

Can you remind me why you still go to the trouble of going to Church? Do you think it is a social club?

[_Yoda]

And my point about Joseph is that by the time he got around to making up Sec 132, making up scripture was easy. And in many ways, that didn't make him all that much different from the men who wrote the Old Testament.

Joseph didn't make up any revelations.

Can you remind me why you still go to the trouble of going to Church? Do you think it is a social club?

Actually, Charity, this is where you and I differ. I think it's possible that Joseph did make up section 132.

There are so many conflicting things regarding other scripture surrounding it. Check out the Dynastic Marriage thread when you have a moment. There is a question there regarding some scripture in the Book of Mormon that I wanted you to address. You'll see where I asked your opinion in the thread.

[Guest]

I think it's possible that Joseph did make up section 132.

I think its quite possible Joseph had absolutely nothing to do with that revelation whatsoever. Since it was unknown, and unheard of, even to his own wife, and did not become public until years after his death, through Brigham Young after they moved to Utah.

If you'd like to read a very well researched book on the topic, you can purchase it here:

http://restorationbookstore.org/Merchan ... ry_Code=18

[_Mercury]

In your view, is there anything authentic in Christian history or scripture?

Charity, by design documents of a religious nature are just xeroxed memes propagated in the language of another culture. I am sure you think that the Bible was produced out of "everlasting principles" but realistically look to the reliable likelihood that it was (like every other religious document) ripped off from previous ideas and doctrines.

[_charity]

I think it's possible that Joseph did make up section 132.

Can I ask what Sec 132 is. The D&C I own is the RLDS version.

Here is the link.

http://scriptures.LDS.org/en/dc/132

[_charity]

Charity, by design documents of a religious nature are just xeroxed memes propagated in the language of another culture. I am sure you think that the Bible was produced out of "everlasting principles" but realistically look to the reliable likelihood that it was (like every other religious document) ripped off from previous ideas and doctrines.

Mercury, LDS theology is that Adam and Eve were the human progenitors. The Gospel in its fulness was given to them by direct messengers from God.

Then as human history unfolded, those original, pural doctrines were distorted, corrupted, etc. and became the myths and legends we find in all cultures. So you see, when subsequent dispensations repeated those doctrines and stories, they weren't ripping off any of the surrounding cultures. They were going back to the original.

[_GoodK]

I do believe the Book of Mormon is a true record. I don't believe the narrative found took place in Central America, but in North America...even as the prophet J.S. did.

If there is a question or something specific you wish to discuss in regards to my statements about the LDS or the Work of the Father, I will be happy to do so. What are you were wanting to know about it, more specifically.

Thanks for clarifying that for me. I am interested in hearing more about what you believe the location of the narrative to be. Forgive me if I mistook your position on this. Also, you mentioned that the Bible talks about a lost tribe coming to America, right? I'd like to discuss this further, if you don't mind.

Um, well... do you hold any religious or spiritual belief at all? If so... would you share a little. If not, do you have any thoughts about the source of all life, and the meaning of life...if there is any meaning at all to be found?
I don't expect you to go into any more detail that you have time to. But if you might give me some idea about where you stand on the subject of religion.

For my part, I will tell you I have had more than enough experience with religion. I don't know that religion is always a negative thing. Probably not... but basically, about 2 years ago I gave it up. I gave up religion for relationship. That may not make any sense... I'd be happy to elaborate more if you like. But maybe that's a good place to start.

Of course, a little quid pro quo, eh? Which one of us is Starling ;)

I do not believe in any religion, and could be labeled as an atheist- though I loathe the term. I am nowhere close to a nihilist, though, and find much beauty, purpose, meaning, and absolute morals in life. I also am not opposed to discussing things, while we don't have a better word yet, regarding spirituality. I have had many tangible, transformative experiences which I once considered to be the spirit or the holy ghost or God while under the "spell" of religion. I am certainly interested in those types of feelings and experiences, though I no longer attribute them, incorrectly, to religion.

I am also quite fond of Mormonism, and the members of the Mormon faith. Well, the sensible ones.

[_Mercury]

Charity, by design documents of a religious nature are just xeroxed memes propagated in the language of another culture. I am sure you think that the Bible was produced out of "everlasting principles" but realistically look to the reliable likelihood that it was (like every other religious document) ripped off from previous ideas and doctrines.

Mercury, LDS theology is that Adam and Eve were the human progenitors. The Gospel in its fulness was given to them by direct messengers from God.

Then as human history unfolded, those original, pural doctrines were distorted, corrupted, etc. and became the myths and legends we find in all cultures. So you see, when subsequent dispensations repeated those doctrines and stories, they weren't ripping off any of the surrounding cultures. They were going back to the original.

No.

What you are doing is using standard behavior and reinterpreting it to fit your world view. This is an intellectually dishonest approach.

All cultures borrow from other cultures. Your (borrowed) theory of dilution is not sound and I would appreciate it if you gave it another thought and dumped this idea, as it is pompous and backwards to believe that your world view is the distilate of truth instead of what it is, a patchwork of frontier occultic practices and early American christian teachings.

Nibleys silly approach of playing mix-and-match with cultural comparison is a study in faith promoting rumor via poor interpretation of disparate cultures and their mythology.

To continue in the belief that Mormonism is somehow a restoration of what is true is neither provable nor utilitarian. I would appreciate it if you would cease and desist propagating this silly line of reasoning.