Is the Internet Confounding the Revision of History

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
Post Reply
_skippy the dead
_Emeritus
Posts: 1676
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:39 am

Post by _skippy the dead »

charity wrote:Here is a piece of information for you. One of the things a person must do to enter the temple is affirm that they sustain the propeht of the Church. And if he has said the Book of Mormon is a historic document, and you don't beleive that, you aren't sustaining the prophet.


You're saying that unless one agrees with everything a prophet says, one is not sustaining the prophet and not worth of a temple recommend? I cannot for a moment believe that is true. If it were, hundreds of thousands of working mothers would have been barred from the temple, along with girls with two sets of earrings, or those who married someone of another race, or even those who discount the global flood as an actual event. It is simply far too simplistic to make this sort of statement. Show me where it says that members must believe everything a prophet says (particularly when this is complicated by the "speaking as a man" philosophy). Such absurdity.
I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe / But at least I'm enjoying the ride.
-Grateful Dead (lyrics by John Perry Barlow)
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Post by _Runtu »

charity wrote:Good, then they must be obeying counsel and not publishing their heterodoxy. Which is what they are supposed to do.


So the minute they state their beliefs publicly, it's open season?

This is where the prophets disagree with you. I prefer to stand on their side.


CFR on any prophet ever saying that you must believe in the historicity of the Book of Mormon.

When I do use logic and information it is swept away as my own personal opinion held by no one else?


Did I ever say that? Nope.

Here is a piece of information for you. One of the things a person must do to enter the temple is affirm that they sustain the propeht of the Church. And if he has said the Book of Mormon is a historic document, and you don't beleive that, you aren't sustaining the prophet.


My believing colleague next door wears two sets of earrings. She's not "sustaining the prophet," but she has a temple recommend. Do you honestly think a bishop or stake president would deny someone a temple recommend because they don't believe the Book of Mormon is an ancient document? Really?

And I am really getting tired of your "unbecoming as a Christian" line. I didn't sneer. I was referring to Dr. Shades and his injunction that in this forum we were all supposed to pussyfoot around and act like we were speaking to a grandma. I wouldn't tell Grandma her idea was a crock. That was the point of that.


Suggesting I'm like a dotty old grandma who makes so little sense I need a pat on the hand and a nap is not sneering? Give me a break.

And if I did "sneer" at you, are you judging me? Isn't God the only person who can judge? Or is this another anti-Mormon/critic tacitc. You judge, but I can't. You can use information and logic, but I can't.


Why do you keep attributing things to me that I've never said? Knock it off.

I didn't say any specific person. I said that believing in the historicity of the Book of Mormon is ONE of the essentially beliefs as a fully orthodox Mormon.


That I can agree with. Of course, I've never met a "fully orthodox Mormon" unless you count as one. :)
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

TD, to help you out, I am placing MY statement and the Wikie statement side by side. They say essentially the same thing. So please, now can you play nice?


Excuse me? I do not think it is I who needs a reminder.

ME:
It says essentially what I said. It does matter. The Lord has gone to great lengths to say that it matters. But people who want to believe something different are certainly welcome in the Church, so long as they do not try to teach this doctrine to others, or convert others to this view.

Wiki
If someone comes to the conclusion that the Book of Mormon is not historical at all, is there a place for him in the Church? Probably. We cast a very broad net. That person cannot go around teaching his heterodox views on the subject, but if he is willing to keep them to himself, he can be a contributing, active member of the Church, simply bracketing the historicity issue.

Capeesh?


Charity you can repeat this as many times as you wish and it still won't address the issue.

Your opinion and the opinion of at folks at FAIR doesn't matter. It means nothing. (We all understand you will "welcome" people to have different views so long as they do not openly express their opinion... this is not the issue at hand).

I mean no disrespect by this I am just saying that no one here is asking for your opinion or the opinion of any other self-appointed apologists.

What YOU believe about the beliefs of other people does not matter in the least.

I do not know how to be more clear but let me try once again.

Because YOU claim that TRI holding, testimony holding, obedient, believers are not "true Latter Day Saints" means nothing. You can believe whatever you wish.

What we are asking is for some official doctrine that supports your opinion and clearly states one is required to be in a factual, historical, accurate Book of Mormon in order to be considered a true Latter Day Saint, or that if one does NOT believe in a factual, historical, accurate Book of Mormon they are not considered "true Latter Day Saints."

Again, NO ONE is asking for your opinion or the opinions of the folks at FAIR. It doesn't matter.

You do not in any way, represent the prophet, the LDS church, or Jesus Christ.

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_hopeofzion
_Emeritus
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:14 pm

long lost friend...

Post by _hopeofzion »

Hey Hope of Zion... my long lost friend! ;-)
How are you? I'm happy to "see" you again! Welcome to the board!

I was indeed lost... but now I am found. Thank you for the warm welcome! :)
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

truth dancer wrote:
What we are asking is for some official doctrine that supports your opinion and clearly states one is required to be in a factual, historical, accurate Book of Mormon in order to be considered a true Latter Day Saint, or that if one does NOT believe in a factual, historical, accurate Book of Mormon they are not considered "true Latter Day Saints."

Again, NO ONE is asking for your opinion or the opinions of the folks at FAIR. It doesn't matter.

You do not in any way, represent the prophet, the LDS church, or Jesus Christ.

~dancer~


Your continued "reminders" that I do not represent the prophet, the Church, or Jesus Christ is insulting. I have said over and over and over that I do not have such pretensions. Your continuing to harp on the issue makes it appear that you have not read my statements, have not understood them, or want others to misunderstand. So you can just drop it, or begin to look like you have ulterior motives.

So what are you expecting? That the prophet come on this message board and state an official policy?

Let me help you put it all together.

1. The founding event of the Church in this dispensation was the discovery of, the translation of and the publication of the Book of Mormon.

2. The Prophet of the Restoration made repeated claimes that the Book of Mormon came from an ancient record of a real people who inhabited this continent.

3. Every prophet of the Church since has stated that it has been revealed knowledge to him that the Book of Mormon is a historic document.

To deny all of that puts one on an opposite side of revealed knowledge, claims and assertions essential to belief in the Church.

IF you believe that the Book of Mormon did not come from gold plates, was not a record of ancient people, that witnesses did not see an angel who revealed the plates to them, that witnesses did not handle the plates themselves, that every prophet of this dispensation has lied, then what kind of a Latter-day Saint are you?

You certainly are not a believing Latter-day Saints. And I would suggest if you can say that all these lies and deceptions took place and you still believe, you really aren't being honest.

One more try here, being a Latter-day Saint is not analogous to being a member of any other Christian denomination. No other Christian is required to believe anything except that Jesus was the Redeemer. And even then, any other Christian can believe almost anything they want to about that. That Christ was part mortal, part divine, or all mortal. That He literally atoned for all sins, or it was some kind of siritual experience. That any particular commandent should be obeyed, or not. No other Christian church maintains that they are the true Church.

But if you claim to be a Latter-day Saint, you are required to accept God's revealed knowledge. If you say you want to be a Latter-day Saint, but you don't want to be held that standard, you have made your choice. It's God's way or the highway.


And this is not my opinion. "We believe all that God has revealed, all that he does now reveal, and we believe he will yet reveal many great and marvelous things." That is one of the things that makes a Latter-day Saint.
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

Your continued "reminders" that I do not represent the prophet, the Church, or Jesus Christ is insulting. I have said over and over and over that I do not have such pretensions. Your continuing to harp on the issue makes it appear that you have not read my statements, have not understood them, or want others to misunderstand. So you can just drop it, or begin to look like you have ulterior motives.


I am not in any way trying to be insulting.

You seem to think that your opinion represents the church's view, or truth, or something. It seems that you think by asserting and restating your opinions (or the opinions of FAIR) you are somehow giving us a doctrinal or official statement.

You previous post supports this conclusion.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion and to believe as you wish but it seems you are unable to find any official doctrinal statements asserting those who believe in the Book of Mormon as inspired fiction are not "true Latter Day Saints."

I'll leave it at that.


~dancer~


Edit to add one more thing... you sound as if you are addressing your post to me as if I am one that claims the Book of Mormon is inspired fiction. To be clear I am not one who believes in the truth claims of the LDS church.
Last edited by Bing [Bot] on Thu Feb 28, 2008 7:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_charity
_Emeritus
Posts: 2327
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 3:30 pm

Post by _charity »

There are none so blind as those who will not see.
_hopeofzion
_Emeritus
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 6:14 pm

My views...

Post by _hopeofzion »

Actually, my observation is that your personal testimony is more in line with Joseph Smith and his visions and revelations than the current apologetic perspective.
I must confess my ignorance about what the current apologetic perspectives are. I have always avoided apologetics, partly because I do not like the word. It seems to derive from the word apology. Whether I am a Christian, Restoration Saint, Disciple of Christ... I feel I have nothing to apologize for about my beliefs if they are right and true. The truth does not need to be defended. It is simply shared, like seeds being broadcast upon the ground. They either take root or they do not.
Some apologists argue that one must believe the historical, factual accuracy of the Book of Mormon, yet these same people discount Joseph Smith and dismiss his teachings regarding the location, story, and facts of the Book of Mormon. They "reinterpret" the Book of Mormon to mean something other than what Joseph Smith wrote/translated, in my opinion.
Again, I don't really know what "they" are saying these days, but I do know this: We are instructed to bring the gospel to all people, and we were instructed by Christ in the D&C not to speak of tenets. I know of very few churches, and no branch of Mormonism, which has been obedient to this command. We are not instructed to convert people to a book, or a church, but unto Christ. If the Book of Mormon is just another testimony of Christ, and I believe it is somewhat more than that, but in any case... it is not Christ Himself, but a witness of Christ.

Unfortunately, I have witnessed many people who confess Joseph Smith to be a prophet, who either do not know what he has said, or if they do know, go on holding opinions and theories about certain things without regard to what the Lord showed him. For example, that the Book of Mormon lands are in North America.

Up until a certain point in our nation's history, I think few ever really did much research into the archaeological evidence, and few believers cared. At some point Bible archeology began to bloom, and common people began to gravitate more towards a desire for scientific evidences. The more subtle and unknown evidence in N America remained mostly unseen, while the sudden, more phenomenal and romantic archaeological discovery of "lost cities" in Central America (in the last century) began to surface, invoking the imaginations of Mormons. "Ah-ha! These must be these great cities of the Nephites in the Book of Mormon!"

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. No where does it say the Nephites built Pyramids. It describes earth works with wooden walls, etc. And there is much evidence of that here in N America, along with copper mines, etc.

However, the Book of Mormon cannot be proven true through archaeological evidence anymore than the Bible can be. It remains largely a matter of faith.
Would you like to share your recent discoveries that have given you your testimony of the HGT?
My conviction of the Book of Mormon is firmly, solidly planted in the witness of the Holy Ghost unto me, and the fruit it bares in my life. However, it was an LDS Mormon who blew my mind away with actual physical evidences of North America being the land of the Nephites. It very much confirmed and made even more solid, if it were possibly, my convictions about the book. His name is Wayne May. He came to Kansas City area, and spoke in an RLDS branch. I was invited by a friend, and his presentation absolutely blew me away.

It's hard to explain. I never doubted the Book of Mormon, but I never felt comfortable with the images of pyramids, glyphs, and other archaeological evidences from Central America. It all seemed somehow foreign...
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.

If you search his name on Google, I'm sure he has a website. I know he has a magazine and some books. Best of all, in my opinion, would be to ask him to come to your branch and present what he has. No sense in me trying to share so poorly something that cannot be understood without all the details and photos and maps.
I'm curious if you think the LDS church is moving away from its teachings and some long held beliefs?
I am not LDS, nor an expert on all things LDS. I couldn't begin to speculate.

But there are just a couple of things about the LDS I do know, that the Lord has shared with me.
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.

It is similar to what I experienced when I left that community I was living in. I left religion for relationship with God.

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!

God bless!!!!
_truth dancer
_Emeritus
Posts: 4792
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm

Post by _truth dancer »

Hi HOZ...

Ahhh just rememering why I am such a fan of yours!

:-)

Thanks for your reply. I'm going to check out the sites!

~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
_GoodK

Re: My views...

Post by _GoodK »

hopeofzion wrote:Unfortunately, I have witnessed many people who confess Joseph Smith to be a prophet, who either do not know what he has said, or if they do know, go on holding opinions and theories about certain things without regard to what the Lord showed him. For example, that the Book of Mormon lands are in North America.


I have also witnessed many people who bear witness of the divine inspiration found within the Bible, yet they don't know how bad the gospels contradict themselves, the brutality and illogic the old testament, the many changes made to popular Biblical stories, etc...
I have also witnessed many people who bear witness of their own divine inspiration, yet they can't quantify anything they say into something falsifiable or reasonable.

hopeofzion wrote: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.


Why would you believe they are led by the Lord, yet not the Mormon Lord?

hopeofzion wrote:No where does it say the Nephites built Pyramids. It describes earth works with wooden walls, etc. And there is much evidence of that here in N America, along with copper mines, etc.


Don't have Book of Mormon in front of me, but does the Bible speak of pyramids or lost tribes being led to south america?

hopeofzion wrote:However, the Book of Mormon cannot be proven true through archaeological evidence anymore than the Bible can be. It remains largely a matter of faith.


Right. Which doesn't make it any more or less ridiculous than the Bible.


It's hard to explain. I never doubted the Book of Mormon, but I never felt comfortable with the images of pyramids, glyphs, and other archaeological evidences from Central America. It all seemed somehow foreign...
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. [/quote]

Is this an example of confirmation bias?

But there are just a couple of things about the LDS I do know, that the Lord has shared with me.

Wait, what?! The Lord shares things with you in regars to Latter Day Saints?

hopeofzion wrote: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.


"People who talk in metaphors ought to shampoo my crotch" - Jack Nicholson, As Good As it Gets

hopeofzion wrote:I left religion for relationship with God.
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!


I'd love to get the translation for this odd statement.
Post Reply