Noah's Ark questions

[_EdGoble]

I used the believe in a local flood for many years, but I never thought about it much, so I would never have done all the metal gymnastics you do as a believer. You can call it textual literalness, but it does not change the fact the global nature of the story is vital. Without it the story goes from being about how mankind and all animals were saved from God's wrath to just a transportation story from the America's to the middle east with lots of magic cards to bring out to get him there. Not to mention he forgot to leave any DNA.

The church's doctrine is still global because Joseph's claimed revelations attach that to it. It also makes more sense from an LDS perspective. Noah built a ship to survive the flood and just ended up on a middle eastern Mountain as the waters receded. It also fits in with the America's being a choice land waiting for God to bring his chosen groups. Then you have three groups with a transportation story to the new choice land. Joseph even borrows another Bible story of the tower of babel. An obvious fiction to any open mind. Worse if you want to believe in a local flood because then people lived all over the earth and spoke many different languages for a very long time, taking away the towers stories explanation of why humans have so many different languages. Not to mention an Adamic language.

Interesting just how America centrist these new tales Joseph is providing. Heck even those ancient prophets from Adam to Noah lived in the America's, and Joseph just happened to be right where these great events took place. HMM really?

Vital to those that think as you, maybe. You can continue to make accusations of gymnastics, but you are just finding fault with the fact that when we have to rightly divide the word of truth to come to a proper and comprehensive understanding of complexity, it demands good reasoning.

Here's an example of Joseph's claimed revelations that with further revelation was changed with better understanding.

"And also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh. . ." (D&C 76:73)

And this was changed to this understanding:

"And as I wondered, my eyes were opened, and my understanding quickened, and I perceived that the Lord went not in person among the wicked and the disobedient who had rejected the truth, to teach them; But behold, from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead." (D&C 138:29-30)

And so, if we had stuck with the "literal" D&C 76 version of things, we never would have moved forward to the D&C 138 understanding of things. Sorry, but you are off the mark. We have to let things go when they aren't true with precision. We have to let go of literalness when it is not one of the basic things and it becomes an obstacle to moving forward. I don't really care what you say about this, because this is just a fact and there are oodles of examples of things like this where people have to just grow up and get over it.

[_EdGoble]

There is much in Mormon culture that I admire. I honestly wish you the best in draining the bath water. You show a degree of honesty and integrity that will be needed more than ever. If there are enough of you it may work.

Well, thanks, but also, we will be hoping that reform will also give some of you reason enough to come back and join with us again.

[_EdGoble]

https://www.LDS.org/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng&query=%22+baptism+of+the+earth%22

So is Professor Parry just a "chapel Mormon", Ed?

I don't know him, but as a professor, he probably eventually will have to come around on this issue as the rest.

[_EdGoble]

I do know that they won't keep your temple if you believe in a local flood.

My temple recommend to me is more important than anything I can "reason" through, so if I must give this up to keep it, then I will. I don't believe any bishop that is well acquainted with the new area covered in the essays on the Church Website would ever do that though.

[_Themis]

I used the believe in a local flood for many years, but I never thought about it much, so I would never have done all the metal gymnastics you do as a believer. You can call it textual literalness, but it does not change the fact the global nature of the story is vital. Without it the story goes from being about how mankind and all animals were saved from God's wrath to just a transportation story from the America's to the middle east with lots of magic cards to bring out to get him there. Not to mention he forgot to leave any DNA.

The church's doctrine is still global because Joseph's claimed revelations attach that to it. It also makes more sense from an LDS perspective. Noah built a ship to survive the flood and just ended up on a middle eastern Mountain as the waters receded. It also fits in with the America's being a choice land waiting for God to bring his chosen groups. Then you have three groups with a transportation story to the new choice land. Joseph even borrows another Bible story of the tower of babel. An obvious fiction to any open mind. Worse if you want to believe in a local flood because then people lived all over the earth and spoke many different languages for a very long time, taking away the towers stories explanation of why humans have so many different languages. Not to mention an Adamic language.

Interesting just how America centrist these new tales Joseph is providing. Heck even those ancient prophets from Adam to Noah lived in the America's, and Joseph just happened to be right where these great events took place. HMM really?

Vital to those that think as you, maybe. You can continue to make accusations of gymnastics, but you are just finding fault with the fact that when we have to rightly divide the word of truth to come to a proper and comprehensive understanding of complexity, it demands good reasoning.

Here's an example of Joseph's claimed revelations that with further revelation was changed with better understanding.

"And also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh. . ." (D&C 76:73)

And this was changed to this understanding:

"And as I wondered, my eyes were opened, and my understanding quickened, and I perceived that the Lord went not in person among the wicked and the disobedient who had rejected the truth, to teach them; But behold, from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead." (D&C 138:29-30)

And so, if we had stuck with the "literal" D&C 76 version of things, we never would have moved forward to the D&C 138 understanding of things. Sorry, but you are off the mark. We have to let things go when they aren't true with precision. We have to let go of literalness when it is not one of the basic things and it becomes an obstacle to moving forward. I don't really care what you say about this, because this is just a fact and there are oodles of examples of things like this where people have to just grow up and get over it.

I noticed you didn't address one problem in my post. Literalness is not the problem with the story. Going from global to local is the problem because it alters the story into a very different one. One that does not fit with current LDS doctrine and teachings or the story found in Genesis. A Local flood that has to have many Magic cards to try and fit into reality. This is why it's so easy to destroy these kinds of arguments.

[_Themis]

I do know that they won't keep your temple if you believe in a local flood.

My temple recommend to me is more important than anything I can "reason" through, so if I must give this up to keep it, then I will. I don't believe any bishop that is well acquainted with the new area covered in the essays on the Church Website would ever do that though.

And this shows the extreme bias to believe things that don't fit the evidence and need mental gymnastics to make you think they make sense. I know because I have done some of my own in the church. It's not really until one can address the problems with the spiritual experience that they can start to have an open enough mind to see just how bad their explanations are.

[_EdGoble]

I noticed you didn't address one problem in my post. Literalness is not the problem with the story. Going from global to local is the problem because it alters the story into a very different one. One that does not fit with current LDS doctrine and teachings or the story found in Genesis. A Local flood that has to have many Magic cards to try and fit into reality. This is why it's so easy to destroy these kinds of arguments.

So what? I am comfortable with it. Other Mormons may not be. That is their problem. Not mine. So what if it alters it? From Noah's perspective, there was still water all around him. I am comfortable with that. What you say about this is not of importance to me.

[_EdGoble]

And this shows the extreme bias to believe things that don't fit the evidence and need mental gymnastics to make you think they make sense. I know because I have done some of my own in the church. It's not really until one can address the problems with the spiritual experience that they can start to have an open enough mind to see just how bad their explanations are.

I am comfortable with where I am on the explanations that I have for things. I am not under obligation to be somehow distressed by your accusations and charges against my point of view, or feel obligated to have the same sentiments as you toward something that YOU felt distressed by when you had a faith crisis.

[_Themis]

I noticed you didn't address one problem in my post. Literalness is not the problem with the story. Going from global to local is the problem because it alters the story into a very different one. One that does not fit with current LDS doctrine and teachings or the story found in Genesis. A Local flood that has to have many Magic cards to try and fit into reality. This is why it's so easy to destroy these kinds of arguments.

So what? I am comfortable with it. Other Mormons may not be. That is their problem. Not mine. So what if it alters it? From Noah's perspective, there was still water all around him. I am comfortable with that. What you say about this is not of importance to me.

I'm not actually saying it for you. I know a closed mind when I see it. I bring it up for others who might take it more seriously with less bias. You even bring up more problems with Noah can't see any land local flood story.

[_Themis]

And this shows the extreme bias to believe things that don't fit the evidence and need mental gymnastics to make you think they make sense. I know because I have done some of my own in the church. It's not really until one can address the problems with the spiritual experience that they can start to have an open enough mind to see just how bad their explanations are.

I am comfortable with where I am on the explanations that I have for things. I am not under obligation to be somehow distressed by your accusations and charges against my point of view, or feel obligated to have the same sentiments as you toward something that YOU felt distressed by when you had a faith crisis.

Did I say I felt distressed? LOL I saw the problems with the spiritual experience well before I came across some of the physical problems and started to look at where the pointed to. Even with better understanding of the problems with the spiritual experience I remained a believer until more of the physical evidence came into play. The spiritual is a wall we have to cross first.