DCP: "The Theological And Historical Ignorance Of Protestants Is Astounding."

[drumdude]

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/

Enjoy!

If Autumnal Thoughts is what I was suppose to read, that was just weird. Started out okay, but seemed to go down a vortex the further along I read.

His blog has become pretty bitter, the bottom part is all sarcasm.

[Gadianton]

Naturally, he fails to elaborate why Christ held the temple in such sacred reverence that he chased the money changers out, why Paul had visions in the temple, why the Apostles worshipped there often post resurrection, and he even fails to understand the significance of Christ "temple" (body) being torn down then raised up again 3 days later and how that might possibly relate to the temple itself. The theological and historical ignorance of protestants is astounding

It is amusing that a professor of antiquities would be so impressed by this ridiculous observation. This is on the level of interpreting "8 were saved by water" as symbolic of the age of baptism. It has nothing to do with understanding history or theology. It may have something to do with mysticism and hidden codes that only the chosen will understand. You could equally argue that Christ torn down and raised again three days later was symbolically the rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple for the final time and victory, and no more were physical temples needed anymore. His body and blood the sacrament. There just isn't enough information for a historian to conclude anything about the need for temples after the death of Christ.

Although a tip of the hat to the Mopologist's favorite scripture -- Jesus driving the money changers out. lol.

[tagriffy]

Pardon my ignorance, but the board under discussion here doesn't seem to be MD&D? Could I get a pointer where to go?

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/

Enjoy!

Thanks! I wonder how much trouble I can get into there.

[Doctor Steuss]

Naturally, he fails to elaborate why Christ held the temple in such sacred reverence that he chased the money changers out,[...]

Naturally, people who advocate that this was a literal historical event fail to elaborate why the Sanhedrin’s Levite temple forces just stood by allowing it to happen. The theological and historical ignorance of Judaism and the Temple is astounding.

Glass houses...

[Res Ipsa]

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/

Enjoy!

Thanks! I wonder how much trouble I can get into there.

LOL.

[Kishkumen]

The ratio of informed to ignorant probably depends more on country than religion.

[Philo Sofee]

Naturally, he fails to elaborate why Christ held the temple in such sacred reverence that he chased the money changers out,[...]

Naturally, people who advocate that this was a literal historical event fail to elaborate why the Sanhedrin’s Levite temple forces just stood by allowing it to happen. The theological and historical ignorance of Judaism and the Temple is astounding.

Glass houses...

SPOT-LUVIN-ON! Wins the comments section for the day.

[Physics Guy]

It's fair enough to say that most Protestants are ignorant about Mormon doctrines. To call that ignorance astounding, however, is bizarre. It's like pinochle enthusiasts being astounded by how ignorant basketball fans all are about the rules of their obscure card game. Why should Protestants know anything about the special beliefs of a small sect?

What this comment and endorsement shows is that Mormons really imagine that their special beliefs are somehow natural and obvious. They imagine that people who are not already steeped in Mormonism could read the handful of Biblical references to the Jerusalem temple and not simply note that the first-century Jewish temple was significant for first-century Jews. They imagine instead that if these unbiased readers would merely think a bit harder about those few historical references, they would see right away that temples must be of great and abiding importance to God.

That's what's absurd. Whether or not any specifically Mormon teachings are right, they definitely are not implied in any obvious and natural way by any non-Mormon scriptures or teachings. The Mormon pretension that their 19th-century breakaway sect is The Church of Jesus Christ has spread a bit too far in these apologists' brains. It's one thing for them to believe their claims, but another for them to fault other people for not following reasoning that only makes sense if one already believes all those special Mormon claims.

Since on the contrary most specifically Mormon teachings strike even mainstream Christians as head-jerkingly bizarre, the Mormon apologists' premise that their teachings are obvious to anyone who is not astoundingly ignorant is a boggling disconnect. It would be fine for them to say, "I know this is going to sound weird to you, but this is what we believe and here is why we believe it." People who start from the premise that non-Mormons are somehow at fault for not believing Mormon claims are living in some unreal world.

[Kishkumen]

Well put, PG. Cultures are distinguished in part by their dominant narratives. Most Christians do not share the same concept of the temple that LDS people have. The temple does not have the same place in their narrative. That said, if non-Mormons want to attack LDS people for building temples, they ought at least to familiarize themselves with LDS temple teachings and their Biblical foundation. The point is not to accept those ideas as correct but rather to understand where Mormons are coming from instead of just opposing something they don’t even understand the first thing about.

[Moksha]

Thanks! I wonder how much trouble I can get into there.

They are much nicer than in the past. Steer clear of posters like Smac and Scott Lloyd and do not cross Calm.