Jump to content

Bob Crockett

Members
  • Content Count

    2,659
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bob Crockett

  1. "Proof-texting" is what the other guy does, the guy you think is a dolt. St. Paul was the biggest proof texter of all. Jesus second.
  2. Libertarianism is not "right wing." It is not "left wing." Many of my libertarian friends vote the Democratic ticket because it represents aspects of personal freedom that the Republican party does not promote. The essential credo of libertarianism is that no compulsion should exist for government policy. Many except national defense from that.
  3. I don't know how to respond to this post. So I shan't.
  4. Libertarianism is a system of government, not one of theology. The destruction of the press and excommunication was done in the name of religion, not compulsory government. I take that back; the destruction of the press was done by the City Council. Definitely not libertarian philosophy.
  5. How do you get "conservative" out of all of this? Thomas Jefferson considered himself a radical progressive. I realize that modern-day conservatives love to carry around and trumpet the constitution, but that doesn't make the constitution the foundation of modern conservatism as conservatism applies to other countries as well. A conservative is a person who does not want change and wants to hold on to his guns and wealth to oppress and threaten the poor. A conservative opposes abortion because he or she thinks it is Biblical murder. A liberal is one who wants change to confiscate (i.e., legal stealing) wealth from the rich. A liberal favors abortion as a means to engage in genocide against the poor minorities. I don't know what Jesus Christ was, but Joseph Smith was a libertarian. Freedom of religion, economic freedom and other freedoms like that.
  6. Communism is the collective ownership of property without title or claim. Marxism preaches atheism and control by the proletariat. Marxism and communism are not the same. Communism existed, as a term and idea, long before Marx. See Robert Owens (term), and to some extent Thomas More's Utopia (idea; communal living).
  7. His followers in Acts adopted pure communism as an economic policy, with death the remedy for not adhering.
  8. If you mean Wayment's translation, that sort of endorsement is pretty weak. I obtained "No Man Knows My History" from the BYU Bookstore. But, I do like Wayment's translation. I would not attempt to teach with it however.
  9. Sorenson's "distances" are rather absurd. The narrow neck of land is a day and a half wide for a Nephite, which Sorenson puts as an isthmus 200 miles wide filled with swamps and mountains. (My numbers are off a little, but you get the drift.)
  10. I too believe that Dr. Sorenson's work is seriously deficient to the point that it contradicts the Book of Mormon text and things Joseph Smiths said. And the premise for an LGT is suspect; if you can't find evidence of the Book of Mormon draw the boundaries so tight that nobody can. But, having said that, there is zero evidence for a "North American" setting. Joseph Smith plainly identified a hemispheric model, from Patagonia to Canada.
  11. It is very true that women are discriminated in the Church. They can't hold high callings, unlike the Community of Christ. They can't tell those with high callings what to do. They can't even hold lower administrative callings. That's apparent. I run a law firm where most of my lawyers are women. It just worked out that way. The most qualified candidates for my law firm just happened to be women. But, the discrimination we see in the Church is, at present, the Lord's discrimination .
  12. So we should be guided as to what doctor to use? What political philosophy to follow? As the APA defined homosexuality before the 1980s as aberrant behavior, should we expect the Church to speak up?
  13. When aversion or conversion therapy occurred at BYU: 1. Was the therapy consistent with the recommendations of the AMA or APA? 2. Were the participants consenting adults? 3. Were other institutions at the time conducting the same programs, and were they considered acceptable?
  14. I think the two-Cumorah theory is completely unsupportable. Sorenson admits in Codex, although his opinions are all over the map, that Joseph Smith taught and believed a hemispheric theory. I hope that we can move on from Dr. Sorenson's theory and more to a more flexible and expansive understanding of the role of the Lamanites in the gospel.
  15. The trouble with this kind of analysis is that it overlooks the fact that Pres. Young was a sarcastic jokester. He used to mock John Taylor's voice and mannerisms. And in not so friendly a manner. When I was a bishop I used to tell the youth that half of everybody in the church remembers the pre-existence and has been sworn to secrecy. So much in the JoD consists of sarcasm and mockery and now passes for gospel truth.
  16. I don' t consider any of these changes anything more than tuning. On my mission in the 1970s we could call home any time we wanted. The trouble was that it would cost over $100 for a five minute call.
  17. One would think the ward consists of the lives of the same three or four people when there are hundreds of congregants with lives of their own, suffering and hardships etc. But that is the Lord's formula for meetings and the leaders are loathe to tread upon it. A fellow moved into our ward after his bishop told him to stop getting up every month and preaching from a scriptural text. Really, there is little to do.
  18. Ditto. The Lord called his Witnesses for a particular purpose and they have responded to the call magnificently.
  19. I used to duct tape my young left-handed son's left hand to discourage him from using his left hand. Just kidding. I tell him that all the time to tell him that is what is wrong with him (as he is preparing to enter law school).
  20. I kind of like your JSF quote. Somewhere I read recently that JSF was in a ward meeting where the congregation had to wait until he received the sacrament. When he complained about this new practice, he remarked that he must have been absent from the Quorum when this rule was instituted.
  21. I don't find this argument even remotely compelling. In particular, John Sorenson in Codex both (1) advanced this particular argument and (2) quoted from some supposed sources linked to Joseph Smith advocating a Mesoamerican geography. I really don't know what to make of Book of Mormon geography at this point. Joseph Smith certainly spoke authoritatively about it, authored or edited articles in the Times and Seasons about a hemispheric model, claimed to have dreams about it and spoke about it. When he spoke, people listened and mimicked him with articles and sermons of their own. But does it really matter? I suppose it matters just a little, but not enough to warrant an entire life's work to it.
  22. Again, generalized statements don't fly here with me. I'm not convinced. It is not different than saying that absence of proof is not proof of absence when, in fact, it is.
  23. You are indeed correct. My paper on the subject (see cite above) notes that. Certainly a major fact contraindicating the Church's published stance on geography. I am in close relationship with one BYU professor of major distinction in Church history and theology, and he is firmly wedded to the Sorenson model. I strongly believe he had much to do with that publication in the Ensign. FARMS was created, in part, to advance the Sorenson model. FARMS was acquired by BYU. But, my paper traces some of Dr. Sorenson's proofs to argue that they are frivolous. To the extreme, in fact. What do my thoughts mean to the Latter-day Saint who believes in the Book of Mormon? Why do I advance my thoughts against the Sorenson model? I believe the Sorenson model was developed to defend against the claim that there is no real hard evidence of a Book of Mormon civilization in the Americas. The Sorenson model draws the theoretical basis for the Book of Mormon's history to such a narrow area that it suggests that finding nothing elsewhere is meaningless. The Sorenson model is a sort of backhand slap to a belief in the Book of Mormon as Joseph Smith saw it. My paper documents a few efforts to attack Joseph Smith. I think that because Joseph Smith saw the Book of Mormon to be a hemispherical text, as that is the promise of the new land and New Jerusalem, we should have faith in that promise. We should have lots of faith in the text of the Book of Mormon and a lot less faith in the collateral theories meant to develop it. Part of my thinking is based, in part, upon Brant Garnder's two-volume text focusing upon the Hebrew influence on the Book of Mormon.
  24. Hypocrisy, collusion and lack of faith in the Book of Mormon because one does not believe in the Sorenson model sort of speaks to the fundamental problem with Dr. Sorenson's work.
  25. I don't see anything wrong with a theoretical map. I think the Niagara peninsula is more consistent with the Book of Mormon's account. But the evidence is so thin it really isn't worth discussing.
×
×
  • Create New...