Jump to content

cinepro

Contributor
  • Content Count

    10,218
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cinepro

  1. The whole "as far as it is translated correctly" came to mind when I recently learned that in Luke 2, the word "inn" is probably a mistranslation. Apparently, the Greek word (kataluma) is the same one that is used for "guest chamber" in Luke 22:11, and different than the word used for "inn" in the story of the good Samaritan in Luke 10. So the idea of Jesus being born in a stable or cave probably isn't accurate. It was probably a relative's house. The houses had mangers inside on the main floor. Who's with me to get this corrected in the Church culture?
  2. cinepro

    Evolution

    I don't know why this is confusing, but 2 Nephi 2:22 says that "all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end." All things fell. Not just Adam and Eve. Not just stuff in the Garden of Eden (or outside the Garden of Eden). I agree that if Lehi had just said that "Adam and Eve fell", then it would be much easier to defend. But he didn't say that.
  3. cinepro

    Evolution

    Like I said...the only defense is to say "The Church (or scriptures) say ABC, but if it instead said XYZ, then there wouldn't be a problem. Therefore, I believe XYZ."
  4. cinepro

    Evolution

    Well, here's 2 Ne 2:22: So the question is "which things that were created 'fell' at the Fall of Adam?" You seem to be saying "the things which were in the Garden of Eden fell." Lehi seems to disagree. He says all things. Not "all humans." Not "all neanderthals." It's everything; all plants and animals. All of it. Why would they have remained forever? Because they never would have (physically) died. Lehi may have been wrong, but I'm not going to throw McConkie and other 20th century LDS under the bus for taking the scriptures at their word.
  5. cinepro

    Evolution

    I think the Church has no "official view" on evolution because if they did, it would be the obviously wrong one. As others have shown, there is no degree of creativity that won't be brought to bear to try and reconcile the scriptures and teachings of the Church with the biological, geological and anthropological evidence. In the end, the defenses are essentially saying "The Church says ABC, but if it instead said XYZ, then there wouldn't be a problem. Therefore, I believe XYZ." So, yeah. If the Church being true depends on the Church leaders' teachings about evolution, the primacy of Adam and Noah in the human timeline, and the scope and literalness of "no death before the fall" being "true", then yeah, the Church isn't true. Therefore, we can't believe those teachings, and anything they've said (and continue to say) to that effect has to be explained away. So explain away.
  6. Over the years, an awkward teaching for the Church PR group to deal with has been the idea that righteous LDS will be rewarded with "their own planets." This even made it to the Church newsroom website, where they try and moderate such ideas about LDS teachings: On Sunday, President Nelson taught: It is my impression that the plain meaning of President Nelson's statement is that "presiding" over a world would be understood as "getting your own planet." If this isn't what he meant, what do you think he did mean? If this is what he meant, did he teach something that isn't doctrinal, or is the Church newsroom mistaken?
  7. cinepro

    Another Crazy Thread From Cdowis

    Elder Cook gave a talk on this, and he says something that's a bit interesting: I suspect he is confirming what most LDS believe: there is no scenario where a person could receive a "no" answer from God when praying about whether or not The Book of Mormon is "true." If they do think they've received a "no", then it can't be from God.
  8. cinepro

    That Deadpool Poster

    I'll also add that if anyone is a fan of the DC and Marvel movies (and especially the DC characters) and is looking for something a little more family friendly, I highly recommend the "Teen Titans Go To the Movies" film. It's not just a kid's film. There is a ton of stuff in it for fans of all ages (and kids will miss most of the references anyway). It even has a Stan Lee cameo. And if anyone is a Fred Savage fan, check out the show "The Grinder" (on Hulu). It only lasted one season, but it's one of my favorite sitcoms of all time.
  9. cinepro

    That Deadpool Poster

    This is actually advertising an edited version of the R-rated "Deadpool 2" that came out earlier this year. So it is a PG-13 version, which, ironically, may make it more palatable to an LDS audience. There's nothing in the movie that specifically mentions the Church, but it is so over the top profane, violent and irreverent towards everything, it is unlikely the original version of the film would ever be enjoyed by most LDS. The poster is probably an allusion to this being the "Second Coming" of Deadpool this year, although since the movie was originally part two, this would actually be the third coming. The framing device for the edits is to use the "telling a story" motif used in The Princess Bride film (presumably so they could "storybook" the more violent and profane parts) , and they got adult Fred Savage to come back. Here's the trailer:
  10. Maybe he's using an unusual and nuanced interpretation of the word "dissemble." Kind of like what people are doing with the word "preside."
  11. I agree that critics of the Church may mock and trivialize the idea, but that doesn't equate with misstating it. Indeed, I think they mock it because they can plainly see what is being taught (just as LDS do). They don't need to change a thing.
  12. Does that mean God the Father is probably "presiding" over our universe on behalf of a greater God? He didn't actually "get" our planet, but he's more of an administrator? Because if we're supposed to liken our authority over a future "world" to the authority God has over our world, then I think most LDS would agree that God has "got" our planet.
  13. I must be missing the outrage gene, because I have been mercifully free from outrage these past 18 years. Sadly, the effect of this is that I am constantly accused of being a shill, apologist, anti-Mormon, Fox News sycophant, Socialist, or whatever bogeyman the person I'm responding to can come up with as a knee-jerk reaction. In short, if you dare question someone's outrage, you quickly become marginalized and part of the problem. Instead of "outrage", I usually feel a kind of despairing depression (after events like 9/11 or other mass violence), or a cynical resignation (in politics and religion). I don't know if it's better, but I can also see how outrage has become an addiction to so many people.
  14. cinepro

    Evidence for the Book of Abraham

    So you think the curse that is being referred to might be diabetes?
  15. cinepro

    Evidence for the Book of Abraham

    I hope I'm not the only one that is really, really glad that it's the first claim that's been proven true and not the second.
  16. cinepro

    Evidence for the Book of Abraham

    "Either way it happened" doesn't mean there is an equal likelihood that either one happened. Did I take the garbage out to the curb this morning, or did an advanced alien race come down in their spaceship and use molecular transformation technology to instantly transport the garbage cans from the house to the curb? Either way, it happened.
  17. cinepro

    How much should religion cost?

    I'm not really equipped to answer that question. I've personally given money to poor people and volunteered over the years, and it never occurred to me to ask how far the money was going to go. So I guess the first thing I would need would be for you to explain how far the money would need to go before it would be worthwhile for the Church to allocate it (and how we would measure that). It does seem odd that when it comes to tithing, we're always told not to worry about what is being done with the money (or how far it is going). We give because it's a commandment. But when God commands us to give to the poor and needy, suddenly we need to put on a green visor and do a cost/benefit analysis before we make any donations. I don't have enough information to make that determination. From where I'm sitting, if President Nelson did do it "on his own" it would look exactly the same as if he had sought the "council of the Savior", so there's no way for me to tell.
  18. cinepro

    How much should religion cost?

    The critical number isn't how many have lived on the Earth. The critical number is how many names we have of specific people who have lived on the Earth. I'm sure the Church knows exactly how many people are in the queue for Temple work. That would be an interesting number to know!
  19. cinepro

    How much should religion cost?

    Can you sketch out the math on that? How many names are currently in the queue for Temple work, and how does an increase in Temples from, say, 130 to 160 increase the rate of Temple work compared to the amount if relief that could be brought to the poor? Can you also factor in the comparative benefit of reducing the amount of time a disembodied spirit has to wait for proxy work from the millennium to the late 2010's compared with the benefit of helping someone who is without food, shelter or clothing attain those things?
  20. cinepro

    How much should religion cost?

    It might not make a difference to you or me, but I'm guessing it would make a difference to the poor that were helped. At least, I'm guessing they'd notice the difference more than God would. I'm also wondering how anyone thinks God would think less of the Church if more money was allocated to the poor instead of the Temple fund. Like, how would that conversation go if President Nelson cut Temple construction by 50% and gave that money directly to the poor and needy all over the world, and then he died and had to sit down for his stewardship interview with God. Do we really think God's going to look at his notes and be disappointed that instead of bumping the Temple count from 155 to 162, President Nelson gave a bunch of money to the poor?
  21. Sounds like something someone in Stage 2 would say.
  22. cinepro

    Is it time to end Testimony meetings?

    He-Man's out, because Steve Martin didn't like the look on his face...
  23. Considering how things went when we got the Papyri back from the Metropolitan Museum and found a Regular Egyptian Rosetta Stone, I would predict absolute disaster for the current translation of the Book of Mormon.
  24. I suspect this will not shock many people, but Bill Reel (aka dbmormon) has received an invitation to his execution. https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/11/bill-reel-disciplinary-court-is-imminent/ I guess it's the same conversation we have whenever something like this happens (Dehlin, Sam Young, Kate Kelly), but should there be a place in the church (or, more accurately, on the membership rolls) for people who have widely divergent points of view on things like the historicity of the Book of Mormon, the supernatural abilities of the current leadership, or even the existence of God and His involvement in world events over the past 6,000 years? Asking for a friend.
×