Jump to content

Valentinus

Contributor
  • Content Count

    5,194
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,497 Excellent

About Valentinus

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Ehrman mentioned a book from the 70s titled The NT in Stereo or something to that effect. He recognized the problem of mashing the Gospels together to create a cohesive and united message. I suppose the same problem could be applied to the FVs if they were to be mashed together. Also, could the LDS church gone without canonizing any of the FVs? What would the church look like then?
  2. I was listening to Bart Ehrman's lectures on the creation of the NT canon. He finds it wrong to attempt to create a unifying tapestry that supports an overall theological message. He asserts that the Gospels should each be read on their own terms. Can Mormonism treat the different accounts of the FV in the same way? Can each account be read and understood on its own terms as opposed to building toward a canonized and universal account?
  3. Those examples are not plagiarized but are points of interest to Mormonism. The "answers" provided by the BoM do not superimpose themselves onto the NT text or tradition. They don't fill in the blanks of the ancient and first century theology. 19th century ideas have no bearing on the OT and NT scriptures. To be clear. In the same way that the NT cannot project itself onto the OT neither can the BoM project itself onto either testaments. Christianity is a cult of Judaism. I don't mean cult in a negative sense. Furthermore, Mormonism is a world religion in the same way Judaism and Christianity are.
  4. Yep! That was terrifying. I got pop ups on my phone in under 10 sec. Who directed this undertaking? I haven't been this horrified since seeing Dr. Satan in Rob Zombie's movie "House of 1000 Corpses".
  5. I haven't visited the church site in a few years. Perhaps it is time to see this house of horrors.
  6. No worries. I'm willing to learn.
  7. This is patently false. Christianity could not have survived all the deaths of the original apostles and Jesus's death without the Spirit to guide them. @3DOP, @MiserereNobis and @Spammer...am I off base on this? The ancient church was not a vessel to bring about Mormonism. Mormonism is a response to 19th century American social and religious culture.
  8. Groupthink can be applied by anyone. Trusting the majority of scientists who've worked on the subject of climate change is based on the scientific method. The ability to use empirical evidence draw conclusions. As for the religion...that is merely an opinion that cannot be empirically tested and relies on Hebrews 11:1 as a rationalization for an assumed reality.
  9. Definitely one of my favorites! 1st Council of Nicea is #1 because St. Nicholas slapped Arius.
  10. Didn't the Roman Catholic Church do that with the glorious and benevolent Council of Trent?
  11. Likewise, individual people examining the evidence provided by many scientists concerning climate change is not groupthink. Climate change denyers are among those with tin foil hats.
  12. Likewise, no LDS person says that without a doubt the LDS church is God's one true church. So your point is correct.
  13. Groupthink can also be applied when someone says there's no debating that one religion is the most "true" above all others. Seven million people standing up and declaring their religion to be the one above all others is groupthink. I'll admit that saying "no debating" is a poor choice of words. There is in fact room for debate. However, I'm going to trust the majority of scientists who have done the work on this issue above those with capitalist interests and lobbyists.
×
×
  • Create New...