Jump to content

CA Steve

Members
  • Content Count

    1,983
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,457 Excellent

About CA Steve

  • Rank
    Separates Water & Dry Land

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I not sure if this was your intent or not, but a comparison between illicit drug use and legal gay relationships is highly problematic.
  2. Who is this man? What sort of devil is he To have me caught in a trap And choose to let me go free? It was his hour at last To put a seal on my fate Wipe out the past And wash me clean off the slate! All it would take Was a flick of his knife. Vengeance was his And he gave me back my life! Damned if I'll live in the debt of a thief! Damned if I'll yield at the end of the chase. I am the law and the law is not mocked I'll spit his pity right back in his face There is nothing on earth that we share It is either Valjean or Javert! And my thoughts fly apart Can this man be believed? Shall his sins be forgiven? Shall his crimes be reprieved? And must I now begin to doubt, Who never doubted all these years? My heart is stone and still it trembles The world I have known is lost in shadow. Is he from heaven or from hell? And does he know That granting me my life today This man has killed me even so?
  3. Popular approval has nothing to do with my response. I am trying to point out that what determines "best" in this context is quite arbitrary as we can see from the multitude of different religious beliefs. This thread could be started in any religious forum asking the same vague question and would get the same types of approvals from those believers. Maybe we should be asking what factors should be used to evaluate best from a variety of different believers before touting our own as the winner? IOW words we are winning a race with only one entrant here.
  4. Because obviously the rest of the world's religious adherents are sitting around saying: "Damn I wish we had the theology that Mormons have!"
  5. Maybe I have missed it. Is there something official from the church that says gay people are not allowed to date?
  6. Maybe we could just all acknowledge that for some people the historical accuracy of the accounts is not relevant to its spiritual message to them and then we could focus on the former as the OP is asking? Really, if the historical provenance is irrelevant why bother objecting to questions about it? Okay, so you don't care about Q or that Mark was the first Gospel to survive or that Mathew and Luke used Mark extensively and freely altered its order and wording or that Mark 16:9-20 probably is not original and was probably added much later on by scribes attempting to harmonize it with the other gospels. The message is the same for you, but for some of us, these are interesting questions that help explain Jesus's ministry and life.
  7. JarMan, This upcoming publication might be of interest to you. The Bible to Book of Mormon Comparative, vol. 1 (1 Nephi–Mosiah). Dan Wees From the description in the link.
  8. So much here that is ambiguous and perhaps much of that is my fault. By supernatural I meant claims of God's involvement in the production of the text, feel free to use what ever term you want to describe that. Such a claim should, in my view, be given less weight than ones that provide a secular (for lack of a better term) explanation without the need to invoke divine assistance. Also perhaps we need to define more clearly which claim of Gee we are talking about. My focus was on the 1842 Nauvoo timeline in relation to the GAEL As far as I know the timeline question is critical to why/how the GAEL was produced. If I understand Dr. Gee correctly, it is important for the entire current text of the Book of Abraham (and more) to be finished before the GAEL so the GAEL can be explained as a reverse translation project. Is that not so?
  9. I believe the 1833 edition is the one brought back by Cowdery from New York. Were the other two you listed also used and or owned by Joseph? And we should not forget the Stuart and Gibbs Hebrew Grammar/Lexicons. They were also in use at the time by Joseph and others.. The Seixas books are also available as "Modern Reproductions" for a very cheap price at Amazon and elsewhere. I picked up a modern repo version of the 1st Seixas book your list the other day. And I have originals of the Stuart Lexicon (from 1838) and Gibb's Lexicon (from 1832) though I have both of them loaned out to a person doing research on them. In the thread I linked, Bill responded to Chris Smith by asking: Chris immediately replied: Bill responds: Then Chris: For anyone not invested in a supernatural explanation of how Joseph produced the text, Chris Smith's explanation of the evolution of Shinehah is clearly more parsimonious. In my view, reasonable contemporary explanations for how Joseph produced texts should be heavily favored over those that required divine assistance especially when asserting that scholarship is being used. I am sure Dr Gee is quite competent in his field but when it comes to textual and historical questions, I believe Dr Gee's timeline theories have been more that adequately responded to by those more qualified in the appropriate fields like Jensen, Hauglid, Vogel, Smith, and others. The later part of the Book of Abraham was definitely produced in Nauvoo. When Matt Grey publishes his work on the Hebrew lexicon(s) influence in the Book of Abraham, I think that will be additional evidence of a Nauvoo timeline. Unfortunately we will have to wait a few months for that. On edit.To fix quotes.
  10. Hmm so we see JS using it in 1835 as "printing house" and I believe also "Kirtland" Nothing to do with "sun" there.Then "later on as part of the phrase Olah[a] Shinehah, allegedly the name of the plains near Adam-Ondi-Ahman." Nor there. "The first time Shinehah is assigned an English meaning is Abr. 3:13, where it is said to refer to the sun." So what happened between early 1835 and 1842 when Abr 3:13 is produced? Maybe we should be looking at Seixas lexicon instead of ancient Egyptian for a more likely explanation. Chris Smith post on this.
  11. Shinehah has the word shine in it too so obviously it is related to sunshine.
  12. For me, such a historical view is easily the primary reason we currently have a patriarchy.
  13. My wish list? 1. Full participation at all levels for women and GLBTQ including allowing women to hold the priesthood. 2. Full transparency for finances and membership numbers. 3. Move the WoW back to the level of good advice or change it to actually cover things that are detrimental and allow the use of those things that are not. 4. Tithing amount that is based on net gain. 5. Emeritus status for all GA's at age 75, including the apostles and the prophet. 6. Figure out a way to make church meetings more interesting and more culturally relevant. Maybe allow music from a wider variety of sources? 7. The focus on missions to be on service not proselytizing. Let's have your youth spend two years building schools, hospitals, churches, and infrastructure where needed. On Edit. Oh and bring back road shows, church wide athletic competitions (or at least regional wide) and Scouting.
  14. If we are considering time frames in millions of year here, I think a better term would be guarding women, similar to how dominant male lions in the animal kingdom guard their pride from other males. So I guess if you think women still belong in harems, one could justify "protecting" them based on evolution.
  15. I don't know about other men but I think viewing one's spouse as a "reward" is very demeaning.
×
×
  • Create New...