Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,539 Excellent


About Gray

  • Rank
    Creates Beasts Of The Earth

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

2,711 profile views
  1. Yes, exactly. Those kinds of caparisons are extremely strained, and have been largely rejected. Comparisons to Canaanite traditions are, I think, even more strained.
  2. Much appreciated, thank you
  3. I don't think I'm wrong, but please feel free to cite specific scholarship to the contrary. Nevo seems to have already done so.
  4. I don't think I'm misinformed Robert, although of course I'm as fallible as the next person. Are you saying that Jesus wasn't thoroughly Jewish? Are you claiming that Mormonism IS thoroughly Jewish? Despite the fact that it rejects the law of Moses, teaches feudalistic penal substitution atonement theory, teaches eternal salvation based on faith in Jesus, and so forth? None of those things were part of Jesus' program. The fact that you keep trying to connect critical scholarship with atheism tells me you don't really grasp what critical scholarship is. Am I wrong? Are you not attempting to associate the two somehow? When those in authority teach folklore, it becomes doctrine. Scholars can tell you what Mormonism was, but leaders define what Mormonism is, at least for the institutional church. That's almost a metaphor for the the larger discussion we're having now. Your personal Mormonism may vary.
  5. The connections are thin enough that you can make them between any two religious traditions you choose. At this point we're talking about Joseph Campbell level archetypes. Christianity simply did not exist 600, 500 or 200 years before Jesus. Christianity didn't exist in Jesus' lifetime, either. There is certainly an evolutionary chain you can follow back before the advent of Christianity, where certain concepts start to evolve (resurrection of the dead, God/Satan dualism, etc). But that's just the point. These concepts gradually evolved, making their appearance in the BOM outside of time and place very jarring.
  6. #WalkAway is a fake movement fueled by Russian bots in an attempt to sow discord.
  7. Yeah, but missionaries do a lot of activities that are stealth missionary work. Our go-to was English lessons.
  8. Gray

    Free Harvard Courses on Religion

    Historical Jesus course from Stanford: https://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/historical-jesus/id384233911?mt=10
  9. I've watched a couple of debates with James White. He exults in vulgar fundamentalism.
  10. Isn't that the hope of every missionary discussion?
  11. Of course. But the earliest teachings of the Jesus movement have little to do with Mormon theology. Or mainstream Christian theology. That is precisely because Jesus was so thoroughly Jewish. The next few decades of Christian develop don't line up well with Mormon theology either. Yes, but what does that have to do with critical scholarship? It's certainly not consonant with the fundamentals of Mormonism. But who drives normative Mormon theology, if not its modern leaders? Has Mormon naturalism become an outdated form of Mormon fundamentalism? (I say that as a naturalist). Maybe a topic for another thread. Indeed.
  12. That's a really thin connection. That holds true for any number of Axial age theologies, including Greek theology. There is no equivalence in Christianity with ritual impurity. The closest modern analog I can think of is cooties. Again, these are very thin connections, similar to the types of connections people used to make with Jesus and Egyptian mythology to try to demonstrate that Jesus was an invented figure.
  13. Thank you for clarifying. Of course this doesn't solve the issue of first century and later normative Christian/Mormon theology in the BOM. Yes, atonement is reconciliation. But it's not reconciliation through suffering of an innocent victim, as the Christians came to believe. At least it's not in Jewish thought. You're trying to smuggle in Christian concepts into Judaism under the cover of some shared terminology.
  14. I think it's safe to say that pre-exhilic Jewish theology would be even further from the Christianity of the BOM than late second temple Judaism, which gave birth to Christianity. The further back you go in Judaism, the more it starts to resemble the religious beliefs and practices of Canaanites and other neighboring groups, which don't remotely resemble BOM Christianity.
  15. What do you mean by primitive Christianity? Do you actually mean Judaism, or something else? What does atheism have to do with critical scholarship? Are you trying to associate the two somehow? Also a part of normative modern Mormonism, although it's correct to say it's not congruent with some of Mormonism's founding theology. https://www.lds.org/search?lang=eng&query=supernatural Why not? The value of either is entirely subjective. As someone who is a naturalist in fact and not just in theory, I've had spiritual insights myself recently, and I find them to be very meaningful. I've never been prone to visions, but I would think the principle would be similar. A vision is an entirely subjective experience, usually with a strong emotional component. They can be life changing and transforming, and are of value regardless of the source.