Jump to content

churchistrue

Members
  • Content count

    418
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

273 Excellent

About churchistrue

  • Rank
    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

890 profile views
  1. churchistrue

    Home/Visiting Teaching to be discontinued

    Is this a bad thing? I see it as a good trend. If revelation is not seen as grand and mysterious, it's more likely we should expect more of it.
  2. churchistrue

    Home/Visiting Teaching to be discontinued

    What do you guys think of this being called a revelation? And do you think Pres. Nelson in his talk Sunday is intentionally trying to demystify the concept of revelation and make us expect it to happen more regularly and call somewhat ordinary changes "revelations"? Do you see this as a "water down" of the word revelation? Is that a good or bad thing? http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/russell-m-nelson-revelation-for-the-church-revelation-for-our-lives/
  3. I agree with this criticism. It should be a little more clear what's allowed and what's not. But once they tell you you crossed the line, I guess that removes the uncertainty. It would be better if there was more consistency across the Church and the "leadership roulette" thing was removed. Correlation isn't always good but sometimes it's necessary.
  4. Then you leave? Or you take that action knowing excommunication is possible? I mean what do you do in any organization if you want change and action within the allowable framework doesn't get it done?
  5. OK. And every person must decide if they can live with that, or if they can work for change within the allowable framework, or if they can't and they feel compelled to coerce the Church, campaign against the Church, harshly criticize in a way that embarrasses the Church and designed to force action and to encourage people to leave. The Church might excommunicate you if you choose the latter approach. You could be right or wrong, but that's not allowed.
  6. I think it's bad form to judge others especially to level of recommending excommunication. But if you were going to make a small list of people who claim to be LDS and then go about attacking and opposing the Church online, based on what I see, Sam would be on that list. Some of his objectives have overlap with some of the things I hope for the Church. But his tactics seem to be crossing a line for what I think is proper for faithful LDS. Just my opinion...
  7. Does she seem like she's lying to you? Fact after fact has been corroborated. Even that she's naming Asay I think tells something. He's the one that would have been assigned to her, based on his personal knowledge of Bishop and the situation at the MTC. And he's the one that she's claiming to have met with. Also, the Church's answer was not that they were never told, only that "no record exists". Carefully worded. I think there's very, very solid reason to believe she talked to Asay.
  8. churchistrue

    Book of Mormon Theology

    I'd guess his evaluation was on Mormon teachings in general, not specifically the Book of Mormon, which is obviously a very different thing.
  9. churchistrue

    Book of Mormon Theology

    I don't think the BOM is precise enough on salvation, grace, and depravity of man to make this level of distinction. Although, generally the BOM is more Arminian than Calvin.
  10. churchistrue

    Where did the Book of Mormon come from?

    Agree. I don't believe in historicity of those things. But I don't take that position lightly, like it doesn't matter. I acknowledge it requires a completely different paradigm on a lot of important LDS views.
  11. churchistrue

    Fields Roper Book of Mormon Wordprint Study

    I strongly agree with clarkgoble here. The theories and interest I had in BOM wordprint studies I started developing 20 years ago, and I thought they would show whether or not the book is "true" or not, ie multiple unique voices = true, lacking in that = not true. But over time, as I've understood better what would be involved in a translation process and especially if you give any deference to the loose translation theories that explain the KJV correlation and various anachronisms, then I think you understand it's not likely to find any unique, multiple voices even if it is ancient. Even the Skousen-Carmack research is implying some sort of loose translation. So, there is a dictation. But it's not of an academically careful word for word translation. I still think wordprint study will give clues to its creation, especially the two trends I've identified.
  12. churchistrue

    Fields Roper Book of Mormon Wordprint Study

    Of course.
  13. churchistrue

    Fields Roper Book of Mormon Wordprint Study

    That may be the case, but whatever was being dictated, it wasn't an ancient source with multiple authors.
  14. churchistrue

    Fields Roper Book of Mormon Wordprint Study

    I agree with you that proof that the voices from the BOM that you think should be distinct, such as Moroni vs Nephi, it is found through wordprint study that they are not unique, or not unique enough to suggest separate authorship, I agree that is not proof the BOM is wrong or is a fraud. I think wordprint studies are important and valuable. My prediction is that over time as word print studies get better, the faithful position will move to the the "unique voices aren't preserved through translation" position.
×