Jump to content

Navidad

Members
  • Content Count

    639
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

310 Excellent

About Navidad

  • Rank
    Seasoned Member: Separates Light & Dark

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Many tribes in the US came originally from the Mexico region? Do you mean as currently bordered? I would love to read some secular sources on this. I live in a buffer area between Puebloan and MesoAmerican cultures. I am not challenging you, but I attend conferences quite often here in Mexico on the origins of the indigenous peoples here and in the US. Which tribes in the US came originally from Mexico as we know it today? Thanks.
  2. Thanks for your always thoughtful replies. I won’t get into a debate with you about this because as we both know, that won’t change anyone’s mind, and I think too much of you to even suggest anything I say might do that. I will assure you that I hold a very high regard for the Bible and what it plainly states and at times, isn't quite so clear. I simply do not read in it the concept of a great apostasy that you do, except for perhaps two exceptions: I Tim 4:1 Paul uses the indefinite pronoun tines to imply that in the later times “some” will fall away. Tines implies that someones, certain ones, some, will fall away at some time in the future. There are other words he could and would have used if he were referring to most folks, all folks, or that the majority of folks would fall away. I don’t believe we know which or when were the later (not latter) times to which he refers, the Greek again refers to some time “after now.” There is no specificity in the language used. Others believe that I Tim 4:1 is directly tied into II Thess 2: 3,4. If this is true, which I doubt, then his use of later times refers to the time just before the rapture (the return) of Christ prior to the tribulation period and millennial reign. This is the ultimate latter times when the antichrist will be revealed and set himself up in direct opposition to God. This time has not yet come. Bottom line, we don’t know when the latter day in this construct will happen. I am 70 and have heard it was around the corner since I was a boy. In Gospel Doctrine Class the other day someone referred to the LDS teaching that right now we are in the last generation that will live prior to the return of Christ. There is no way we could possibly know that (whether Saint or Baptist). Folks have been saying that for a thousand years. It appears that Paul in II Thess. Is referring to the very latter days and a major apostasy either just before or even after the rapture of the Saints. He even uses the definite article in front of the word apostasy, implying this one is thee apostasy, not a partial apostasy. This cannot be the one referred to by the Saints. This certainly hasn’t occurred yet, nor had it occurred by the early 19th century. I say I don’t connect the two scriptures because the second is a big apostasy and the first is one in which some folks (tines) were or are involved. This was evidently happening in the early church and has happened to some groups ever since, but was never more than “some,” just as Paul predicted. I am not really sure of LDS eschatology to totally understand what happens after the literal physical return of Christ to earth. Most Mennonites are amillenial; I am premillennial. That means I am a rapture, tribulation (apostasy), and literal thousand-year reign (in that order) kind of a guy. That view may both share commonality and differ from LDS eschatology. So the views I have expressed about the apostasy don’t go counter to the Bible as I understand, interpret, and believe it. Of course, hermeneutics is a discipline which when used correctly leads to widely-divergent views. I respect that and I respect you.
  3. Hi amigo ---- As a religious group within the Christian tradition, I do believe that members of the Church of Jesus Christ are prone to elitism. Once one acknowledges he or she is the only - then elitism is bound to follow. Then, assuming the sociological principle that faithful members of any group tend to display many of the dominant characteristics of the group, it is easy to see why a) one doesn't see it in others when most of those one associates with share the same identity; and b) one mirrors the dominant characteristics of the group with which one identifies. I highly recommend the book "The Sin of Certainty: Why God Desires our Trust more than our "Correct" Beliefs" by scholar and theologian Peter Enns. He is a controversial guy (why I like him) and always makes me think (why I like him). This is a powerful book. Elijah the prophet faced the same kind of identity issue when he complained to God in I Kings 19:10 that "I, even I only, am left; and they seek my life, to take it away." A few verses later, God reminded him that "I have left me seven thousand in Israel" who had not bowed the knees to, nor kissed the face of Baal. How about we all join hands together and stand for the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Now that would be something to trumpet!
  4. Diet Dr. Pepper is a heavenly, err.....celestial, err.....amazing drink. I have one every day whether I need it or not. Drinking Diet Dr. Pepper is not an addiction; it is a delight! Especially if you went to graduate school and seminary in Texas!
  5. I think your post exactly reflects words of wisdom! Good job!
  6. I couldn't help as I read this post but think that what you describe is in some very similar ways what the Mormon faith has done to non-LDS Christians with the mythology of the total or at least great apostasy. Of course not every one of your eight points applies, but there are many similarities. Perhaps most common is the extreme nature of the account that has greatly offended non-LDS Christians over the past 180 years. Proclaiming that the Father and Son affirm that all other Christian faiths are an abomination is somehow vaguely familiar to what you describe in your eight points. Calling all the faith works of every other Christian faith the works of men, of the devil, describing them as blasphemous, calling all non-LDS Christians "so called Christians," claiming that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true and living church sounds strikingly like your eight points, just said in a different way against a different people group and for the purpose of crafting a careful separation from "the other."
  7. Somewhere, years ago I read in a text by a faithful Mormon that 21% of the text of the BOM is made up of quotes (exact, or loose) from the Bible and that Isaiah is the book most widely quoted. Do you all confirm either, or both of those points? I don't have a reference for my remembrance - it just sticks in my mind as something I have read.
  8. Hi Clark: Thanks for the reply. I don't quite understand your third sentence. I am not nit-picking, I just want very much to understand your point. I grew up in a world of both orthodoxy and orthopraxy. I think the leaders would have said orthodoxy was more important, but they certainly spent more preaching time on orthopraxy! I think this is a very interesting distinction; it gives me a lot to think about. I just got a sample of a book on Kindle that aims to dig deeply into the theological components of Narnia, Middle Earth, and Hogwarts. It is by a Presbyterian minister! My wife and I read chapters from Narnia to our son every evening. I loved the insights; he loved the stories. I think the author left out the hundred acre woods of Pooh. That doesn't surprise me. Milne wasn't much interested in theology.
  9. I hope it is ok for me to ask one basic question from a perspective that is important for me. In this period of the 21st century, what is necessary for a faithful Saint to believe about the Book of Mormon? I see nothing in the baptismal or temple recommend interviews about the Book of Mormon, its historicity, etc. For that matter neither is there any general statement about scripture in either interview. No requirements about the Bible, POGP, or D&C. As an aside, maybe someone would also help me with an understanding of what it means to "sustain" in an LDS construct? Not trying to hijack the thread - just curious about the "sustain" part. Thanks
  10. Hi Calm: I don't know what I meant by "official." I guess I should have said "credible" LDS sources - like all of you . . . err. . . . some of you! Ha! I will look at your links thanks so much. It appears your links are all in response to a study in 2008 by different authors than in the work presented on the website to which I linked. It seems the episodes in this website refer to later research by additional and/or different scholars. Again, I am not advocating, just pointing out the difference in the work on this website from that reviewed in your links. This work clearly acknowledges Joseph Smith as a potential author of the BOM.
  11. There are two websites that go by the name MormonLeaks; MormonLeaks.io and MormonLeaks.com. The first seems intent on releasing stuff to embarrass the Church. I am not, repeat - am not referring to that site in this post. There is another site that is never referenced in this thread. It took me several hours, but I read the entire site and found it very interesting. It details the content analysis work of Criddle, Uyleman, and Booth. I know nothing about any of them. I am not advocating or defending their work in any way. I simply found it very interesting and am wondering if it has all been debunked? Here is the link to their website: https://mormonleaks.com/#text_uv79ezg It seems to seek to answer the question oft-asked on this thread: who, if anyone were the middle men? Since no one has mentioned it I assume this work has been discredited. I find it interesting and would like to know your thoughts about it. Under their Methodology, they indicate, "The narrative presented here is a naturalistic perspective that, to the best of our knowledge, is consistent with existing historical and textual evidence. Our aim is to create an account that integrates as much evidence as possible into a narrative with explanatory and predictive power. While we are not aware of errors of fact, we recognize that errors are possible, and we welcome corrections. We also anticipate that new evidence will come to light. Corrections and additional information may require fine-tuning of the narrative or even significant changes. We reserve the right to do so." That sounds fair. The episode format/style keeps the reader's interest. The content analysis/authorship work seems impressive. Do any of you know these folks? What is their intent/purpose? What think ye all? Thanks.
  12. Isn't this all a moot point since I can't find anything in the Baptismal questionnaire or in the missionary's teaching manual about baptism that requires a belief in the historicity of the BOM to be baptized in the LDS church? Is it not also the case that many current important beliefs (even if I have called them non-essential?) in the LDS faith are not found in the BOM, but in the D&C or Pearl of Great Price? Shouldn't we be questioning their historicity and validity? I understand the theory of Moroni's challenge in Moroni 10, but don't understand why it is so important to believe (in the 21st century) that the BOM is true when it contains so little of the doctrinal essence of current LDS theology? Of course most of these type of beliefs in pre-existent spirits, three levels of heaven, exaltation, that the LDS Church is the only true and living church, etc. are also not on the baptism questionnaire. Am I missing something, or is this BOM debate just an intellectually stimulating challenge for most of you? Except for one question about Joseph Smith's restoration of the church and the current Prophet, the baptism questionnaire and teaching could be taken from any church's requirement for baptism? Every group has its own word of wisdom, emphasis on tithing, etc.? Sometimes I think I am missing something? The BOM doesn't necessarily seem anachronistic to the time it was written as much as it is today in the real world of Mormon doctrine? Notice that is a question not a statement.
  13. I hate it when that happens! Let me know if you get an answer about the draft thing? At least three or four times I have lost things I worked an hour on. Now I write my replies in Word and cut and paste!
  14. If a bishop marries someone in the chapel prior to being sealed in the temple, is that considered a "civil service" as well? Doesn't that happen sometimes now? Here in Mexico folks have to be married in front of a civil magistrate-type and then they go to the temple.
×
×
  • Create New...