Noah's Ark.....i know call me crazy.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, snowflake said:

Thank you for your response MFB, well said. 

First: Why I believe the bible to be the word of God. The more I study the Bible the more i have come to understand that it is an integrated message system from outside our time-space domain.  The old testament has hundreds of prophecies many of which have come true. How could the OT prophets know of future events? Well they were inspired by God to give us a message before the actual events took place.  Here are just a few that would give evidence for my claim. Micah 5:2 ....born in Bethlehem. Zechariah 9:9...King on a Donkey, Zechariah 11:12...betrayed for 30 pieces of silver, Zechariah 11:13 Temple, Potter..etc. Zechariah 13:6...wounds in hands, Isaiah 53:7 ...no defense..innocent, Isaiah 53:9....died with the wicked, grave with the rich, Psalm 22:16, crucified.  These are 8 of the more famous prophicies....which there are over 300 prophicies. Once you understand and do some homework this is clear evidence of inspired by (someone outside our time space domain)...God if you will.  Empirical evidence for the claims of the book (Bible). Empirical evidence and a world view that makes the most sense out of everything.....that is my main reason for trusting in the Bible. 

Second: Your explanation above is excellent... we know these books to be true..... because God told us so......this as an emotional response is spot on....well said sir! The problem I have always had with this response is that is assumes that there is no such thing as "truth" if you will.  The Mormons, Christians, and Muslims all get an emotional response that their book is correct..but if we are honest we know that all three of them have a different "God" among many other things, (and yes I am saying the LDS God is different than the Christian God) and without looking very deep we know that that simply cannot be correct, they are three very different "Gods"! So if you throw "truth" out the window as irrelevant (I know you will have a brilliant take on "truth" for me MFB) or as "everyone has their own truth"....then I guess you are fine with this as an accurate test for scripture. Oh, and also yes, God has told me that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. 

Yes the word "truth" is undefinable philosophically speaking perhaps oddly enough to you.

For 2000 years or more philosophers have TRIED - trust me- to come up with an answer to that one- many desperately seeking to define it, but none of the definitions have worked.

The best is that truth exists in "spheres" so that for example there is "scientific truth"- that the earth is billions of years old, for example, AND "religious truth" that say, the earth is 6000 years old

So in the CONTEXT of science, the age of the earth is not really subject to dispute except by people who disagree with the preponderance of the evidence, like creationists who have an "ax to grind" and are really confusing their religious beliefs with their scientific beliefs.

In a court room a jury finds the "truth" ONLY "beyond a REASONABLE doubt".  Think about that!  THAT is the most important definition humanity can come up with- LIVES depend on that definition of truth- billions of dollars- and the freedom of uncountable people are based on "the preponderance of the evidence" OR "beyond a reasonable doubt"!!

Where is "absolute truth" there??   Nowhere!

The problem is INTERPRETATION of data just like INTERPRETATION of texts- ie: the bible.  Scientists interpret data too and agree or disagree based on.... EMOTION!  There is more grant money available for THESE experiments than those, or "I like these results because......" and many times the "because" is followed by "This data shows God created the earth" OR "this data shows that God did not create the earth".

So who is deciding the "scientific" conclusion in interpreting the data??   An emotional human being ALWAYS with biases.  BIAS is inevitable, absolutely.  My school is better than your school, I don't trust this guy's data, etc etc.

How many "sola scriptura" sects are there that disagree about, say baptism?  What is the "truth" when so many disagree about biblical interpretation among "Christians"?  Calvinist or Arminian?  

Thirty Years War ring a bell??   Where's the truth among Christians all bible believers??

One faith one baptism?   It is an illusion in modern Christianity- it doesn't exist, yet all believe that THEIR interpretation is the "RIGHT ONE"

Same problem in science actually so religionists including Mormons are in good company.  Christians don't agree, Mormons don't agree, scientists don't agree and all go with "What seems best to me"

THAT is the truth about truth-  and that is a perfect sample of a circular argument. 

It is true because I say it is true. 

But I am not the only one- you only need to read the first couple of paragraphs of this article to get the drift that I am not kidding about the present understanding of "philosophical truth".  On the other hand, if you want to wade through it, it is an excellent summary of the arguments pro and con for this way of seeing "truth"

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-deflationary/

Edited April 19, 2018 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

Just you wait MB! The belief police are going to catch up with you... and then Wham! Catastrophic convulsions of thought will take place, and you will come out a new MB..  Oh, I fergot, that happened already.... gosh come to think of it, that happened to me too. The Church police must have secretly gotten us with their secret mind-ray. 

Me LIKEY THAT mind ray, but it ain't comin from the church- it be comin from da BOSS up in the sky someplace! 

[pogi]

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

scriptures. And you get to interpret them according to Moroni 10:4-5, Alma 32 et al.

If you can honestly pass a temple recommend interview in perfectly good conscience- there is no other definer of doctrine than that. 

This is a pretty famous essay by a pretty famous Mormon theologian, and the topic of defining doctrine has been explored a lot on this forum

http://www.timesandseasons.org/harchive/2005/04/is-there-any-mormon-doctrine/

And LDS.org contains this statement- as official as any I suppose

https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

The interpretation of this statement has been hotly discussed here on this board, emphasizing the "consistently published" portion, but notice that apostles "counsel together.... to establish doctrine... that is consistently proclaimed".   BUT NOTE that the "doctrine RESIDES" in the scriptures.

So let's put on our logic hats for a moment.

Prophets are not infallible, but fallible.  We must always be guided by our own testimonies and the Holy Ghost otherwise we might drink the kool aid and end up like the people of Jim Jones- and the SCRIPTURES tell us to "ask God" for answers - they do not say "Ask the prophets" for truth anywhere.   Prime Directive:  Ask God

Doctrine RESIDES in the scriptures about which we should ask whom?  God!  Joseph was prompted by James 1:5 in the first place!   "Lack wisdom? Ask God".  THEN comes Moroni 10 and Alma 32- if the word is "sweet" it is true!  God manifests the truth to you.

Who was Joseph's "prophet"?  God!  He went to the scriptures and asked God, and we must do the same or we are robots.

The church is a central repository based on Jesus Christ- and what He represents- not a scientific interpretation of the old testament and is to be interpreted by each individual as they see fit, but the church is defined more as a LIFESTYLE- orthopraxis- than anything else.

We have no magesterium, we have no catechism.   The Articles of Faith are the Wentworth letter which was essentially a press release to the neighboring Protestants about what we believe, containing no "meat" of the gospel- just nice words for Protestants so they don't think we are too weird. 

Doctrine?   It is really debatable whether or not we have anything we MUST believe except clearly what is asked in temple recommend interviews!   THAT and the baptismal interview define the beliefs we MUST have in order to be "members of the church in good standing".   Period. 

And trust me- I have and have had leadership callings, my stake president knows me well , my temple president knows me ,  and knows my beliefs,  I work in the temple weekly, and I am still here. 

They haven't thrown me out yet! 

Crazy how the Noah thread has basically merged with the topic in the standard works thread.  This is the very stuff I have been trying to find answer to over there. 

Let me ask you a couple questions to see how you approach the dilemma I am facing.  I agree with you about the scriptures.  They are our doctrine as accepted by common consent, and we do get to interpret them according to the spirit.  But what if through prayerful study you find certain passages to be the uninspired cultural beliefs of men?  Do we still have to accept them as doctrine of the church by the law of common consent?  What do you do when the spirit conflicts with covenants that we have made in upholding canonical scripture?  In some cases, the practices of the church do not match the teachings of the scriptures (our source of doctrine).  For example, our women do not keep silence at church and reserve their questions for their husbands in their homes.  So, it seems that even the church is at odds with these passages.  I have never seen the church attempt to justify their practices against the scriptures, so how are we supposed to justify that?

The articles of faith, though originally part of a press release, have been canonized.  What does that mean to you personally in practice?  Do you not feel bound by the law of common consent to uphold them as doctrine?  By being canonized , has it not become gospel doctrine that we have covenanted to uphold and obey as contained in the scriptures.  Articles of faith 8 states that we believe the Bible is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.  What if the spirit leads me to not believe that?  What if I see some of the Bible as the words of uninspired fallible men, even when translated correctly? 

What is a good approach to this dilemma? Should we remove the offending passages from our canon (like we did the lectures on faith), or simply pretend like they don't exist (like most people seem to do), or try to twist their meaning into something that they do not appear to mean?  Or something else?  Does the spirit trump covenant?

[strappinglad]

21 minutes ago, pogi said:

Should we remove the offending passages from our canon

A friend of my parents did exactly this. He gave a view on a doctrine during a group fireside. When shown in the D&C where he was in error, he tore the offending page from his book.

I wonder if Mr. Hichens , now in the spirit world, has accepted the new ' reality ' , or will he still think he is in an extended hallucination ? Then again, the longer I live, the only way I see this life as even remotely fair is if it is just a " Total Recall " esque , event.

[snowflake]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Same problem in science actually so religionists including Mormons are in good company.  Christians don't agree, Mormons don't agree, scientists don't agree and all go with "What seems best to me"

THAT is the truth about truth-  and that is a perfect sample of a circular argument. 

It is true because I say it is true. 

Basically you are saying "there is no such thing as truth".......is that a true statement?

 

[mnn727]

10 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

For those wishing to believe in a local flood, this from lds.org 

Still other people accept parts of the Flood story, acknowledging that there may have been a local, charismatic preacher, such as Noah, and a localized flood that covered only a specific area of the world, such as the region of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers or perhaps even the whole of Mesopotamia. Yet these people do not believe in a worldwide or global flood. Both of these groups—those who totally deny the historicity of Noah and the Flood and those who accept parts of the story—are persuaded in their disbelief by the way they interpret modern science. They rely upon geological considerations and theories that postulate it would be impossible for a flood to cover earth’s highest mountains, that the geologic evidence (primarily in the fields of stratigraphy and sedimentation) does not indicate a worldwide flood occurred any time during the earth’s existence.

There is a third group of people—those who accept the literal message of the Bible regarding Noah, the ark, and the Deluge. Latter-day Saints belong to this group. In spite of the world’s arguments against the historicity of the Flood, and despite the supposed lack of geologic evidence, we Latter-day Saints believe that Noah was an actual man, a prophet of God, who preached repentance and raised a voice of warning, built an ark, gathered his family and a host of animals onto the ark, and floated safely away as waters covered the entire earth. We are assured that these events actually occurred by the multiple testimonies of God’s prophets.

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1998/01/the-flood-and-the-tower-of-babel?lang=eng

When was Donald W Parry made Prophet?

Also from LDS.org: Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church.  https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

[Marginal Gains]

22 minutes ago, mnn727 said:

When was Donald W Parry made Prophet?

Also from LDS.org: Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church.  https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

When was the newsroom made Prophet?

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

Crazy how the Noah thread has basically merged with the topic in the standard works thread.  This is the very stuff I have been trying to find answer to over there. 

Let me ask you a couple questions to see how you approach the dilemma I am facing.  I agree with you about the scriptures.  They are our doctrine as accepted by common consent, and we do get to interpret them according to the spirit.  But what if through prayerful study you find certain passages to be the uninspired cultural beliefs of men?  Do we still have to accept them as doctrine of the church by the law of common consent?  What do you do when the spirit conflicts with covenants that we have made in upholding canonical scripture?  In some cases, the practices of the church do not match the teachings of the scriptures (our source of doctrine).  For example, our women do not keep silence at church and reserve their questions for their husbands in their homes.  So, it seems that even the church is at odds with these passages.  I have never seen the church attempt to justify their practices against the scriptures, so how are we supposed to justify that?

The articles of faith, though originally part of a press release, have been canonized.  What does that mean to you personally in practice?  Do you not feel bound by the law of common consent to uphold them as doctrine?  By being canonized , has it not become gospel doctrine that we have covenanted to uphold and obey as contained in the scriptures.  Articles of faith 8 states that we believe the Bible is the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.  What if the spirit leads me to not believe that?  What if I see some of the Bible as the words of uninspired fallible men, even when translated correctly? 

What is a good approach to this dilemma? Should we remove the offending passages from our canon (like we did the lectures on faith), or simply pretend like they don't exist (like most people seem to do), or try to twist their meaning into something that they do not appear to mean?  Or something else?  Does the spirit trump covenant?

I don't have much time but I will tell you what I think quickly.

I think the answer to it all is remaining non dogmatic. It seems to me that the Earth was not created in 6 days 6000 years ago. Am I absolutely positive about that? Of course not. So I accept science as a conflicting claim and know that there are conflicting claims in this world and leave it at that. When the Earth was created really is not relevant anything in my life.

I think that it is downright wrong for women not to be able to speak in church. I just know that deep inside myself, so I do not accept it. I think we have to pick and choose according to what the spirit tells us individually.

I have no problem with the Articles of Faith other than the fact they're the bare bones of the Gospel. How could you disagree with what is not in them? Joseph was against Creed's and did not intend the articles of Faith to become a Creed. There is nothing there about the temple nothing there about anything of importance. Other than the very basics. Because there is so little there there's basically nothing to disagree about.

Can my opinion if you find fault in the Bible that section fits into the not translated correctly category, since Joseph used the word translation to rewrite vest sections of the Bible without any manuscripts to go from. He was writing what he was inspired to write. I feel that my first obligation is to follow what the spirit tells me.

I could not even know that the church is true at all without that premise. The prime directive as far as I'm concerned just to follow your own testimony or you can't even know the church is true.

If that is the prime directive then it sticks across the board.

My Covenant is to follow the scriptures and so far they as they are translated correctly, we do not make covenants regarding each individual passage of scripture as to whether or not it is correct.

Dictated please excuse errors.

[clarkgoble]

19 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Sigh.

Always the dualist

What am I going to do with you?

Only dualism if you you're comparing two different things like thought and reality. In this case we're comparing flawed beliefs with beliefs of some community having done sufficient inquiry. So no dualism. Comparing like to like.

[Sevenbak]

On 4/18/2018 at 1:05 PM, Calm said:

"And the land of Jerusalem and the land of Zion shall be turned back into their own place, and the earth shall be like as it was in the days before it was divided."

As in possibly the people are given the land of their inheritance, they know who they are, their heritage, their place in God's Plan and all are of one nation as it was before competition, hate, pride split the family of man.

Or possibly everything gets moved somehow to the identical condition it was at a certain time in the past.

"Turned back into their own place"

Why this phrasing?  Why would one particular geological placement be seen as "their own place" as if the continents don't belong just as much where they are now as where they have ever been?  The crust must have always been moving if basic knowledge of how things work is accurate, why one formation would be preferred to another, not sure.

There is a sense that something must be rigid and unchanging in order to be perfect, that there is only one ideal, perfected condition for anything rather than change being perfect in its own way.

I find it difficult to believe God would have us give up the grandeur of the Alps or stunning ways of the Fjords and beauty of New Zealand and curious islands like Phuket, Thailand.  While beautiful in their own way, endless plains or even rolling hills need variety to achieve full appreciation.

Otoh, "their own place" sounds much like heritage to me...or even social relationship.

The two verses before this are instructive too.

 

22 And it shall be a voice as the ^avoice of many waters, and as the voice of a great ^bthunder, which shall ^cbreak down the mountains, and the valleys shall not be found.

23 He shall command the great deep, and it shall be driven back into the north countries, and the ^aislands shall become one land;

 

The returning of the continents at the 2nd Coming to their original state isn't going to be a gradual thing, it will be loud and swift and literal.  This isn't talking about heritage or social relationships.  Is it too hard to believe that God is capable of doing this as he says in the scriptures... 4000 some odd years ago, or reversed in the near future just like he says?

[Sevenbak]

On 4/18/2018 at 2:44 PM, The Nehor said:

The downside is that if the scripture does mean Pangea is coming back then there will be a lot less beachside property on the New Earth. This is why I already called dibs on some oceanfront land. Better hurry up and do the same before it is all gone.

Just buy your beachfront on the west coast and you'll be fine... ;-)

 

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, Sevenbak said:

Just buy your beachfront on the west coast and you'll be fine... ;-)

 

Already called dibs on Paradise Cove in California.

[Sevenbak]

On 4/18/2018 at 3:06 PM, clarkgoble said:

 A good article on the influence of Seventh-day Adventist thinkers on this matter on Joseph Fielding Smith and company is this Dialog article.

Why do you think this teaching originated with Joseph Fielding Smith? 

“The Eternal God hath declared that the great deep shall roll back into the north countries and that the land of Zion and the land of Jerusalem shall be joined together, as they were before they were divided in the days of Peleg. No wonder the mind starts at the sound of the last days!” -Joseph Smith

 

On 4/18/2018 at 3:06 PM, clarkgoble said:

 

Since Pres. Hinkley became President there's been a move away from such things...

CFR?

 

 

On 4/18/2018 at 3:06 PM, clarkgoble said:

 

although I think Pres. Nelson still believes in a young earth and a global flood.

I don't believe Pres. Nelson believes in a young earth.  He does however, teach no death before the fall.  Those are not one and the same, not at all.

 

On 4/18/2018 at 3:06 PM, clarkgoble said:

It'd be helpful if you could supply references so we know what you're talking about.

Here you go.  These are all current manuals in the curriculum.  All reference a very real and physical separation of the continents post flood as well as point to their return to their original state.

Old Testament Manual, Chapter 4:  https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testament-student-manual-genesis-2-samuel/genesis-4-11-the-patriarchs?lang=eng

Old Testament Manual, Chapter 16:  https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testament-student-manual-kings-malachi/chapter-16?lang=eng

Old Testament Manual, Chapter 18:  https://www.lds.org/manual/old-testament-student-manual-kings-malachi/chapter-18?lang=eng

New Testament Manual, Chapter 55: https://www.lds.org/manual/new-testament-student-manual/revelation/chapter-55-revelation-12-16?lang=eng

Doctrine and Covenants Student Manual, Section 133: https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-student-manual/section-133-the-lords-appendix-to-the-doctrine-and-covenants?lang=eng

 

Ensign articles:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1973/03/early-families-of-the-earth?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/new-era/1971/03/gondwanaland-what-it-means-to-latter-day-saints?lang=eng

 

Some statements from the prophets:

Joseph Smith

That it comes to open the way for Zion to rise and put on her beautiful garments and become the glory of the earth, that her land may be joined, or married (according to the known translation of Isaiah) to Jerusalem again, and they be one as they were in the days of Peleg.  ¹²

John Taylor

#1: How far the flood may have contributed, to produce the various changes, as to the division of the earth into broken fragments, islands and continents, mountains and valleys, we have not been informed; the change must have been considerable. But after the flood, in the days ofPeleg, the earth was divided.— ¹³,—a short history, to be sure, of so great an event; but still it will account for the mighty revolution, which rolled the sea from its own place in the north, and brought it to interpose between different portions of the earth, which were thus parted asunder, and moved into something near their present form; this, together with the earthquakes, revolutions, and commotions which have since taken place, have all contributed to reduce the face of the earth to its present state; while the great curses which have fallen upon different portions, because of the wickedness of men, will account for the stagnant swamps, the sunken lakes, the dead seas, and great deserts.  ¹⁴

#2: . . . after the flood, in the days of Peleg, the earth was divided.—See Genesis 10:25,—a short history, to be sure, of so great an event; but still it will account for the mighty revolution, which rolled the sea from its own place in the north, and brought it to interpose between different portions of the earth, which were thus parted asunder, and moved into something near their present form . . .” ¹⁵

Joseph Fielding Smith

#1: I have here a clipping from “Believe It Or Not” by Ripley which I cut out of the paper January 15, 1941; it is too small for you to see, but I will gladly pass it around. In this Ripley shows that you could take all the land surface of the earth, if you had the power to do so, and fit it like a jigsaw puzzle altogether again. You hang a map up on the wall and take a look at it; and if you have one you do not care much about take your scissors and clip out along the coast of South America and North America and see if you cannot fit them together with the coastline of Europe and Africa.”

 

In the restoration of all things this is going to be accomplished. I am not saying that because of any statement that is made by some scientist. I am not saying it because I have imagined such a thing, because I have looked at a map. I am saying it because the Lord Himself has said it. If you are willing for me to depart from the standard works of the Church and present to you some of the sayings that have been made by some of the leaders of the Church, I would like to read one or two things to you; at least, to show that I am not so far off the track. I have good company, anyhow. When I have the Prophet Joseph Smith and Brigham Young and Parley P. Pratt and Orson Pratt and John Taylor and others all on my side, I think I have some pretty good company, and I would rather have that company than this uncertain company that has an idea that things began way back millions, no, billions of years ago in the sea and have developed to what they are now. ¹⁶

#2: THE EARTH HAS UNDERGONE MANY CHANGES

It should also be remembered that this good earth has passed through a great many changes since the days of Eden. The Bible teaches us that in the beginning all the water was in one place. Therefore all the land must have been in one place. ¹⁷ Therewere notan Eastern and aWestern Hemisphereat the time of Adam. It is very strange, but nevertheless true, that some of the greatest events that have occurred on the face of the earth have been passed over in the Bible with the slightest mention; for example, in Genesis 10:25 , we read: And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one wasPeleg; for in his day was the earth divided.” This is a very brief statement of one of the greatest events that ever occurred on the face of this terrestrial globe, yet there is scientific evidence that this very thing happened. In the beginning the land surface was one vast continent; there came a time when it was divided, and other continents were formed and theWestern Hemisphere came into existence, but this was long after the time of Adam.

Speaking of this great event Dr. Immanuel Velikovisky, in his book, Earth in Upheaval, makes the following comment:

The theory of drifting continents, debated since the 1920’s has its starting point in the similarity of the shape of the coastlines ofBrazilandAfrica. This similarity (or better, complementation) plus some early fauna and floral affinities suggested to Professor Alfred Wegner of Cruz in the Tyrol that in the early geological age these two continents, South America and Africa, were one land mass. But since animal and vegetable affinities, could also be found in other parts of the world, Wegner conjectured that all continents and islands were once a single land mass that in various epochs divided and drifted apart. Those who do not subscribe to the theory of continental drift continue to explain the affinity of plants and animals by land bridges” or former land connections between continents and also between continents and islands. ¹⁸

#2: This, of course, has little to do with the Garden of Eden, but it does show that there have been great changes on the earth’s surface since the days of Adam. ¹⁹

#3: . . . the Eternal God hath declared that the great deep shall roll back into the north countries and that the land of Zion and the land of Jerusalem shall be joined together, as they were before they were divided in the days of Peleg.No wonder the mind starts at the sound of the last days! ²⁰

#4: THE JEWS ARE TO GATHER ATJERUSALEM

From this and other revelations in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants, we are informed that the Jews are to gather atJerusalem. On this, the American Continent, the converted Israelites and Gentiles are to gather with the Latter-Day Saints and the revelation states that those who come from among the Gentiles are to flee” untoZion. However, they are not to go out in haste,” that is to say, the Latter-day Saints are preparing the way. They are building the temples and the highways and performing the labors which are necessary for the tribes ofIsraelwhen their prophets shall speak to them and they shall receive their call to come toZion. We know very little about the lost tribes,” who they are or whence they will come. For our present needs, it is sufficient to rely on the word of the Lord concerning these tribes and of their coming, and the Lord has revealed the following:

And he shall utter his voice out ofZion, and he shall speak fromJerusalem, and his voice shall be heard among all people;

And it shall be a voice as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder, which shall break down the mountains, and the valleys shall not be found.

He shall command the great deep, and it shall be driven back into the north countries, and the islands shall become one land;

And the land of Jerusalem and the land of Zion shall be turned back into their own place, and the earth shall be like as it was in the days before it was divided. ²¹

#5: We read in Genesis that in the beginning all of the land surface was in one place as it was in the days of Peleg, ²² that the earth was divided. Some Bible commentators have concluded that this division was one concerning the migrations of the inhabitants of the earth between them, but this is not the case. While this is but a very brief statement, yet it speaks of a most important event. The dividing of the earth was not an act of division by the inhabitants of the earth by tribes and peoples, but a breaking asunder of the continents, thus dividing the land surface and creating the Eastern Hemisphere and Western Hemisphere. By looking at a wall map of the world, you will discover how the land surface along the northern and southern coast of the American Hemisphere and Europe andAfricahas the appearance of having been together at one time. Of course, there have been many changes on the earth’s surface since the beginning. We are informed by revelation that the time will come when this condition will be changed and that the land surface of the earth will come back again as it was in the beginning and all be in one place. This is definitely stated in the Doctrine and Covenants in the following words:

When the Lamb shall stand upon Mount Zion, and with him a hundred and forty-four thousand, having his Father’s name written on their foreheads.

Wherefore, prepare ye for the coming of the Bridegroom; go ye, go ye out to meet him.

For behold, he shall stand upon the mount of Olivet, and upon the mighty ocean, even the great deep, and upon the islands of the sea, and upon the land of Zion. ²³

TIME OF EARTH’S RENEWAL NOT KNOWN

Just when this great change shall come we do not know. If, however, the earth is to be restored as it was in the beginning, then all the land surface will again be in one place as it was before the days ofPeleg, when this great division was accomplished. Europe, Africa, and the islands of the sea includingAustralia,New Zealand, and other places in the Pacific must be brought back and joined together as they were in the beginning.

Before this great work will be accomplished, the prophecy in relation to the tribes ofIsraelas recorded in the Doctrine and Covenants must be fulfilled. Through the preaching of the gospel in all parts of the world, the preparatory work is being accomplished. The lost tribes” will be discovered and, as the revelation states, the lost sheep among the gentiles will flee toZionand the Jews toJerusalemas the Lord has decreed. The Redeemer will come to take his place as King of kings, and the great day of the millennial reign will be ushered in. ²⁴

When that day comes great changes shall take place upon the earth. We believe this is a day of restoration, and that the earth is to be renewed. ²⁵ In this renewal we are informed that the Lord shall command the great deep, and it shall be driven back into the north country, and the islands shall become one land; and the land of Jerusalem and the land of Zion shall be turned back into their own place, and the earth shall be like as it was in the days before it was divided.” ²⁶ The notion prevails quite generally that the dividing of the earth in the days ofPelegwas a division politically among the people, but from this word of the Lord we gain the idea that the earth itself was divided and that when Christ comes it will again be brought back to the same conditions physically as prevailed before this division took place. The sea is to be driven back into the north. The land is to be brought back as it was originally and the lands of Zion (America) andJerusalem (Palestine and all the land pertaining unto it) will be restored to their own place as they were in the beginning. The Savior will stand in the midst of his people, and shall reign over all flesh. We have discovered in our study that the wicked, or all things that are corruptible ²⁷, will be consumed and therefore will not be permitted to be on the earth when this time comes. ²⁸

RESTORATION OF THE EARTH. Joseph Smith gave this inspired summary of latter-day events: There shall be famine, and pestilence, and earthquake in divers places; and the prophets have declared that the valleys should rise; that the mountains should be laid low; that a great earthquake should be, in which the sun should become black as sack-cloth of hair, and the moon turn into blood; yea, the Eternal God hath declared that the great deep shall roll back into the north countries and that the land of Zion and the land of Jerusalem shall be joined together, as they were before they were divided in the days ofPeleg. No wonder the mind starts at the sound of the last days!” ^29 30

CIVILIAZATION BEGAN INAMERICA. Contrary to popular belief the western hemisphere is where civilization began. The Lord revealed that Adam-ondi-Ahman, a place inDaviess County,Missouri, is where Adam dwelt after he was driven out of the Garden of Eden. The scriptures say that Adam journeyed to the East of Eden and at that portion of the garden from whence he was driven the Lord placed Cherubim to prevent Adam returning. The Garden of Eden, then, must have been on the western hemisphere. It stands to reason, this being true, that the antediluvians also dwelt on this western hemisphere before the division of the earth. Just what was the nature of the land surface of the earth when Noah built hisArkmay not be definitely known, but this we know—if we accept the scriptures—that in the beginning all the land surface of the earth was in one place. The dividing of the continents did not take place until after the flood, for it was in the days ofPelegwhen the earth was divided. Some have maintained that this division had reference to the parcelling out of the land surface among the tribes and peoples as they scattered forth over the earth. This interpretation, however, cannot be maintained in the light of what is written. The Lord has promised us that in these last days in the restoration of all things the land surface shall once again be brought back to the condition in which it was before it was divided. This will come at the time of the second advent of Jesus Christ, for he has said:

And he shall utter his voice out ofZion, and he shall speak from Jerusalem, and his voice shall be heard among all people.

And it shall be a voice as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder, which shall break down the mountains, and the valleys shall not be found.

He shall command the great deep, and it shall be driven back into the north countries, and the islands shall become one land;

And the land of Jerusalem and the land of Zion shall be turned back into their own place, and the earth shall be like as it was in the days before it was divided.— ^31 32

Here the Prophet tells us that the dividing of the earth was in the days of Peleg. When Christ comes, it will be brought back again as it was before it was divided. ³³

Harold B. Lee

Some time ago I met a woman in Connecticut, an investigator, who was introduced to me by the missionary who had been teaching her the gospel. I said to her, Tell me, what was it that first attracted you to this church?”

She thought for a moment and then said, Well, I will tell you, Brother Lee. I had been raised in a sectarian church, and when I started coming to this church, there was something about your missionaries that caught my attention. When they stood up to speak, their faces seemed to shine, and that is something I had never seen in the preachers of my church.”

Do you know what that shining was? It was the power of the Holy Ghost, which our teachers are privileged to receive if they will only keep the law that our Heavenly Father has laid down as a requisite for their preparation.

A missionary told how he was cornered by an atheist who ridiculed many of the teachings of the scriptures. The atheist confronted our missionary before the congregation, an untrained, unschooled young man whom we had dared to send out without his having gone to a theological seminary for training and indoctrination in all the teachings of the gospel. Think what a chance we take in sending our missionaries out, unprepared except for the power of the Holy Ghost.

The atheist said, Why, it is preposterous for you to say that you believe in a Bible that teaches about a creation when the land was together and the water was all together.” Then he read to the missionary from the Book of Genesis, and continued, Now look at the earth. Here it is divided into many parts and oceans between. How will you explain the inconsistency in this?”

Well, the missionary did not have the answer, but he bowed his head and silently prayed, Heavenly Father, give me your Spirit to tell me what to say.” Then he raised his tear-stained face, and up above the audience, at the back of the hall, he read these words: Genesis 10:25 . In the days ofPelegthe earth was divided.” Never in the world had he ever read this scripture. He did not know it was in the Bible, but he saw it there on the wall, and he was able to respond, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, to the atheist’s question. ³⁴

 

[Sevenbak]

23 hours ago, sunstoned said:

There is no physical or scientific evidence for any of this.  Any division of the continents happened over 200 million years ago.  There is no physical evidence of a global flood, and a mountain of scientific facts that point to it never happening.  The least of which is that the written history of several nations, like Egypt remain uninterrupted through the time the flood supposedly took place.   

That's the view of some.   Other's look at massive unbroken folded layers of rock along fault lines that would have required intense heat and horizontal thrust to create.  That is not something that happens over 200 million years.

Scientists base their assumptions on current movements and measurements.  I say they are shortsighted.  When God describes the process as the "...^avoice of many waters, and as the voice of a great ^bthunder, which shall ^cbreak down the mountains, and the valleys shall not be found." 

...Then I can safely say that I refuse to pray at the alter of science.  I'll respect it, and value it's contributions, but don't accept all as truth, just because society tells me to.

 

[Sevenbak]

12 hours ago, snowflake said:

I was at the cliffs of Moher last spring (not my photo), Just amazing the layers stacked up here, no evidence of erosion between the layers......, strata layed down perfectly symmetrical by water. I'm often amazed the assumptions people make, and simply disregard obvious signs of a global flood. Then replace God's word with lies that they have been taught since pre-school. We see layered strata all over the world as evidence of a global flood. 

 

Nice pic, looks like the Cliffs of Insanity.   Inconceivable.

[Sevenbak]

13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

If this annoys you then you are really on the wrong board. A substantial number of the people here are convinced all dead bodies are going to come back to life due to a vile necromantic ritual a Jewish demigod wizard did a few millennia back.

Did you get lost on your way somewhere else and wind up here by accident?

He is kind of on to something.  Just don't tell him that:

Moses's rod acted kind of like a wand.  It even turned into a snake like some possessed horcrux.

Joseph in Egypt gazed into his precious silver cup and practiced divination.

Elisha uttered a curse against young boys and they were torn apart by bears.

Drawing lots with strange markings was a favorite method of divining God's will.

Saul consulted a Urim for guidance.

Paul cursed someone with blindness.

Jesus spat in clay and cured blindness. He changed water to wine, made dead people rise, shriveled plants he didn't like with a curse, disappeared into thin air... etc.

Peter cursed a lying woman and she died.

John said God would give a white stone with secret words written on it to believers...

And that's just a few...

 

 

Those pesky prophet and their magic... I'm totally thinking a biblical Harry Potter remake is in order...

 

Edited April 20, 2018 by Sevenbak

[mfbukowski]

3 hours ago, clarkgoble said:

Only dualism if you you're comparing two different things like thought and reality. In this case we're comparing flawed beliefs with beliefs of some community having done sufficient inquiry. So no dualism. Comparing like to like.

Thought IS reality.

How can you know anything about reality without thinking it?

Dualism. 😜

[Marginal Gains]

10 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

My Covenant is to follow the scriptures and so far they as they are translated correctly, we do not make covenants regarding each individual passage of scripture as to whether or not it is correct.

How do you decide which bits are translated correctly?

OT - what’s your workflow for dictating posts?

[mfbukowski]

5 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

How do you decide which bits are translated correctly?

OT - what’s your workflow for dictating posts?

Translated correctly?

The same criteria Joseph used.

I do not understand the sentence about workflow.

[mfbukowski]

On 4/19/2018 at 8:46 AM, MiserereNobis said:

Help me to understand this. Wouldn't the prophet and apostles count as your magisterium? What is the difference? They get to define doctrine (they make the temple recommend questions, yes?) and practices/ritual. They also decide what goes into the LDS scriptures, don't they?

And wouldn't all of the classes on Sunday and every morning for high schoolers count as your catechism? My experience at LDS Sunday services is that it is mainly all lessons. Don't those lessons come out of officially published manuals? Isn't that a catechism -- teaching people what their faith believes.

Also, it is a pet peeve of mine when people say there is no creed in the LDS church and you have the Articles of Faith which literally begin "We believe." You can't get much closer to a creed (Latin: "credo" = "I believe") than that, press release for protestants or not.

The short answer is there is no doctrine that says they create the doctrine. Adding documents which have the weight of scripture happens very rarely, but yes the 15 do have that ability.

On numerous occasions Joseph said that he wanted there to be no Creeds in Mormonism. As far as the phrase "I believe" , I probably say that 50 times a day on this board and nobody thinks it's scripture!.  it is true that we take the articles of Faith as Doctrine but they are so Elementary as to be almost useless. It's like saying we believe in breathing.

I strongly suggest you read some articles from FAIR, there is a good one by Mike Ash, which discusses this.

I will post some links as soon as I can when I get off this device.

[mfbukowski]

13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Already called dibs on Paradise Cove in California.

I think you have some competing dibs on that one.

[Sevenbak]

8 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

I think you have some competing dibs on that one.

For now, just rent something cheaper up in the foothills... then wait until the seas heave themselves beyond their bounds with all the tectonic movements, cleaning out the beach homes in the Malibu district, then swoop in and get something for pennies on the dollar...

[pogi]

32 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

The short answer is there is no doctrine that says they create the doctrine. Adding documents which have the weight of scripture happens very rarely, but yes the 15 do have that ability.

The 15 can only submit documents for approval by the general membership via the law of common consent.  They don't actually have the authority to canonize anything without our approval.  It only becomes binding when we consent to it.  The scriptures only have authority because we give them binding authority through the principles of free agency and covenant.  This helps to explain how there doesn't seem to be a magisterum in the LDS chruch.  If there is, then we are as much a part of it as the 15.  

 

 

Edited April 20, 2018 by pogi

[snowflake]

22 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Yes the word "truth" is undefinable philosophically speaking perhaps oddly enough to you.

For 2000 years or more philosophers have TRIED - trust me- to come up with an answer to that one- many desperately seeking to define it, but none of the definitions have worked.

The best is that truth exists in "spheres" so that for example there is "scientific truth"- that the earth is billions of years old, for example, AND "religious truth" that say, the earth is 6000 years old

So in the CONTEXT of science, the age of the earth is not really subject to dispute except by people who disagree with the preponderance of the evidence, like creationists who have an "ax to grind" and are really confusing their religious beliefs with their scientific beliefs.

In a court room a jury finds the "truth" ONLY "beyond a REASONABLE doubt".  Think about that!  THAT is the most important definition humanity can come up with- LIVES depend on that definition of truth- billions of dollars- and the freedom of uncountable people are based on "the preponderance of the evidence" OR "beyond a reasonable doubt"!!

Where is "absolute truth" there??   Nowhere!

The problem is INTERPRETATION of data just like INTERPRETATION of texts- ie: the bible.  Scientists interpret data too and agree or disagree based on.... EMOTION!  There is more grant money available for THESE experiments than those, or "I like these results because......" and many times the "because" is followed by "This data shows God created the earth" OR "this data shows that God did not create the earth".

So who is deciding the "scientific" conclusion in interpreting the data??   An emotional human being ALWAYS with biases.  BIAS is inevitable, absolutely.  My school is better than your school, I don't trust this guy's data, etc etc.

How many "sola scriptura" sects are there that disagree about, say baptism?  What is the "truth" when so many disagree about biblical interpretation among "Christians"?  Calvinist or Arminian?  

Thirty Years War ring a bell??   Where's the truth among Christians all bible believers??

One faith one baptism?   It is an illusion in modern Christianity- it doesn't exist, yet all believe that THEIR interpretation is the "RIGHT ONE"

Same problem in science actually so religionists including Mormons are in good company.  Christians don't agree, Mormons don't agree, scientists don't agree and all go with "What seems best to me"

THAT is the truth about truth-  and that is a perfect sample of a circular argument. 

It is true because I say it is true. 

But I am not the only one- you only need to read the first couple of paragraphs of this article to get the drift that I am not kidding about the present understanding of "philosophical truth".  On the other hand, if you want to wade through it, it is an excellent summary of the arguments pro and con for this way of seeing "truth"

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-deflationary/

Would it be fair to say "philosiphically speaking" Mormonism, Atheism, Islam and Christianity are all equally "true"?

[MiserereNobis]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

This helps to explain how there doesn't seem to be a magisterum in the LDS chruch.  If there is, then we are as much a part of it as the 15.

Yet this is not how I see it manifesting on this board at all. The apostles are called prophets and seers and faithful Mormons defer to their judgement. They are given the right to declare God's word to the whole church (I can't remember the exact phrase I've heard a few times, right of revelation? parents have it for their children, etc). It seems like you (not you personally, but LDS) want to have it both ways: no magisterium yet prophets and apostles who reveal God's will.

I still don't see what I am missing but maybe Mark's links will help clarify.

The magisterium is the ultimate teaching authority in the Catholic Church (the bishops in communion with the pope). Who has the teaching authority in the LDS church? Isn't it the apostles?