John P. Pratt

[jmackley]

John P Pratt is well respected author who has been published in the Ensign and Meridian Magazine. He has some great insights on gospel dating and chronology thanks to his interest and professional background in astronomy*.

This has led him to to some scriptural insights. For example, he has interesting information on the identity of the "seven angels" in the Doctrine & Covenants 88:92-107, which he identifies as follows:

1. Uriel/Peter = 1st Trump: First fruits of Christ are resurrected (Celestial resurrection)
2. Raguel/Moses = 2nd Trump: Resurrection of those redeemed from spirit prison (Terrestrial resurrection)
3. Sariel/Abel = 3rd Trump: Those of Telestial kingdom judged but not yet resurrected
4. Raphael/Enoch = 4th Trump: Sons of perdition judged but not yet resurrected
5. Phanuel/Joseph Smith = 5th Trump: Every knee shall bow and every tongue confess
6. Gabriel/Noah = 6th Trump: Declaration that the evil in the world is defeated
7. Michael/Adam = 7th Trump: Saints are crowned in glory with Christ

His website contains a large collection of his scholarly articles - a very good study and research resource. He also has published a book which I have read - and highly recommend. Fortunately the majority of his articles can be found online at johnpratt.com and/or meridian magazine.

- Jay Mackley

theholyscriptures.info

*John P Pratt has a Ph.D. degree in astronomy and is a senior scientific analyst with the Eyring Research Institute.

[Joseph Antley]

How does a degree in astronomy offer insights into the identifies of the seven angels?

[alter idem]

I found John Pratt's site years ago, it is very fascinating.

[alter idem]

How does a degree in astronomy offer insights into the identifies of the seven angels?

Since we were just discussing this on Justdreamin's thread; Just to let you know, I did not ignore your post...I read it, but any response I made would have been catty.

Which explains why I do not respond every time I am inclined to.

[mfbukowski]

How does a degree in astronomy offer insights into the identifies of the seven angels?

He got on his big telescope and took their pictures. They had missionary nametags on.

[The_Monk]

I'm sure Pratt is a very nice guy and a faithful Mormon and we'd get along famously at a party. But I think his research borders on really really really nutty.

Uranus testifies of Christ. Seriously.

[jmackley]

How does a degree in astronomy offer insights into the identifies of the seven angels?

Much of Pratt's unique research revolves around his ability to calculate dates of various ancient calendars and astronomical time periods and then correlate that information to the scriptures. Pratt believes our solar systems is designed as basically a big time piece and that God has planned many events, like the birth and death of Christ, the restoration of the Priesthood, and the establishment of the Church by this timepiece. Pratt's research is not to predict the future but rather to see in past events a witness of Gods hand by their timing and execution.

As far as the seven angels are concerned, Pratt uses scriptural based logic but he also has an article on the roles of the seven angels that fit into the original Enochian symbolism of the constellations.

Pratt argues that all Latter-day Saints and serious students of the scriptures need a basic understanding of astronomical principles and history. For example, when Christ is referred to as the bright and morning star, what does that mean? Pratt answers those kinds of questions and sometimes the answers are significant.

- Jay Mackley

[Cold Steel]

I welcome such speculations and insights. We don't have to accept them, but they give us something to think about. If he starts holding study groups in his basements, publishing pamphlets and declaring himself the one mighty and strong, then we'd need to go by and have a little "chat" with him.

[jmackley]

I'm sure Pratt is a very nice guy and a faithful Mormon and we'd get along famously at a party. But I think his research borders on really really really nutty.

Uranus testifies of Christ. Seriously.

I could not claim to understand his research on Uranus enough to form a judgment. It's one of his more obtuse articles for sure. However I take scriptures like the following seriously:

... and all things denote there is a God; yea, even the earth, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form do witness that there is a Supreme Creator. (Book of Mormon | Alma 30:44)

so I suggest an open mind. Seriously.

A more impressive article on divine solar system design is this one.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I like Dr. Pratt. I have used some of his material on this very board. Mainly when it comes to science and what it can and cannot do. For the most part I find his views quite insightful. And yeah his analisys of "Chronos" was really wierd. I had a really hard time following it.

[The_Monk]

I could not claim to understand his research on Uranus enough to form a judgment. It's one of his more obtuse articles for sure. However I take scriptures like the following seriously:

... and all things denote there is a God; yea, even the earth, and all things that are upon the face of it, yea, and its motion, yea, and also all the planets which move in their regular form do witness that there is a Supreme Creator. (Book of Mormon | Alma 30:44)

so I suggest an open mind. Seriously.

A more impressive article on divine solar system design is this one.

Sorry, I've read much of his "research" (i.e. postings on Meridian Magazine) and I find it completely lacking in nearly all regards, let alone "impressive." By all means, keep publishing it, but I find little value in it, his methods questionable and his assumptions fundamentalist. I'd lump it in with Elder Holland's description of theological Twinkies.

[ERayR]

Much of Pratt's unique research revolves around his ability to calculate dates of various ancient calendars and astronomical time periods and then correlate that information to the scriptures. Pratt believes our solar systems is designed as basically a big time piece and that God has planned many events, like the birth and death of Christ, the restoration of the Priesthood, and the establishment of the Church by this timepiece. Pratt's research is not to predict the future but rather to see in past events a witness of Gods hand by their timing and execution.

As far as the seven angels are concerned, Pratt uses scriptural based logic but he also has an article on the roles of the seven angels that fit into the original Enochian symbolism of the constellations.

Pratt argues that all Latter-day Saints and serious students of the scriptures need a basic understanding of astronomical principles and history. For example, when Christ is referred to as the bright and morning star, what does that mean? Pratt answers those kinds of questions and sometimes the answers are significant.

- Jay Mackley

Really all that Latter-day Saints really need is the testimony that comes with personal revelation. All else is nice, helpful and faith inspiring but it is not necessary. That said, I would encourage anyone to do as the D & C teaches and learn out of the best books of things in on and above the earth. Of governments, etc.

[volgadon]

I don't think one needs to know very much about astronomy in order to appreciate what the bright and morniing star means, I certainly am no astronomer.

[cinepro]

John P Pratt is well respected author who has been published in the Ensign and Meridian Magazine.

He has some really interesting articles on Astronomy, but when he ventures into the relationship between science and religion, it starts to get a little hazy:

What is evolution if not a total rewrite of the history of the earth? The history in the Book of Genesis has been deemed plausible from Abraham onward. That is, he was a real person, who is the father of many modern nations. But any talk of Noah and a worldwide Deluge as described in the Bible is bound to bring riotous laughter from the "educated." And any thought that the Biblical Adam was a real human being is discounted even by many Christian religions.

http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/lds/meridian/2007/blindness.html

An LDS scientist who still supports the worldwide flood? A man after my own heart...

Moreover, what began as simply a chronological exercise to determine the date of the Great Deluge resulted in much more. At first there was no thought of extending the discussion into the realm of asking whether or not the Flood was truly worldwide. The surprising result was that the Flood is so closely tied to the baptism of Jesus Christ that there seems to be no escaping the comparison of the Flood to the baptism of the earth. Thus, it may be time for us to rethink any arguments we may have entertained about a localized Flood, and also of civilizations which we assume existed without interruption in the year 2343 BC, when the fountains of the great deep erupted, and "the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished" (2 Peter 3:6).

The Great Flood

But he's definitely a little..."conservative" when it comes to social issues...

Of course, abortion is only one of many problems which has probably been exacerbated by false science. Murders have become so common that most are no longer newsworthy. Many people do not consider adultery to be a sin and divorce is now merely another question of freedom of choice. Similarly, the sin of fornication is now accepted as normal sexual maturing. "Living together" is seen by many as a logical preparation for marriage, perhaps even temple marriage. Do our youth know that adultery, incest, homosexuality, and bestiality were all punishable by death when the Ten Commandments were given? (Lev. 20:10-16).

Has Satan Hijacked Science?

(Emphasis added)

[mfbukowski]

Actually I think this all raises some interesting questions about methodology.

This guy reminds me a lot of Cleon Skousen. Speaks very authoritatively about everything, with very little of what we here would call "evidence".

But yet, we accept all we believe on faith anyway.

So what's wrong with this stuff? How do we distinguish this as "nutty" and our favorite scholars here as "not nutty"?

Certainly peer review is one of the issues, but is it the only one?

Is there anyone else in this guy's field who gives him any credibility?

And why should that be a criterion? Is anything "true" or "not true" just because "the establishment" says it is or is not??

Is there no place for speculation as the "matter unorganized" for real research?

[mfbukowski]

Interesting that you ridicule him for putting forth some of the same views about the flood which you have espoused.

Can it be that we have finally caught your true self?

[mfbukowski]

Sorry, I've read much of his "research" (i.e. postings on Meridian Magazine) and I find it completely lacking in nearly all regards, let alone "impressive." By all means, keep publishing it,...

Why?

[cinepro]

Interesting that you ridicule him for putting forth some of the same views about the flood which you have espoused.

The "ridicule" was over the use of the words "respected author" and "Meridian Magazine" and "Ensign" in the same sentence. (I'm not saying that no one who publishes in the Ensign is a notable scholar or "great author"; obviously many luminaries such as John Sorenson and Daniel Petersen have published in the Ensign and Meridian. But they would probably cite their other, more rigorous publications as evidence of their esteem, as should have been done in the OP.)

Can it be that we have finally caught your true self?

Based on your understanding of my comment above, I wouldn't count on it.

[mfbukowski]

Based on your understanding of my comment above, I wouldn't count on it.

I am not so sure.

Ya gotta be quick around here. I caught it before it got edited

[Larrin]

It appears that some of his ideas/articles use less than spectactular scholarship, but then so do most of my ideas. Some of his articles are interesting and/or thought provoking. For ironclad arguments perhaps you should look somewhere else.

[alter idem]

He got on his big telescope and took their pictures. They had missionary nametags on.

Okay, that was funny.

[alter idem]

I like his writings. I'm not sure I agree with many of his conclusions, but he does make me think deeply on some things I would not have otherwise thought about. I like that and I think scholars like that among the saints are worthwhile.

[jmackley]

Really all that Latter-day Saints really need is the testimony that comes with personal revelation. All else is nice, helpful and faith inspiring but it is not necessary. That said, I would encourage anyone to do as the D & C teaches and learn out of the best books of things in on and above the earth. Of governments, etc.

Right. I referred only to "serious students of the scriptures". I think we're actually in agreement.

[mfbukowski]

Okay, that was funny.

My wife sometimes tells me I am funny, but then I tell here that looks aren't everything.

[alter idem]

My wife sometimes tells me I am funny, but then I tell here that looks aren't everything.