Sunday School And A Worldwide Flood (Pt.3)

[David T]

In the verses pertaining to the flood in Moses 7, it is the Lord of heaven and earth Himself who, with bitter tears, straightforwardly informs Enoch that He's going to send the floods to destroy the wicked in the flesh and consign their spirits to the spirit prison, at least until the day that missionary work is initiated in the spirit world at the time of death of Christ. If you want to explain all this away by saying that Enoch's encounter with the Lord is just a nice story, be my guest. But as for me and my house, we believe it.

 

Joseph Smith was demonstrably known to be willing to couch his modern inspired writing in a pseudepigraphal framework. IE, his United Firm revelations were first published completely re-worked as Revelations to Enoch and his United Order, with names, places, and events all substantially revised to make it take place in the the time of Enoch. Far more than the simple "code names" most seem to have thought was going on. Please see this fantastic and important paper: The Inspired Fictionalization of the 1835 United Firm Revelations.

Edited February 11, 2014 by David T

[thesometimesaint]

In the verses pertaining to the flood in Moses 7, it is the Lord of heaven and earth Himself who, with bitter tears, straightforwardly informs Enoch that He's going to send the floods to destroy the wicked in the flesh and consign their spirits to the spirit prison, at least until the day that missionary work is initiated in the spirit world at the time of death of Christ. If you want to explain all this away by saying that Enoch's encounter with the Lord is just a nice story, be my guest. But as for me and my house, we believe it.

 

All of this skepticism causes me to wonder what will be left of the miraculous aspects of the Gospel of Christ if the rationalizers finally get their way. Will we still believe in the prophesied resurrection of millions of the dead to celestial glory from the dust, in the twinkling of an eye, or will we eventually discard this belief because it's an embarrassment that doesn't square with modern science?

 

I don't find it embarrassing at all. I'm sure God has a perfectly understandable method for the Resurrection. He just hasn't told us it yet.

[teddyaware]

Teddyaware:

 

Any appeal to God is an appeal to authority, and circular argument. Let the the arguments for a Global Flood stand or fall on there own merits.

Do you yourself ever appeal to God's anointed for authority, or is the whole divine revelation thing an outmoded and obsolete principle as well?

[teddyaware]

I don't find it embarrassing at all. I'm sure God has a perfectly understandable method for the Resurrection. He just hasn't told us it yet.

... and He hasn't told you about the flood either, but you've already made up your mind.

[Gray]

Joseph Smith was demonstrably known to be willing to couch his modern inspired writing in a pseudepigraphal framework. IE, his United Firm revelations were first published completely re-worked as Revelations to Enoch and his United Order, with names, places, and events all substantially revised to make it take place in the the time of Enoch. Far more than the simple "code names" most seem to have thought was going on. Please see this fantastic and important paper: The Inspired Fictionalization of the 1835 United Firm Revelations.

 

Fascinating, I'll have to read more when I have time

[thesometimesaint]

Do you yourself ever appeal to God's anointed for authority, or is the whole divine revelation thing an outmoded and obsolete principle as well?

 

Irrelevant to this discussion.

 

Some 40% of all US scientists believe in some type of personal God. As a Saint I'm not required to accept any other religion. To me personally I'm a High Priest in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. My authority to act in Gods' name was confirmed upon me by another duly authorized High Priest in the same. I fully accept the Truth Claims of the Church. I'm not required by my faith to believe anything that is not true.

[thesometimesaint]

... and He hasn't told you about the flood either, but you've already made up your mind.

 

No not really, or at least not in ways that some understand it. I'm perfectly fine with a Prophet of God(Noah) recording what God told him, building that boat, and saving what he could from a massive albeit regional flood.

 

Ps; I fully accept Moses as a Prophet of God. However Pi is not equal to exactly three even if Moses claims it is.

Edited February 11, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[Gray]

... and He hasn't told you about the flood either, but you've already made up your mind.

 

We don't need God to tell us about the physical world. It's all right there in front of us to explore

[canard78]

No, they both mean the same thing, just that the one verse clarifies the meaning in Moses a little better. It all means the same thing- that through the seed of Enoch would come Noah and from Noah all the nations of the earth.

 

So the JST clarifies passages in the bible? Except for when it also accidentally clarifies passages in the Book of Mormon? At that point it's just an inspired commentary?

[Rob Osborn]

This thread reminds me of biblical prophecy about the scoffers who in our day disbelieve the flood and belive instead in uniformatarianism-

 

 3 ^aKnowing this first, that there shall come in the ^blast days scoffers, walking after their own ^clusts,

 4 And saying, ^aWhere is the ^bpromise of his ^ccoming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

 5 For this they willingly are ^aignorant of, that by the ^bword of God the heavens were of old, and the ^cearth standing out of the water and in the water:

 6 Whereby the world that then was, being ^aoverflowed with ^bwater, perished:

 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto ^afire against the day of judgment and ^bperdition of ungodly men. (2 Peter 3:3-7)

[Rob Osborn]

So the JST clarifies passages in the bible? Except for when it also accidentally clarifies passages in the Book of Mormon? At that point it's just an inspired commentary?

All of the scriptures relating to the promise given Enoch are in harmony. Not sure what you are getting at.

[Rob Osborn]

We don't need God to tell us about the physical world. It's all right there in front of us to explore

typical atheism.

 

Be civil please.

[emarkp]

Ps; I fully accept Moses as a Prophet of God. However Pi is not equal to exactly three even if Moses claims it is.

 

Good thing Moses didn't claim it then.

[thesometimesaint]

Good thing Moses didn't claim it then.

The cauldron mentioned in Exodus Make this tabernacle and all its furnishings exactly like the pattern I will show you.” (Exodus 25:9)

"And he [Hiram] made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one rim to the other it was round all about, and...a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about....And it was an hand breadth thick...." — First Kings, chapter 7, verses 23 and 26

[Gray]

typical atheism.

 

It has nothing to do with atheism. Why would we need God to reveal facts about the material world when we are living here now and can find out first hand?

[Gray]

This thread reminds me of biblical prophecy about the scoffers who in our day disbelieve the flood and belive instead in uniformatarianism-

 

 3 ^aKnowing this first, that there shall come in the ^blast days scoffers, walking after their own ^clusts,

 4 And saying, ^aWhere is the ^bpromise of his ^ccoming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

 5 For this they willingly are ^aignorant of, that by the ^bword of God the heavens were of old, and the ^cearth standing out of the water and in the water:

 6 Whereby the world that then was, being ^aoverflowed with ^bwater, perished:

 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto ^afire against the day of judgment and ^bperdition of ungodly men. (2 Peter 3:3-7)

 

That was less a prophesy and more an observation of current events

[thesometimesaint]

It has nothing to do with atheism. Why would we need God to reveal facts about the material world when we are living here now and can find out first hand?

 

Actually Ad Hominem attacks are part and parcel of Creationism's defenders.

SEE Wedge Document http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy

[emarkp]

The cauldron mentioned in Exodus Make this tabernacle and all its furnishings exactly like the pattern I will show you.” (Exodus 25:9)

"And he [Hiram] made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one rim to the other it was round all about, and...a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about....And it was an hand breadth thick...." — First Kings, chapter 7, verses 23 and 26

 

And how many significant figures in cubits is that?

[Flyonthewall]

This scripture is very telling for me:

9 For this, the waters of Noah unto me, for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth, so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee.

I don't remember Jesus ever placing Himself in His parables, they were always about "a generic someone".

He seems to be saying "I have sworn now as I have sworn before"...but if He has never done it before, then it seems rather ... empty.

I believe the scriptural stories are based on actual events... I understand poetic license in describing those events but they still happened.

[Skylla]

Teddy is out of the thread.

 

Skylla

[Rob Osborn]

It has nothing to do with atheism. Why would we need God to reveal facts about the material world when we are living here now and can find out first hand?

The problem with naturalism is that it must be athestic in its approach. This naturalism which is so prevailant in science has becone its own religious dogma that must chalk up deity as the supernatural or mythical. As Ken Ham said in debate its the wrong direction to tech with. We will never find ultimate truth in science without God.

[Bikeemikey]

This thread reminds me of biblical prophecy about the scoffers who in our day disbelieve the flood and belive instead in uniformatarianism-

3 ^aKnowing this first, that there shall come in the ^blast days scoffers, walking after their own ^clusts,

4 And saying, ^aWhere is the ^bpromise of his ^ccoming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

5 For this they willingly are ^aignorant of, that by the ^bword of God the heavens were of old, and the ^cearth standing out of the water and in the water:

6 Whereby the world that then was, being ^aoverflowed with ^bwater, perished:

7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto ^afire against the day of judgment and ^bperdition of ungodly men. (2 Peter 3:3-7)

You do realize that citing scriptures that support a global flood only reduces trust in scripture, right?

[cinepro]

We will never find ultimate truth in science without God.

 

Can you give an example of how a scientist might find "ultimate truth" by incorporating "God" into their theories?  What scientific questions are currently being unanswered or unsuitably answered because of this flaw in the scientific method?

[Rob Osborn]

You do realize that citing scriptures that support a global flood only reduces trust in scripture, right?

Its truly sad that with so many witnesses in scripture for a global flood coupled with obvious evidence in the rocks that man will lean on his own understanding of which he cannot test nor prove. Its almost as if there is some evil force in the world deliberately trying to get people to disbelieve in reality.

[Bikeemikey]

The problem with naturalism is that it must be athestic in its approach. This naturalism which is so prevailant in science has becone its own religious dogma that must chalk up deity as the supernatural or mythical. As Ken Ham said in debate its the wrong direction to tech with. We will never find ultimate truth in science without God.

There is nothing about naturalism that requires it to be atheistic... This is a silly proposition. All naturalism requires is that god be within the bounds if the natural order. This is totally acceptable within the mormon doctrinal realm.