Noah's Flood And "mental Gymanstics" - Local Flooders Wanted!

[ERayR]

Christianity has made belief in the historicity of the miracles the basis for the truth of the gospel. This distorts who Jesus really was, by turning him, for example at the wedding in Cana, into a kind of wine god, and coupled with the absolute lack of miracles in our own time undermines the claims of the theology of the gospels and makes it difficult or impossible for many people to convert. 

 

I do not think there is a lack of miracles in our time.  I think it that we have a lack of recognition of miracles and a refusal to acknowledge them. 

[LinuxGal]

I do not think there is a lack of miracles in our time.  I think it that we have a lack of recognition of miracles and a refusal to acknowledge them. 

 

It's a matter of defining terms correctly.  A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature.  Sometimes unlikely events occur, like my own survival of inflammatory breast cancer, but all such events remain grounded in natural laws established by firm and unalterable experience.

[ERayR]

It's a matter of defining terms correctly.  A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature.  Sometimes unlikely events occur, like my own survival of inflammatory breast cancer, but all such events remain grounded in natural laws established by firm and unalterable experience.

 

Aw I see why we differ.  I do not see a miracle as a violation of the laws of nature.  I see it as an event that can not be explained by the present understanding of those laws which we often dismiss as coincidence.

 

Definition of miracle:

 

noun

1. an effect or extraordinary event in the physical world that surpasses all known human or natural powers and is ascribed to a supernatural cause.

2. such an effect or event manifesting or considered as a work of God.

3. a wonder; marvel.

4. a wonderful or surpassing example of some quality:

    a miracle of modern acoustics.

Edited November 26, 2014 by ERayR

[thesometimesaint]

Science is the ability to make observations about our natural world/universe and accurately make predictions based on those observations. Miracles because they appeal to the supernatural are outside the world of science. That does mean that miracles don't/can't happen. Just that science has no way of making accurate predictions from them. IE; Walking on water. We are free to believe or not believe that Jesus did it. What we haven't been able to do is accurately predict us being able to do it.

[danielwoods]

I think most of Genesis is just a oral history that grew in the telling and do not consider it scripture - that's a radical view for any type of Christian, but I'm sure God wants us to use our intellect and our power of reasoning along with our faith. 

Its time for Christians of all kinds to stop the mental gymnastics trying to make physical science correlate with Biblical stories

 

What is interesting is the arrogance of those who think they know what happened in the past, when they weren't even there. The observations of those who experienced these events, recorded them and described them, as only they knew how. They didn't describe every detail to our satisfaction, which of course wasn't their purpose. Which was to relay God's message. However, even though that wasn't their purpose (extreme details), the details that they do include are accurate to their observations of those events. 

 

So, who is doing mental gymnastics to make things fit? The one who takes what was written and says it doesn't mean what it says, or the one who looks at the physical evidence and says the popular interpretation of it is probably false because it is contradicted by known observations of those who were there?

[Pinecone]

I think most of Genesis is just a oral history that grew in the telling and do not consider it scripture - that's a radical view for any type of Christian, but I'm sure God wants us to use our intellect and our power of reasoning along with our faith. 

Its time for Christians of all kinds to stop the mental gymnastics trying to make physical science correlate with Biblical stories

And what of the same account had among the Jaredites?

Ether 1:2-5

Was this an oral tradition among the Jareidtes written by Ether on the 24 gold plates of Ether found by the Nephites?

Did Mosiah, who translated them, lie? Did the Prophet Moroni who referred to them, lie?

An oral history? Really?

[thesometimesaint]

What is interesting is the arrogance of those who think they know what happened in the past, when they weren't even there. The observations of those who experienced these events, recorded them and described them, as only they knew how. They didn't describe every detail to our satisfaction, which of course wasn't their purpose. Which was to relay God's message. However, even though that wasn't their purpose (extreme details), the details that they do include are accurate to their observations of those events. 

 

So, who is doing mental gymnastics to make things fit? The one who takes what was written and says it doesn't mean what it says, or the one who looks at the physical evidence and says the popular interpretation of it is probably false because it is contradicted by known observations of those who were there?

 

You weren't  there at the birth of your mother? How do you know it happened?

[mnn727]

 

So, who is doing mental gymnastics to make things fit? The one who takes what was written and says it doesn't mean what it says, or the one who looks at the physical evidence and says the popular interpretation of it is probably false because it is contradicted by known observations of those who were there?

Known observations of those who were there? If you believe the Bible is historical and that the first 5 books were written by Moses, then tell me -- was Moses there?

No he was not and neither was Ether. They were both reporting what had been passed down --ie Oral Histories.

Edited November 28, 2014 by mnn727

[lds-convert-sw]

This is a heated topic, but I'm going to jump in here and say to "Linuxgal, Sometimesaint", and some others, If you don't believe in God, you don't believe in the scriptures, nor do you believe in Joseph Smith, why then are you even here wasting peoples time? 

[thesometimesaint]

This is a heated topic, but I'm going to jump in here and say to "Linuxgal, Sometimesaint", and some others, If you don't believe in God, you don't believe in the scriptures, nor do you believe in Joseph Smith, why then are you even here wasting peoples time? 

 

I'm 63 years old, and have been a faithful believing member of the Church for the last 43 years.

As far as wasting my time; I don't force anyone to read my posts, let alone respond to them. Further it is my time to waste.   

[lds-convert-sw]

I'm 63 years old, and have been a faithful believing member of the Church for the last 43 years.

As far as wasting my time; I don't force anyone to read my posts, let alone respond to them. Further it is my time to waste. 

Ok, maybe I haven't been around long enough, but your recent posts say otherwise (being a longtime 'believing'  church member). But then, what do I know?, you have 44,000 posts. I didn't say you were wasting 'your time', I said "why waste 'others' time with anti-mormon, anti-gospel crap?

[thesometimesaint]

If you had bothered to read more of my posts you'd realize that I am very particular in what things I do believe. I've never once referenced Anti-Mormons for supporting reference. I personally have little to no use for their arguments against what I believe. Still applies if you choose to read what I and others post it is your time you are wasting. We won't even talk about responding. To me the real challenge is to maintain faith while seeing through that glass darkly. You know that whole Faith, Hope, and Charity thing.

[lds-convert-sw]

If you had bothered to read more of my posts you'd realize that I am very particular in what things I do believe...

Seeing as you've been here a long time, and I haven't, I apologize, and retract my statements. I'm sure I misunderstood.

We do, indeed, see through a glass darkly. I wish be to able to see things as they truly are. I was confused though, by your statement about J.F. Smith, were you saying that we was not a prophet?, or were you simply saying that his comments about the moon (of which I am unfamiliar) are just those of a man, and not those of a man acting in his prophetic capacities? Sorry, hope that makes sense. As I mentioned, I am unfamiliar with his statements about the moon, but I would venture to say that since he was "a man of his time" perhaps he couldn't see the greater picture. Imagine trying to explain interstellar probes such as Voyager to Moses, or men of Jesus' time.

Edited November 28, 2014 by lds-convert-sw

[thesometimesaint]

Seeing as you've been here a long time, and I haven't, I apologize, and retract my statements. I'm sure I misunderstood.

We do, indeed, see through a glass darkly. I wish be to able to see things as they truly are. I was confused though, by your statement about J.F. Smith, were you saying that we was not a prophet?, or were you simply saying that his comments about the moon (of which I am unfamiliar) are just those of a man, and not those of a man acting in his prophetic capacities? Sorry, hope that makes sense. As I mentioned, I am unfamiliar with his statements about the moon, but I would venture to say that since he was "a man of his time" perhaps he couldn't see the greater picture. Imagine trying to explain interstellar probes such as Voyager to Moses, or men of Jesus' time.

 

No problem.

 

I allow all men their own opinions, and even to be wrong on some occasions. As Joseph Smith said: "A prophet is only a prophet when acting as such". To his credit JFS did later admit to being wrong about men being on the moon.

 

Heck we don't need to go back that far. A few hundred years ago if you'd have tried to explain the television you get burned at the stake for witchcraft

[LinuxGal]

This is a heated topic, but I'm going to jump in here and say to "Linuxgal, Sometimesaint", and some others, If you don't believe in God, you don't believe in the scriptures, nor do you believe in Joseph Smith, why then are you even here wasting peoples time? 

 

This thread is about the Noachide Flood.  Why do you invite others to derail it?

[lds-convert-sw]

This thread is about the Noachide Flood.  Why do you invite others to derail it?

Sorry, a little touchy, aren't we?

[LinuxGal]

Sorry, a little touchy, aren't we?

 

There is another thread where I'm being set up to get banned from a topic by posting a "study" so yes I am touchy.

[lds-convert-sw]

There is another thread where I'm being set up to get banned from a topic by posting a "study" so yes I am touchy.

Ok. Well I may disagree with some peoples posts, but I don't want anyone to get banned. I'll stay on topic

[danielwoods]

Known observations of those who were there? If you believe the Bible is historical and that the first 5 books were written by Moses, then tell me -- was Moses there?

No he was not and neither was Ether. They were both reporting what had been passed down --ie Oral Histories.

 

You have faith that your "non-observed" interpretations trump those Oral Histories. I do not. Your position then forces you to arrogate those histories into "just stories" or "Myth" when the context of those histories are recorded as direct observations, not mythologies. 

 

Those Oral Histories were also believed to be true by Jesus, whom I also trust as a completely reliable source. 

 

Further, the inconsistencies (and admitted ignorance) of the interpretations of those who weren't there lead to my many doubts that they don't know what they are talking about. 

[Pinecone]

Known observations of those who were there? If you believe the Bible is historical and that the first 5 books were written by Moses, then tell me -- was Moses there?

No he was not and neither was Ether. They were both reporting what had been passed down --ie Oral Histories.

Well, The Creator of the Universe appeared to Moses and showed Moses his creation. Then Moses wrote it down.

It's recorded in Moses chapter 1 in The Pearl of Great Price. An Oral History from The Lord if you will.

Do you know what The Pearl of Great Price is? And swine?

[mnn727]

You have faith that your "non-observed" interpretations trump those Oral Histories. I do not. Your position then forces you to arrogate those histories into "just stories" or "Myth" when the context of those histories are recorded as direct observations, not mythologies. 

 

Those Oral Histories were also believed to be true by Jesus, whom I also trust as a completely reliable source. 

 

Further, the inconsistencies (and admitted ignorance) of the interpretations of those who weren't there lead to my many doubts that they don't know what they are talking about. 

But yet you accept the the numerous 'miracles' that would have had to have happened to cause a world wide flood (listed in other posts on this thread)and reject the geological records. You turn God into both a magician and a liar.

[thesometimesaint]

Well, The Creator of the Universe appeared to Moses and showed Moses his creation. Then Moses wrote it down.

It's recorded in Moses chapter 1 in The Pearl of Great Price. An Oral History from The Lord if you will.

Do you know what The Pearl of Great Price is? And swine?

 

Slightly paraphrasing the Articles of Faith # 8

We believe the Scriptures to be the word of God as far as they are translated correctly;

[mnn727]

Slightly paraphrasing the Articles of Faith # 8

We believe the Scriptures to be the word of God as far as they are translated correctly;

 as far as they are translated correctly; -- that's the rough part, isn't it? How are we to know? Especially when you have oral histories passed down for a thousand or more years prior to being written down. Each new oral historian being considered a "new translation"

 

The nice thing about the Church is that its still true even if you don't believe the Bible is historical. 

 

Whether Noah's flood happened or it didn't matters absolutely zero in terms of our salvation and exaltation.

Edited November 29, 2014 by mnn727

[Pinecone]

Slightly paraphrasing the Articles of Faith # 8

We believe the Scriptures to be the word of God as far as they are translated correctly;

 

You don't know the Eighth Article of Faith very well.

[Pinecone]

 as far as they are translated correctly; -- that's the rough part, isn't it? How are we to know? Especially when you have oral histories passed down for a thousand or more years prior to being written down. Each new oral historian being considered a "new translation"

 

The nice thing about the Church is that its still true even if you don't believe the Bible is historical. 

 

Whether Noah's flood happened or it didn't matters absolutely zero in terms of our salvation and exaltation.

 

Surely. Because your faith in the scriptures has nothing to do with your personal salvation and exaltation.