KevinG Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 How dare the Church hide its history by not putting essays on evolution and the Mountain Meadows Massacre on lds.org 50 years ago!
Calm Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 For what? Seminary and Institute? Manuals are here: https://www.lds.org/manual/institute?lang=eng https://www.lds.org/manual/seminary?lang=eng
Joshua Valentine Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 I know of no church that has addressed its history as the lds church as done. And no church is under such pressure to write their historys.How many Churches are notorious for claiming all non-Mormon statements about controversial parts of its history are all lies?
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 (edited) And if you keep reading the manual, you find in the next in the following paragraph “[C]reation best explains the origin of life." - Harold Coffin I love that the new manual quotes Elder Snow Elder Steven E. Snow of the Seventy said:“The Internet has put all kinds of information at our fingertips—good, bad, truthful, untruthful—including information on Church history. You can read a great deal about our history, but it’s important to read about it and understand it in context. The difficulty with some information online is that it’s out of context and you don’t really see the whole picture."https://www.lds.org/manual/foundations-of-the-restoration-teacher-manual/lesson-10-seek-truth?lang=eng The quote also applies to other stuff too. Creationist "evidences" are usually out of context and don't present the whole picture. Edited July 1, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 How many Churches are notorious for claiming all non-Mormon statements about controversial parts of its history are all lies? all Christian churches dismiss the Nag Hammadi texts and other early writings as lies. I know of no church that has addressed its history as the lds church as done. And no church is under such pressure to write their historys. because it is not important to them, the Bible is all they need.
Calm Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 How many Churches are notorious for claiming all non-Mormon statements about controversial parts of its history are all lies?There are none that I am aware of that hold such an absolute position. If you believe one exists, please document this claim.
Calm Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 (edited) all Christian churches dismiss the Nag Hammadi texts and other early writings as lies. CFR please.I know a number of Christian churches, including LDS, Catholic and Protestant that have scholars who study early writings to trace development of teachings. Edited July 1, 2015 by calmoriah
Mars Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 Canard, I checked with Stephen because I don't want to misrepresent his viewpoint and he confirmed my comment above is how he meant it. He also clarifies his use in a comment on the blog itself, he was in a hurry to get the blog out and made a poor choice of wording due to the connotations associated. Here is the comment in a response that the use of tranparency and its variations was inappropriate by Dan Bachman (who if my memory serves me, should know what he is talking about): "I am invariably misquoted on something I never should have said in the first place."
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 (edited) CFR please.I know a number of Christian churches, including LDS, Catholic and Protestant that have scholars who study early writings to trace development of teachings. Some evangelical apologists dismiss the Nag Hammadi texts and other early copies. Edited July 1, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian
Calm Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 So you are admitting you were wrong when you stated "all Christian churches dismiss the Nag Hammadi texts and other early writings as lies"?
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 So you are admitting you were wrong when you stated "all Christian churches dismiss the Nag Hammadi texts and other early writings as lies"? It seems that I was wrong, it is not hard for me to change my mind, I am not like most MDDB people .
Calm Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 (edited) It is strange though that you don't actually just say "hey, I was wrong". Instead you rewrite the comment to make it acceptable with no recognition of why you were changing it to begin with and you even respond here "it seems like I was wrong". Maybe you could practice saying simple stuff when you have been demonstrated wrong as in right off the bat "you are right, I am wrong, thanks for correcting me". Your claim that it is not hard for you to change your mind would be more believeable. And you have only engaged in your discussions a small subset of MDDB people on a limited number of subjects so your judgment of "most MDDB people" comes out so arrogant, it discredits your claim that you are as openminded as you appear to think. Edited July 1, 2015 by calmoriah
TheSkepticChristian Posted July 1, 2015 Posted July 1, 2015 It is strange though that you don't actually just say "hey, I was wrong". Sure, hey, I was wrong. your welcome. And you have only engaged in your discussions a small subset of MDDB people on a limited number of subjects so your judgment of "most MDDB people" comes out so arrogant, it discredits your claim that you are as openminded as you appear to think. I could be wrong about that too
theplains Posted July 3, 2015 Posted July 3, 2015 As I said in my previous thread, I don't think that any church should be in the history writing business. We just need to look at this thread and the discussion that has come about. It causes contention and disagreement according to historical interpretation and what should have been included in the writings of the essay's etc. But I suppose that the lds needed to do so to protect members from what the critics are saying and writing. Understanding historical events provides us with the basis to know why Joseph Smith did whathe did and how it formed a key aspect of the FLDS. I don't know if the church has, or will plan atsome time in the future, to translate its statements on polygamy in other languages like Mandarin,or Japanese. But I suspect the missionary you meet on the street in Taipei or Tokyo has no clue. Thanks,Jim
Recommended Posts