Popular Post volgadon Posted January 8, 2016 Popular Post Posted January 8, 2016 Some unknown Wittgensteinian they probably pulled off of the streets somehow published a review essay. http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/untangling-scripture-from-the-philosophies-of-men/ 5
VideoGameJunkie Posted January 8, 2016 Posted January 8, 2016 Sorry if I inappropriately used a temple reference. I used to get myself in trouble when I'd say something not in tune with what was being talked about in ward FHE or Elder's quorum and I once responded with "I am simply doing that which has been done in other worlds." It actually got a huge laugh in EQ, but I later felt it was in bad taste. My brother on his mission in Brazil had a companion who would constantly quote from the temple at inappropriate times. 1
Calm Posted January 8, 2016 Posted January 8, 2016 If I wonder if something is appropriate, I do a google search with site:lds.org to see if the phrase comes up. If it does, I know I am good in general. Though still need to be careful in making inappropriate jokes or treating teachings themselves disrespectfully. Generally something like you said is acceptable if the group is all LDS and understand it. If they are not and you have to explain in detail. it can get problematic in that too much info might need to be shared in an inappropriate context. 2
VideoGameJunkie Posted January 8, 2016 Posted January 8, 2016 Ya my brothers companion would say it to non members who had no idea what he was talking about. And my brother said he'd only quote Lucifer.
salgare Posted January 8, 2016 Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) wow . Thank you Mark (who is the nice looking man that poised for the camera?) Well that pretty much blew me away, not even noting the author I captured many quotes I was grabbing from that article with interest of discussing. There is just too many to address here. I'll just throw a couple out here: "I am further convinced that God allowed these philosophies to emerge at this time and place to provide fertile intellectual soil to allow thinking Mormons to see the Restoration in this light. Unfortunately, much of Mormon thought to date is still imbued with a sectarian perspective. In my view, there is much to overcome." "Mormon conceptions of a human nature unencumbered by original sin or inherited depravity comport perfectly with the nineteenth-century zenith of liberal humanism, with its celebration of human potential, sense of boundlessness, and Romantic optimism." "Humanism can be seen as a godless interpretation of the world or, as Givens here demonstrates, as not only compatible with but part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the extent it is interpreted in the light of human progression and affirmation of the basic goodness of mankind." For the first time in my life I recently ventured in to some familiarization with atheism. I commented on this in the following thread recently bumped by volgadon (would be nice to see it rise back up again). http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/65982-mormon-noahide-laws/?do=findComment&comment=1209575949 I was struck with the personal angelic struggle suggested between the extremes of old school Mormon Orthodoxy to Humanism. I assume the concept of orthopraxis would be foreign to say a Bruce R. McConkie (BRM) generation. It sure is to me. A thought that came to my mind as I read the earlier portions of the article was this upcoming volume sure sounds like the orthopraxis replacement of the orthodox "Mormon Doctrine" I've bandied about the term "Nuanced Mormonism" that I'm heard elsewhere. I know that labels are often disliked, but they also tend to be as a picture telling a 1000 words to use them in the right context; Orthodox Mormon, New Order Mormon, Nuanced (Orthoprax?) Mormon (New for short). Is there a term you would prefer I use in this context? Based on this review I assume its fair for me to put that label on Givens? The balance of the umbrella over this diversity is a pretty crazy dynamic. I assume this New Mormonism is the Church's moving forward plan as us old BRM (and older) Mormons age and die off. What a thought provoking article ... so much more ... but I can't get over the portrayal of the gumpy mfb and that incredible looking man in the picture! Edited January 8, 2016 by salgare 2
mfbukowski Posted January 9, 2016 Posted January 9, 2016 (edited) 5 hours ago, volgadon said: Some unknown Wittgensteinian they probably pulled off of the streets somehow published a review essay. http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/untangling-scripture-from-the-philosophies-of-men/ He's a noted motivational speaker who lives in a van down by the river as I recall. But he looks too much like a used car salesman for me to trust him. Edited January 9, 2016 by mfbukowski 3
mfbukowski Posted January 9, 2016 Posted January 9, 2016 4 hours ago, Calm said: If I wonder if something is appropriate, I do a google search with site:lds.org to see if the phrase comes up. If it does, I know I am good in general. Though still need to be careful in making inappropriate jokes or treating teachings themselves disrespectfully. Generally something like you said is acceptable if the group is all LDS and understand it. If they are not and you have to explain in detail. it can get problematic in that too much info might need to be shared in an inappropriate context. Quote From this it is plain that we are not called to preach the philosophies of men mingled with scripture or our own ideas or the mysteries of the kingdom, nor are we called to bring forth new doctrine. Used by a GA in conference. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1973/10/you-shall-receive-the-spirit?lang=eng I think that makes it OK. 1
Ahab Posted January 9, 2016 Posted January 9, 2016 Ah, I see. Someone I know as mski wrote it. I suppose now I'll have to read it for whatever good it will do me.
volgadon Posted January 9, 2016 Author Posted January 9, 2016 http://mla-s1-p.mlstatic.com/the-who-sell-out-cd-nuevo-bonus-tracks-13566-MLA20079320112_042014-F.jpg 1
salgare Posted January 9, 2016 Posted January 9, 2016 Nothing worth discussion here I guess ... and I still have no clue as to your joke??. I noted Brent Metcalfe's OP doing nothing but pointing to an article was immediately locked. I guess "The Who" is the important thing around here:
juliann Posted January 9, 2016 Posted January 9, 2016 Of course "who" matters. Mf is an active poster and this is a congratulatory thread. The most to complain about is that maybe it should be in Social Hall. I suspect the reason inactive posters post links is to increase their rankings...which speaks well of this board. That said, it would be wonderful if Brent became an active poster. Back to the topic, Mf, congratulations! 2
Ahab Posted January 9, 2016 Posted January 9, 2016 After reading about half way through I stopped because I need a little time to sort through mski's thoughts that are not my thoughts, but to still appreciate the ones that are. Maybe I've already wrestled an angel and forgotten about it... I have Sometimer's (not quite Alzheimer's) sometimes, maybe due to my age... but I notice revelation from God when I not so much struggle but instead just relax and take it in, not being so insistent on keeping my own sometimes false perceptions while being more open to what just feels right and good. So at this point I want to just take a little more time to process mski's interpretation of Israel's/Jacob's struggle with an angel (of the Lord) while weighing it against what God had already told me about how to interpret that passage of scripture and waiting upon further light and instruction from our Father. It may be that what "works for" mski just isn't what works for me. But we'll see. Also it seems that maybe mski's and Given's idea of "early Christianity" is at least a few thousand years later than my own idea of when it began on this Earth. Or maybe that's just a term they are using to refer to the time when Christianity was reintroduced to those in the Eastern hemisphere by our Lord and John (the baptist). So what I see from "early Christianity" to these latter days is not so much a progression of thought to get the world ready for "Mormonism", or at least not for the first time, but just another one of the many times our Lord has declared the gospel to the world, both personally and through prophets/angels, with everyone on the Earth, this last time, nor falling into apostasy so much that another restoration would be needed. Anyway, otherwise some very good thoughts, there, mski. I wasn't even aware that you were someone with a desire to formally review other's books.
PeterPear Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 I really enjoy MormonInterpreter - where some Mormons subject the scriptures to their own private interpretations.
salgare Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 1 hour ago, PeterPear said: I really enjoy MormonInterpreter - where some Mormons subject the scriptures to their own private interpretations. Like the linked article?
mfbukowski Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 10 hours ago, Ahab said: After reading about half way through I stopped because I need a little time to sort through mski's thoughts that are not my thoughts, but to still appreciate the ones that are. Maybe I've already wrestled an angel and forgotten about it... I have Sometimer's (not quite Alzheimer's) sometimes, maybe due to my age... but I notice revelation from God when I not so much struggle but instead just relax and take it in, not being so insistent on keeping my own sometimes false perceptions while being more open to what just feels right and good. So at this point I want to just take a little more time to process mski's interpretation of Israel's/Jacob's struggle with an angel (of the Lord) while weighing it against what God had already told me about how to interpret that passage of scripture and waiting upon further light and instruction from our Father. It may be that what "works for" mski just isn't what works for me. But we'll see. Also it seems that maybe mski's and Given's idea of "early Christianity" is at least a few thousand years later than my own idea of when it began on this Earth. Or maybe that's just a term they are using to refer to the time when Christianity was reintroduced to those in the Eastern hemisphere by our Lord and John (the baptist). So what I see from "early Christianity" to these latter days is not so much a progression of thought to get the world ready for "Mormonism", or at least not for the first time, but just another one of the many times our Lord has declared the gospel to the world, both personally and through prophets/angels, with everyone on the Earth, this last time, nor falling into apostasy so much that another restoration would be needed. Anyway, otherwise some very good thoughts, there, mski. I wasn't even aware that you were someone with a desire to formally review other's books. Thanks Mr. Ahab
mfbukowski Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 21 hours ago, salgare said: Appears this was only an advertisement thread? I didn't start it And I would love to respond to any posts that say anything more than how absolutely wonderful-looking I am. Even though of course that is totally true regardless of the definition. 2
mfbukowski Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 21 hours ago, volgadon said: http://mla-s1-p.mlstatic.com/the-who-sell-out-cd-nuevo-bonus-tracks-13566-MLA20079320112_042014-F.jpg I remember when that came out. Amazing album! And thanks 1
mfbukowski Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 (edited) On 1/8/2016 at 3:13 PM, salgare said: wow . Thank you Mark (who is the nice looking man that poised for the camera?) Well that pretty much blew me away, not even noting the author I captured many quotes I was grabbing from that article with interest of discussing. There is just too many to address here. I'll just throw a couple out here: "I am further convinced that God allowed these philosophies to emerge at this time and place to provide fertile intellectual soil to allow thinking Mormons to see the Restoration in this light. Unfortunately, much of Mormon thought to date is still imbued with a sectarian perspective. In my view, there is much to overcome." "Mormon conceptions of a human nature unencumbered by original sin or inherited depravity comport perfectly with the nineteenth-century zenith of liberal humanism, with its celebration of human potential, sense of boundlessness, and Romantic optimism." "Humanism can be seen as a godless interpretation of the world or, as Givens here demonstrates, as not only compatible with but part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ to the extent it is interpreted in the light of human progression and affirmation of the basic goodness of mankind." For the first time in my life I recently ventured in to some familiarization with atheism. I commented on this in the following thread recently bumped by volgadon (would be nice to see it rise back up again). http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/65982-mormon-noahide-laws/?do=findComment&comment=1209575949 I was struck with the personal angelic struggle suggested between the extremes of old school Mormon Orthodoxy to Humanism. I assume the concept of orthopraxis would be foreign to say a Bruce R. McConkie (BRM) generation. It sure is to me. A thought that came to my mind as I read the earlier portions of the article was this upcoming volume sure sounds like the orthopraxis replacement of the orthodox "Mormon Doctrine" I've bandied about the term "Nuanced Mormonism" that I'm heard elsewhere. I know that labels are often disliked, but they also tend to be as a picture telling a 1000 words to use them in the right context; Orthodox Mormon, New Order Mormon, Nuanced (Orthoprax?) Mormon (New for short). Is there a term you would prefer I use in this context? Based on this review I assume its fair for me to put that label on Givens? The balance of the umbrella over this diversity is a pretty crazy dynamic. I assume this New Mormonism is the Church's moving forward plan as us old BRM (and older) Mormons age and die off. What a thought provoking article ... so much more ... but I can't get over the portrayal of the gumpy mfb and that incredible looking man in the picture! Quote I was struck with the personal angelic struggle suggested between the extremes of old school Mormon Orthodoxy to Humanism. Thanks! I am curious where you got that interpretation Edited January 10, 2016 by mfbukowski
mfbukowski Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 (edited) It's great watching Brits pretend they came from Tennessee while we think their accents are intellectual. Go figure. Edited January 10, 2016 by mfbukowski 1
mfbukowski Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 11 hours ago, juliann said: Of course "who" matters. Mf is an active poster and this is a congratulatory thread. The most to complain about is that maybe it should be in Social Hall. I suspect the reason inactive posters post links is to increase their rankings...which speaks well of this board. That said, it would be wonderful if Brent became an active poster. Back to the topic, Mf, congratulations! Thanks juliann!
Recommended Posts