Popular Post consiglieri Posted February 4, 2016 Popular Post Posted February 4, 2016 10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: Aesop's fables, Pinocchio, and Jesus' parables are all true. Indeed. And I expect you mean using the definition of "true" that is really the only definition that matters. As teaching truths about the human experience that resonate with the reader on a deep and spiritual level. This is one of my favorite sayings, which I believe is a paraphrase of G.K. Chesterton: Fairy tales are not true because they teach us dragons are real. Fairy tales are true because they teach us dragons can be defeated. 5
Johnnie Cake Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) The standard works should come with the same disclaimer as the Movie and TV series 'FARGO': At the beginning of the books the following disclaimer should be made: Quote "The events depicted in these Books took place somewhere on the Earth between 6000 BC and 1842 AD. At the request of the survivors, the names have been changed. Out of respect for the dead, the rest has been told exactly as it occurred" Then at the end of the books the following disclaimer should be made, just as in the Movie and TV series: Quote "The Books claim to be both homey and exotic, and pretend to be true." Edited February 4, 2016 by Johnnie Cake
thesometimesaint Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 1 minute ago, Johnnie Cake said: The standard works should come with the same disclaimer as the Movie and TV series 'FARGO': At the beginning of the books the following disclaimer should be made: Then at the end of the books the following disclaimer should be made, just as in the Movies and TV series: It is at the front of the Book of Mormon. SEE https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/bofm-title?lang=eng "And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment-seat of Christ". 1
Gray Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 45 minutes ago, consiglieri said: Indeed. And I expect you mean using the definition of "true" that is really the only definition that matters. As teaching truths about the human experience that resonate with the reader on a deep and spiritual level. This is one of my favorite sayings, which I believe is a paraphrase of G.K. Chesterton: Fairy tales are not true because they teach us dragons are real. Fairy tales are true because they teach us dragons can be defeated. My only regret is that I have but one upvote to give 1
consiglieri Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 7 minutes ago, Gray said: My only regret is that I have but one upvote to give And mine is that the software won't even allow me to give one.
Gray Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 17 hours ago, PeterPear said: Why? When the Lord told Joseph Smith he was not yet as Job, the Lord and Creator of the Universe and all things therein and who knows all things and has all power - LIED to Joseph Smith - all to comfort the Prophet on a false story? D&C 121:10 By extension, then you have to believe the account of the Brother of Jared seeing the Lord is fiction, because the Brother of Jared said the Lord cannot lie: https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/ether/3.12?lang=eng#11. Ether 3:12. For someone who sets himself up as a light to the world by speaking at Fair Mormon Conferences, you have an odd belief system. (Which is why I consider Fair Mormon to be worthless.) It's nothing personal, of course. LOL! I don't believe the story is based on actual events, and I'd have no problem using Job as an example of someone who has suffered.
Robert F. Smith Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 4 hours ago, volgadon said: I'm still curious as to who PP thinks I am. He likely imagines that all participants at Fair Conferences are filthy socialists, and perhaps is making a prophecy that you will show up at a future Fair Conference -- even though you have never been to one yet. 1
Calm Posted February 4, 2016 Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) 16 hours ago, volgadon said: Look at it another way. If president Monson were to reveal during general conference that the Lord wants him to call members to repentance for being stingier and greedier than Ebeneezer Scrooge, would we be forced to conclude either that 1) Scrooge is real, or 2) that the Lord was lying to the prophet because Scrooge wasn't real? https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/christmas-devotional/2011/12/because-he-came?lang=eng Quote Now converted to a life of selflessness and service, Scrooge declares at the last: “I will honor Christmas in my heart, and try to keep it all the year. I will live in the Past, the Present, and the Future. The Spirits of all Three shall strive within me. I will not shut out the lessons that they teach.” 1 This touching account never fails to inspire me. Quote Fortunately, as we know, Ebenezer Scrooge changed his life for the better. I love his line, “I am not the man I was.” 10 https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2001/10/now-is-the-time?lang=eng&clang=ase Edited February 4, 2016 by Calm
Cold Steel Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 On 2/3/2016 at 8:26 PM, strappinglad said: Hey, I like the talking donkey. It wasn't so much that the donkey spoke to Balaam that surprised me. The angel could have done that. What got me is that Balaam answered it back without waiting a beat! Like the thing talked to him every day. Not many people could have recovered like that from a talking donkey! On 2/3/2016 at 4:42 AM, Tacenda said: Donkeys talking, serpents in staffs, God commanding Abraham to kill his son, God commanding JS to marry other wives, world flood...too many to count. Some scriptures are now represented as allegories or parables, but no one presented certain ones as such growing up. It leaves one to start distrusting the Bible, but relieved that God just might be a loving God vs. a God of wrath. Whoa! Back up. God's commanding Abraham to kill Isaac is actually one of the most credible parts of the Bible. The Abrahamic test was intended to point the way to Christ. As Abraham was prepared to offer his only son, so God the Father was to offer his only begotten Son for the sins of the world. And even as Isaac was willing to go through with it, Jesus freely offered his life to bring about all righteousness. Scholars have always assumed this was a test of Abraham's willingness to obey, and though this may also be the case, the Jews were supposed to see the relationship between the Messiah and Jesus' sacrifice. But most of them missed it. That story was old many generations before Christ, so I don't dismiss it in the least. On 2/3/2016 at 10:52 AM, Freedom said: I believe LDS doctrine requires Job to be a real person. The book of Job, however, is an allegory based on his life. Not necessarily. The Lord refers to Job in scripture, but it doesn't mean Job had to be real. I could use a reference to Tom Sawyer going into the cave and still see it as a fictional story. Or Captain Ahab and the whale. All can be used metaphorically. 1
JLHPROF Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 2 hours ago, Alan said: I don't think Nephi killed Laban. Despite what is written in scripture? But then you also don't believe Joseph was a polygamist despite scripture and history.
Tacenda Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, JLHPROF said: Despite what is written in scripture? But then you also don't believe Joseph was a polygamist despite scripture and history. Those things are hard to believe, like God commanding Abraham to sacrifice his son, it's almost like a sick joke. Three instances, including Nephi killing Laban, and polygamy where it broke Emma's and others hearts or moral codes and that go against what God commands in the first place. Sitting in GD class it was always a depressing (Abrahamic test) topic to me, thinking HF would do that. Edited February 9, 2016 by Tacenda 1
ksfisher Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 4 hours ago, Alan said: I don't think Nephi killed Laban. Nephi seems to thing he did. How do you explain the discrepancy? 1
JLHPROF Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: Those things are hard to believe, like God commanding Abraham to sacrifice his son, it's almost like a sick joke. Three instances that go against what God commands in the first place. Sitting in GD class it was always a depressing (Abrahamic test) topic to me, thinking HF would do that. Why? God allowed his own son to be sacrificed when he could have stopped it. Our mortal conditioning is that death is the worst thing, but everybody dies. It's part of the plan. And God has every right to set the method and timing. 2
stemelbow Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 4 minutes ago, ksfisher said: Nephi seems to thing he did. How do you explain the discrepancy? Nephi's a propagandist. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davidbokovoy/2015/02/1-nephi-as-propaganda/Nothing proper about your propaganda
Tacenda Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 (edited) 1 minute ago, JLHPROF said: Why? God allowed his own son to be sacrificed when he could have stopped it. Our mortal conditioning is that death is the worst thing, but everybody dies. It's part of the plan. And God has every right to set the method and timing. Ok, I can see that I guess. But what if it's just crazy people hearing voices though? Edited February 9, 2016 by Tacenda
ksfisher Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 4 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Nephi's a propagandist. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davidbokovoy/2015/02/1-nephi-as-propaganda/Nothing proper about your propaganda I don't see anything in what Bokovoy has written that would imply that Nephi fabricated any part of his story. Nephi may have written his story in a way that presented him as the hero, but I don't see anything about Nephi making things up.
thesometimesaint Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Ok, I can see that I guess. But what if it's just crazy people hearing voices though? Being mortal we all see things that aren't there, hear things that aren't there, feel things that aren't there, smell/taste things that aren't there. It is not the fact that we experience these things. It is our response to them that counts. Edited February 9, 2016 by thesometimesaint
JLHPROF Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 17 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Ok, I can see that I guess. But what if it's just crazy people hearing voices though? Faith. You could use that same argument against ANY part of the gospel, starting with the atonement all the way up to receiving your calling and election. It's all subject to our faith and the word of God. 1
stemelbow Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 11 minutes ago, ksfisher said: I don't see anything in what Bokovoy has written that would imply that Nephi fabricated any part of his story. Nephi may have written his story in a way that presented him as the hero, but I don't see anything about Nephi making things up. I'm fine with that too. Just saying it's possible he didn't kill Laban in light of such thinking that Bokovoy outlines. Meaning the folktale (which implies a story made up and passed along) might not have happened as described. the story carried meaning so much so Nephi felt it important to relay it the way he did. But, we don't really know. Just saying it's possible.
ksfisher Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 6 minutes ago, stemelbow said: I'm fine with that too. Just saying it's possible he didn't kill Laban in light of such thinking that Bokovoy outlines. Meaning the folktale (which implies a story made up and passed along) might not have happened as described. the story carried meaning so much so Nephi felt it important to relay it the way he did. But, we don't really know. Just saying it's possible. And I guess Mormon could have written the whole thing from the front porch of his condo (made of stone of course) in Venice Beach. We really don't know...it's possible. 1
stemelbow Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 1 minute ago, ksfisher said: And I guess Mormon could have written the whole thing from the front porch of his condo (made of stone of course) in Venice Beach. We really don't know...it's possible. I'm not sure what the problem is here. Nephi could have made it up, that's why someone may think Nephi didn't really kill Laban. That the story shows signs of propaganda and folk telling may help lead someone to believe that. As it is for us, it doesn't much matter of Nephi killed Laban or not, the story is in our scriptures and is meant to convey something. It's up to us to decide if that which is conveyed is meaningful to us individually or not.
ksfisher Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 4 minutes ago, stemelbow said: I'm not sure what the problem is here. Nephi could have made it up, that's why someone may think Nephi didn't really kill Laban. That the story shows signs of propaganda and folk telling may help lead someone to believe that. As it is for us, it doesn't much matter of Nephi killed Laban or not, the story is in our scriptures and is meant to convey something. It's up to us to decide if that which is conveyed is meaningful to us individually or not. I think the stuggle I'm having with what you and Alan are saying is the implication that Nephi, whom we accept as a prophet, is lying. Bokovoy's article makes the point that much of what Nephi is writing in 1 Nephi could be termed propaganda. But just because something could be called propoganda does not mean that it is not true, just that the story was told in such a way as to teach what Nephi wanted to teach. Nephi's story, as history, is not "objective." It's a it's written in a deliberate manner so as to make Nephi the founding hero of the dynasty. The facts are correct, but chosen by Nephi to teach that point. 1
stemelbow Posted February 9, 2016 Posted February 9, 2016 1 hour ago, ksfisher said: I think the stuggle I'm having with what you and Alan are saying is the implication that Nephi, whom we accept as a prophet, is lying. Bokovoy's article makes the point that much of what Nephi is writing in 1 Nephi could be termed propaganda. But just because something could be called propoganda does not mean that it is not true, just that the story was told in such a way as to teach what Nephi wanted to teach. Nephi's story, as history, is not "objective." It's a it's written in a deliberate manner so as to make Nephi the founding hero of the dynasty. The facts are correct, but chosen by Nephi to teach that point. I'm not concerned with whether he lied. It doesnt' mean something bad to me since everyone who has lived has likely lied about something. But it woudlnt' matter anyway because it appears much of what is scripture is propaganda and folktales--meaning some amount of exaggeration and fabrication is found throughout scripture. I dont' hold the authors responsible for that because what is important or meaningful is the story anyway.
Recommended Posts