cinepro Posted August 7, 2016 Posted August 7, 2016 Does anyone know if he's changed his views on any of these important events? https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/06/a-promised-land?lang=eng The choicest part of this earthly creation was a garden “eastward in Eden” where God placed our first parents, Adam and Eve. This resplendent place filled with paradisiacal glory was located on that part of the land mass where the city Zion, or the New Jerusalem of the earth’s last days, would eventually be built. (See D&C 57:1–3, D&C 84:1–3; and Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 3:74.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Two generations [after Enoch] the Lord was so pained by that generation “without affection” (Moses 7:33) that he opened the windows of heaven and cleansed the entire earth with water. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Holy scripture records that “after the waters had receded from off the face of this land it became a choice land above all other lands, a chosen land of the Lord; wherefore the Lord would have that all men should serve him who dwell upon the face thereof.” (Ether 13:2.) Such a special place needed now to be kept apart from other regions, free from the indiscriminate traveler as well as the soldier of fortune. To guarantee such sanctity the very surface of the earth was rent. In response to God’s decree, the great continents separated and the ocean rushed in to surround them. The promised place was set apart. Without habitation it waited for the fulfillment of God’s special purposes. With care and selectivity, the Lord began almost at once to repeople the promised land. The Jaredites came first, with stories of the great flood fresh in their memories and the Lord’s solemn declaration ringing in their ears 1
rodheadlee Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 What is this, beat up on Elder Holland week? You had to go back 40 years for a quote. 4
JAHS Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 46 minutes ago, cinepro said: Does anyone know if he's changed his views on any of these important events? Don't think so. I don't know of any general authorities who would completely disagree with any of this. 1
juliann Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 Surely you know how to use the search function on LDS.org as well as anyone else. Tell us what you find. 2
BCSpace Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 1 hour ago, rodheadlee said: What is this, beat up on Elder Holland week? You had to go back 40 years for a quote. It's official doctrine if found in an official LDS publication no matter how old. For it not to be doctrine, one would have to find a differing statement in an official publication of a later date (continuing revelation principle). One might argue correlation, but I believe this quote is within correlation. One might also argue "consistently published", but then you've likely limited doctrine to the yearly curriculum. Having said that, there are scriptures cited (D&C 116 and 117:8) to tie the GoE to Missouri or the American continent, but neither of them actually say or imply that. Adam lived for 900 years after the Fall. There is no indication he must have stayed on the borders of the local Garden. 1
juliann Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 1 hour ago, BCSpace said: It's official doctrine if found in an official LDS publication no matter how old. CFR 1
The Nehor Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 Does he have an opinion on the Lost Tribes and living under the ice caps/on the dark side of the moon.
Robert F. Smith Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 3 hours ago, cinepro said: Does anyone know if he's changed his views on any of these important events? https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/06/a-promised-land?lang=eng Good question. However, at the time he wrote those words, he was not an apostle, but was then the Church Commissioner of Education, having just been President of BYU. Moreover, when he says "he opened the windows of heaven and cleansed the entire earth with water," the immediate question I would ask is does this mean that the entire planet was submerged under miles of water (covering Everest), or is he suggesting the result of great Pluvial rains such as came down at the end of the last Ice Age -- a lustration, rather than immersion baptism.
BCSpace Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 11 minutes ago, juliann said: CFR Siggy, as you well know.
cinepro Posted August 8, 2016 Author Posted August 8, 2016 12 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: Good question. However, at the time he wrote those words, he was not an apostle, but was then the Church Commissioner of Education, having just been President of BYU. Moreover, when he says "he opened the windows of heaven and cleansed the entire earth with water," the immediate question I would ask is does this mean that the entire planet was submerged under miles of water (covering Everest), or is he suggesting the result of great Pluvial rains such as came down at the end of the last Ice Age -- a lustration, rather than immersion baptism. I can't speak for Elder Holland, but it's possible that his beliefs about a post-flood breakup of Pangaea would lead him to argue that there was no Mount Everest before the flood... That appears to be a common belief among people who believe in a world-wide flood: http://www.icr.org/article/did-noahs-flood-cover-himalayan-mountains/
Freedom Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 1 hour ago, BCSpace said: Siggy, as you well know. "This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith." Perhaps you should read your own references.
Robert F. Smith Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 1 hour ago, cinepro said: I can't speak for Elder Holland, but it's possible that his beliefs about a post-flood breakup of Pangaea would lead him to argue that there was no Mount Everest before the flood... That appears to be a common belief among people who believe in a world-wide flood: http://www.icr.org/article/did-noahs-flood-cover-himalayan-mountains/ I suppose so. On the other hand, the geologic time scale for the breakup of Pangaea goes too far back to entail human occupation of any sort, and many evangelical scholars reject the young Earth theory as absurd and non-biblical. The ICR people are only one group among several among evangelical scientists. In any case, the biblical text does not opt for a young Earth, nor for a worldwide Flood which covers everything. The Great Flood is regional. Folklore explains why this is not well understood. Quote Church History Seminary Manual has the following observation in discussing section 77 of the Doctrine and Covenants: the manual straightforwardly says, "The 7,000 years [in vv. 6-7] refers to the time since the Fall of Adam and Eve. It is not referring to the actual age of the earth including the periods of creation." Quote In these respects we differ from the Christian world, for our religion will not clash with or contradict the facts of science in any particular...whether the Lord found the earth empty and void, whether he made it out of nothing or out of the rude elements; or whether he made it in six days or in as many millions of years, is and will remain a matter of speculation in the minds of men unless he give revelation on the subject. If we understood the process of creation there would be no mystery about it, it would be all reasonable and plain, for there is no mystery except to the ignorant. B. Young, JD 14:116, May 14, 1871. Quote That eternity, agreeable to the records found in the catacombs of Egypt, has been going on in this system (not the world) almost 2555 millions of years; and to know that deists, geologists and others are trying to prove that matter must have existed hundreds of thousands of years:—it almost tempts the flesh to fly to God, or muster faith like Enoch to be translated and see and know as we are seen and known! W. W. Phelps, Times & Seasons, 5/24 (1 Jan 1844/ 45?):758 Thus, there is no reason to doubt that there were humans/hominids before Adam, nor that there was an esoteric ceremony in the Garden of Eden around 6,000 years ago in which certain ordinances were performed and covenants made which affect all humans -- before and after Adam. Very much like the current LDS endowment ceremony, and with most of the same figurative and symbolic meaning which we now experience. 3
Popular Post cinepro Posted August 8, 2016 Author Popular Post Posted August 8, 2016 6 hours ago, rodheadlee said: What is this, beat up on Elder Holland week? You had to go back 40 years for a quote. That's an odd reaction to a simple post that highlights some teachings made by Elder Holland (teachings which are well supported and reinforced by the scriptures and Church publications, I would point out). In the other thread, people seemed really upset that JC had not provided any references for a supposed claim by Elder Holland, so I thought I could make everyone happy by providing some claims that were referenced. But I suspect some LDS prefer anything that is taught by leaders that contradicts their worldview to be unreferenced, so as to make it easier to ignore them. As for the timing of the quotes, I wasn't aware that talks in General Conference came with an expiration date. Certainly, the recent courses of study in Church that have highlighted teachings that were decades or even 100+ years old would seem to indicate that aged talks can still have some value. Obviously, if there are subsequent Church curriculum or teachings by Church leaders published by the Church that contradict Elder Holland's teachings, then he would stand corrected. If you are aware of any such thing, do share. 7
thesometimesaint Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 We need to get over the idea that Apostles are infallible. SEE May 14, 1961 - Apostle Joseph Fielding Smith announces to stake conference in Honolulu: JFS wrote:We will never get a man into space. This earth is man's sphere and it was never intended that he should get away from it... The moon is a superior planet to the earth and it was never intended that man should go there. You can write it down in your books that this will never happen. 3
bcuzbcuz Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 11 hours ago, cinepro said: Does anyone know if he's changed his views on any of these important events? https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/06/a-promised-land?lang=eng And the Nazca lines in Peru are landing strips for the airships of the lost tribes/or for flying saucers (take your pick)
CV75 Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 12 hours ago, cinepro said: Does anyone know if he's changed his views on any of these important events? https://www.lds.org/ensign/1976/06/a-promised-land?lang=eng I take it that the most relevant and profitable aspects of his views were of a spiritual nature then, and as with most faithful people, would have advanced in spiritual depth over the last 40 years. 1
Storm Rider Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 These types of threads always make me laugh. Take any single one of us and record all our thoughts and everything we have ever said. Having done this I am certain that we could then pull out statements and prove each of us are flaming idiots of the lowest order. Does an apostle or prophet forfeit his humanity upon accepting to serve humanity? Does serving as an apostle/prophet require perfection from childhood so that each thought, each statement was in perfect accord with all truth, simple, direct, without nuance. More importantly, can each of statements be prevented from being taken out of context or distorted in any way? I guess it is too much to just ask the bloke what they actually think today rather than yesterday or any time before they were called to serve. Would any of be meet the standard that you set up for anyone that serves in leadership?
HappyJackWagon Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 Elder Holland strikes me as a literalist. I'm reminded of this recent talk where he says to appreciate the atonement one must first understand there was a literal Adam and Eve in a literal Garden and a literal fall. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/where-justice-love-and-mercy-meet?lang=eng Quote In our increasingly secular society, it is as uncommon as it is unfashionable to speak of Adam and Eve or the Garden of Eden or of a “fortunate fall” into mortality. Nevertheless, the simple truth is that we cannot fully comprehend the Atonement and Resurrection of Christ and we will not adequately appreciate the unique purpose of His birth or His death—in other words, there is no way to truly celebrate Christmas or Easter—without understanding that there was an actual Adam and Eve who fell from an actual Eden, with all the consequences that fall carried with it. 1
jkwilliams Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 48 minutes ago, Storm Rider said: These types of threads always make me laugh. Take any single one of us and record all our thoughts and everything we have ever said. Having done this I am certain that we could then pull out statements and prove each of us are flaming idiots of the lowest order. Does an apostle or prophet forfeit his humanity upon accepting to serve humanity? Does serving as an apostle/prophet require perfection from childhood so that each thought, each statement was in perfect accord with all truth, simple, direct, without nuance. More importantly, can each of statements be prevented from being taken out of context or distorted in any way? I guess it is too much to just ask the bloke what they actually think today rather than yesterday or any time before they were called to serve. Would any of be meet the standard that you set up for anyone that serves in leadership? What's interesting to me is that, as bcspace pointed out, this article was approved by Correlation, since it postdates 1971, the year when all church materials became subject to Correlation review. LDS scriptures are clear that the earth has a "temporal existence" of 7,000 years (D&C 77:6-7), so Elder Holland's article is certainly consistent with scriptural doctrine. What came before the "temporal existence" isn't clear, but scripture and church leaders have consistently taught that there was no death on the earth before the Fall of Adam, so a literal reading would exclude the possibility of evolution, human or otherwise. We read in 2 Nephi 2: 22: Quote And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end. When I was a believer, I just figured the physical evidence is pretty conclusive in favor of a very old world and speciation through evolutionary processes, so the scriptures as given weren't meant to be taken literally. Again, I find it absolutely fascinating how some people try to reconcile a literal reading of the scriptures with an old earth and evolution. 2
Storm Rider Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 The existence of God as determined solely by scripture or by the statements of those who are perceived as servants of God are not the crux or pivot point of my faith. Nor are they even the sole outline of what I believe is true or have found to be true. You seem to live your life in an effort to disprove God based upon the actions or influence of others. My belief is benefited by hearing and reading, but my faith is built strictly upon my personal interaction with God. There was a time when I entertained an atheistic approach to life, but that path is not available to me any longer, not because I know, but my faith prevents such a position of spiritual ignorance. Regardless of our individual choices, if what you are doing makes you happy then stick to it and don't change. If, however, you find that you are not very happy or want something more, he remains God and is willing to play a part in your life.
jkwilliams Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 19 minutes ago, Storm Rider said: The existence of God as determined solely by scripture or by the statements of those who are perceived as servants of God are not the crux or pivot point of my faith. Nor are they even the sole outline of what I believe is true or have found to be true. You seem to live your life in an effort to disprove God based upon the actions or influence of others. My belief is benefited by hearing and reading, but my faith is built strictly upon my personal interaction with God. There was a time when I entertained an atheistic approach to life, but that path is not available to me any longer, not because I know, but my faith prevents such a position of spiritual ignorance. Regardless of our individual choices, if what you are doing makes you happy then stick to it and don't change. If, however, you find that you are not very happy or want something more, he remains God and is willing to play a part in your life. Not sure who this is addressed to, but I agree with you that belief in God is a matter of subjective experience, not "proof" or evidence. It would be quite odd to try to "disprove God" based on anything. How do you think that would work?
thesometimesaint Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 (edited) Depends on what you call evidence. If you claim Empirical Evidence is the only type of evidence. Then sure there is none, and probably won't be until Jesus returns. Edited August 8, 2016 by thesometimesaint spelling
thesometimesaint Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 4 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Depends on what you call evidence. If you claim Empirical Evidence is the only type of evidence. Then sure there is none, and probably won't be until Jesus returns.
Robert F. Smith Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 9 hours ago, cinepro said: That's an odd reaction to a simple post that highlights some teachings made by Elder Holland (teachings which are well supported and reinforced by the scriptures and Church publications, I would point out). In the other thread, people seemed really upset that JC had not provided any references for a supposed claim by Elder Holland, so I thought I could make everyone happy by providing some claims that were referenced. But I suspect some LDS prefer anything that is taught by leaders that contradicts their worldview to be unreferenced, so as to make it easier to ignore them. As for the timing of the quotes, I wasn't aware that talks in General Conference came with an expiration date. Certainly, the recent courses of study in Church that have highlighted teachings that were decades or even 100+ years old would seem to indicate that aged talks can still have some value. Obviously, if there are subsequent Church curriculum or teachings by Church leaders published by the Church that contradict Elder Holland's teachings, then he would stand corrected. If you are aware of any such thing, do share. You keep saying "Elder Holland," cinepro, as though to give his speculative comments prophetic legs of some sort, but your citation is to a man who was the LDS Commissioner of Education. He did not become a general authority until years later. However, it is very interesting that general authorities who are scientists often disagree on fundamental issues such as the age of the Earth and whether evolution is correct or not. I have cited and quoted some of that. They are as entitled to speculation as the rest of us. Instead of making it appear that there is only one version of reality on such issues, you would do well to provide the correct picture -- which is one of wide diversity of views among the Brethren and in Scripture. 1
Storm Rider Posted August 8, 2016 Posted August 8, 2016 1 hour ago, jkwilliams said: Not sure who this is addressed to, but I agree with you that belief in God is a matter of subjective experience, not "proof" or evidence. It would be quite odd to try to "disprove God" based on anything. How do you think that would work? It appears that you have done that already. Maybe you should explain how or why you are a unbeliever.
Recommended Posts