Stargazer Posted September 19, 2016 Posted September 19, 2016 On 9/17/2016 at 9:17 PM, notHagoth7 said: True. Upon closer investigation, however, I would suggest that your point is somewhat less relevant than it might appear to be at first glance, as it suggests John would/did take an approach 180 degrees different from what you're saying you might have done. I'm guessing you didn't really mean that. Or did you? You're not really asserting that Islam is a pagan faith, are you? By way of comparison, the Julian calendar was created in a pre-Christian Roman era. Would you exclude such a calendar from consideration for prophetic reckoning, simply because it was introduced during a largely-pagan period of the Roman Republic? If not, why? Same for the Mayan calendar? etc.? Last I checked, God often speaks to people's understanding and specific circumstances. Just as Mormon saw and spoke to the specific people/situations that were clearly revealed to him centuries in advance. Hence, since John was also shown events centuries beyond his own day, the Muslim calendar was an appropriate/meaningful template for his target audience, because the Muslim calendar was the civil calendar for Asia Minor when the prophecy was fulfilled. If it might be helpful for others, years back I wrote up a comparison of the verbiage in Rev 11 (which contains an 1844 timeline) and that in Daniel 8 (which contains a second corroborating 1844 timeline). The two passages are companion, parallel prophecies, both in symbolism and in time. Listening. Why would John do that? For what purpose would he utilize a Jewish calendar that had zero relevance to his intended audience at the time of his prophecy's fulfillment? I could see why *Daniel*, six centuries earlier, would utilize the Jewish calendar for his/Gabriel's Messianic timeline, since that calendar would still be in use among the intended target audience when his/Gabriel's promise was fulfilled. But such was not the case with John's timelines. At the time appointed, his intended audience was using completely different ways to reckon time....and had been, for centuries. Is that response somewhat helpful? Now, while I find your ideas along this line intriguing, I confess that I feel that they are more along the lines of "the Gospel according to notHagoth7" than something I would consider authoritative. Is this your own idea, or are you repeating an argument someone else has made?
Gervin Posted September 19, 2016 Posted September 19, 2016 9 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: How do you imagine that we should recreate those Bible bashes which several of us here have witnessed or participated in during years past, Erik?? They weren't videotaped or filmed. However, one indicator of this is independent research showing that Mormons know the Bible better than evangelicals. http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref=/sltrib/home/50374273-76/bible-religion-survey-atheists.html.csp (the names of Jim Faulconer and Richard Evans are misspelled), and http://www.pewforum.org/2010/09/28/u-s-religious-knowledge-survey/ . You don't address the CFR: the article you cite is about general religious knowledge. Of the 20 questions presented here, knowledge of the Bible would help you with only about four. My guess is that the humiliation you imagine being heaped on Christians by Mormons is just that ... imaginary.
Robert F. Smith Posted September 19, 2016 Posted September 19, 2016 55 minutes ago, Gervin said: You don't address the CFR: the article you cite is about general religious knowledge. Of the 20 questions presented here, knowledge of the Bible would help you with only about four. These independent research results are merely indicative. Perhaps you have results showing the opposite tendency. In any case, personal observation of past Bible bashes is not subject to a CFR since there is no reasonable way in which to recreate them. That is the nature of personal observation of such encounters, Gervin. 55 minutes ago, Gervin said: My guess is that the humiliation you imagine being heaped on Christians by Mormons is just that ... imaginary. Again, that was my personal observation. However, I don't see any value at all in heaping humiliation upon anyone in such encounters, as I have already pointed out. That is a motive I associate with a lack of sincerity in the mutual combatants. I do know of Mormon encounters with an evangelical expert in such interreligious warfare, although I did not personally witness it: So you might want to ask Professor Norman L. Geisler his views on the matter. He is currently Chancellor of Veritas Evangelical Seminary, the Distinguished Professor of Apologetics at that school, and a Visiting Professor of Apologetics at Southern Evangelical Seminary. His tough Mormon encounters occurred when he was teaching at Dallas Theological Seminary decades ago, and he may have mentioned them in some of his many publications on apologetics. A member of this board was his primary opponent in those encounters, if he cares to weigh in on the results. I have no doubt that such encounters helped Dr Geisler in writing about the LDS faith as a cult.
boblloyd91 Posted September 19, 2016 Posted September 19, 2016 5 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said: These independent research results are merely indicative. Perhaps you have results showing the opposite tendency. In any case, personal observation of past Bible bashes is not subject to a CFR since there is no reasonable way in which to recreate them. That is the nature of personal observation of such encounters, Gervin. Again, that was my personal observation. However, I don't see any value at all in heaping humiliation upon anyone in such encounters, as I have already pointed out. That is a motive I associate with a lack of sincerity in the mutual combatants. I do know of Mormon encounters with an evangelical expert in such interreligious warfare, although I did not personally witness it: So you might want to ask Professor Norman L. Geisler his views on the matter. He is currently Chancellor of Veritas Evangelical Seminary, the Distinguished Professor of Apologetics at that school, and a Visiting Professor of Apologetics at Southern Evangelical Seminary. His tough Mormon encounters occurred when he was teaching at Dallas Theological Seminary decades ago, and he may have mentioned them in some of his many publications on apologetics. A member of this board was his primary opponent in those encounters, if he cares to weigh in on the results. I have no doubt that such encounters helped Dr Geisler in writing about the LDS faith as a cult. Well now I'm curious who that board member was! 1
Oliver_Cowdery Posted September 19, 2016 Posted September 19, 2016 (edited) On 9/17/2016 at 9:25 PM, Scott Lloyd said: I think such Mormons may not exist in anything other than legend and lore. Do you perhaps have in mind the use of source material in Sunday lessons? That's quite a different matter than out-and-out "refusal to read." For one thing, I'm not aware of any list of "Church-approved" reading material. Are you? Believe me, those type of Mormons do exists in larger numbers than one might expect. They are in my family and I know many of them very well. You are correct, there is no church approved list of books. That is what makes their position so ridiculous. But the fact that the church owns a book publisher and store encourages their behavior. When they see a church book they open it and look at the publisher. If it wasn't purchased from Deseret Book or published by the church itself, they say it is unapproved. I've got a close family member who flat out refuses to read Rough Stone Rolling because he is afraid of what he might learn. Edited September 19, 2016 by Oliver_Cowdery 2
Recommended Posts