How to Answer Questions about Church History

[Bernard Gui]

32 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

That is the narrative your family crafted to tell the story of your Dad’s conversion.  You embue these symbols with power in the process.  Traditions, rituals, symbols all have very important and powerful meaning.  

I’m not much into the trendy “your narrative” thing. We didn’t craft a story. I reported the facts, not symbols, we witnessed first hand.

Craft: 3: skill in deceiving to gain an end  

• used craft and guile to close the deal

Edited July 26, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[hope_for_things]

15 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I responded to that question. Not many authors, if any, include that invitation. Are you aware of any? A Baptist minister once told me if you pray about the Book of Mormon, Satan will answer the prayer.

Why would anyone pray to find out if Harry Potter, Jabberwocky, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, a math tables book, or the New York Times were true? The Bible doesn’t include such an invitation about itself. 

Isn’t the BoM supposed to be a compilation of multiple texts by various authors over thousands of years with a diverse opinions.  One author, Moroni, invites you to pray about what exactly, his small portion, or all of the texts, including Nephi’s small plates and Ether?  

The Bible is also a collection of texts over many years.  At some future date maybe a group of people will gather together all the words of the internet into a canon for our generation. 

What does it even mean to pray about multiple texts by multiple authors anyway?  

[hope_for_things]

20 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I’m not much into the trendy “your narrative” thing. We didn’t craft a story. I reported the facts, not symbols, we witnessed first hand.

Craft: 3: skill in deceiving to gain an end  

• used craft and guile to close the deal

I’m not denigrating your story by pointing out that it is a story with subjective meaning for your family.  

[Jane_Doe]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Just trying to point out what I see as a problem with the way you’ve compared the religious stories children are told to the scientific teachings children learn in school.  There are so many different religious teachings, within Mormonism as well as across time and culture and scripture.  All these teachings don’t harmonize.  All these teachings dont build on basic fundamentals.  There are as many different beliefs about religion as there are humans on this earth.  Science is very different, I don’t think your analogy works.  

Actually I first spoke of how we teach science in 4th grade and how that is totally different to science taught later on.  And part of that learning is going through and "that biology rule I told you about last year-- well there's a ton of exceptions because things are actually much more complicated than that cartoon I told you earlier.  Here's how what I told you before was incomplete/wrong....".  

The very foundations of what you 'know' before are constantly being reexamined and revised across time and cultures, much of which is contradictory (either on the surface or deep down).  We only know a very little and are constantly being challenged by new things.

[Hamba Tuhan]

7 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Same way you know you’re awake and typing me a message.  

I'm not sure I do know that. Do you know it? How? And if so, can you convince me of what you know?

Quote

I haven’t seen convincing evidence to support the idea that angelic visions are anything tangible that happens in a measurable way.

Tangible? Measurable? You mean just like the interaction you and I are having in this forum??? 

Edited July 26, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan

[Hamba Tuhan]

7 hours ago, Tacenda said:

But feel left out of not getting any answers for so long. 

Whenever I feel left out, I'm reminded of our father Abraham's approach: 'And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers ... desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge ... and to keep the commandments of God'.

I'm also reminded of the counsel from Paul: 'But covet earnestly the best gifts' and 'Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy'.

To the best of my knowledge, this is the only coveting approved of anywhere in scripture. It has certainly served me well.

[Robert F. Smith]

13 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

I read your replies, and they constitute your opinion about what Dr. Harper meant, however you don’t provide evidence to support that opinion either specifically from something he stated in the video or somewhere else.  Maybe some quotes from Dr. Harper that explain your interpretation of what he said.  I’m looking for something more substantive.  

In other words, you have no substantive reasons for finding my comments erroneous in any way.  If you had, you could certainly have pointed out my error(s).  It is very easy to make the generic assertion (as you do) without bothering to specify a factual basis for it.  That is the normal response I so frequently hear to the data provided by professional historians:  Non-professionals are more than happy to agree with whatever fits their preconceptions, and simply dismiss anything that does not fit.  That is just not the same as a real discussion among professional historians -- where substance is the focus.

I would be more than happy to entertain a substantive objection to anything Harper said.  The onus is on you to provide the basis for that objection -- if you actually have one.

[hope_for_things]

12 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

In other words, you have no substantive reasons for finding my comments erroneous in any way.  If you had, you could certainly have pointed out my error(s).  It is very easy to make the generic assertion (as you do) without bothering to specify a factual basis for it.  That is the normal response I so frequently hear to the data provided by professional historians:  Non-professionals are more than happy to agree with whatever fits their preconceptions, and simply dismiss anything that does not fit.  That is just not the same as a real discussion among professional historians -- where substance is the focus.

I would be more than happy to entertain a substantive objection to anything Harper said.  The onus is on you to provide the basis for that objection -- if you actually have one.

I’ve provided points referencing multiple things he said in the video.  You’ve referenced nothing Dr. Harper actually said, only that you think I’m wrong without supporting that through analyzing what he said.  Ironically, you’ve gotten this situation completely backwards.  

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

I’ve provided points referencing multiple things he said in the video.  You’ve referenced nothing Dr. Harper actually said, only that you think I’m wrong without supporting that through analyzing what he said.  Ironically, you’ve gotten this situation completely backwards.  

False.  I actually discussed the points you raised (twice).  You failed to respond to any of those points I made.  It is clear that you are merely being diisagreeable, rather than disagreeing with something substantive.

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

False.  I actually discussed the points you raised (twice).  You failed to respond to any of those points I made.  It is clear that you are merely being diisagreeable, rather than disagreeing with something substantive.

It’s hard for me to believe that your perception of reality is so different than how I’m seeing this, considering that we are both writing in the same language.  I’ll leave it as is, inability to communicate.  

[carbon dioxide]

On 7/26/2018 at 10:57 AM, hope_for_things said:

Well I asked this question earlier but why don’t we pray about other books or media to ask God if they are true?  Any author could put words like Moroni’s promise into their text.

 I’m not trying to change your mind or have you stop doing what works well for you.  Just having a discussion.  

People should pray about any issue that concerns them.  Moroni promise can be applied to other situations. 

[hope_for_things]

4 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

People should pray about any issue that concerns them.  Moroni promise can be applied to other situations. 

Just curious, but have you prayed about other books, or media before?  And if you did, what would you expect an answer from God to mean.  

For example if you prayed about a copy of the USA Today, and got a good feeling.  Does that mean God endorses all the various different articles in that particular issue?  Or perhaps all issues into perpetuity? 

[cdowis]

On 7/24/2018 at 5:58 PM, Jane_Doe said:

Here's my parallel: I teach biology on a number of levels (pre-K through graduate).  I am quite honest with my students: what I am telling you right now is a simplification of how the real world works.   What your 3rd grade teacher told you and showed you on "The Magic School Bus" was great understanding for 10 year olds-- I watch "The Magic School Bus" with my own daughter.  But for this college class we're ditching the 90's cartoon simplifications and I'm going to tell you a much more complicated story that doesn't alway match up with Ms. Frizzle's telling for 10 year olds.  And if you go on to Graduate School, you'll find all the find all exceptions to the simplified version "rules" I'm going to tell you in here-- I'm still learning those complexities myself. 

I like it.  As a very active apologist, I deal with this issue almost  every day in the youtube discussions.

Let's take some examples

1. the recitations of the First Vision == an angel, Christ alone, Christ and the Father are reported to have appeared.

2. Mountain Meadows

3. Wives of Joseph Smith who were already married.

4. Nauvoo Expositor

These are not a matter of faith (should poor people pay tithe) but of historical events.  And my responses range  from elementary school to graduate school.

https://mormonhub.com/forums/topic/57532-youtube-apologetics/

 

Edited July 29, 2018 by cdowis

[cdowis]

On 7/26/2018 at 12:36 AM, Hamba Tuhan said:

My father was lying in bed next to his pregnant, sleeping wife one night, praying earnestly that both she and the baby would be fine (despite the fact that she'd earlier been told that another pregnancy would most probably result in the loss of her life). According to his report, he saw the room brighten through his closed eyelids, and when he opened his eyes, a man dressed all in white was standing next to the bed. As part of the ensuing conversation, Dad was promised that Mum and I would both be fine.

 

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

On 7/29/2018 at 6:55 AM, hope_for_things said:

Just curious, but have you prayed about other books, or media before?  And if you did, what would you expect an answer from God to mean.  

I know you're not addressing me, but I'll answer. I have never in my entire life prayed about any book, including the Book of Mormon. I feel reasonably confident that if I did, the response would be silence. I'm happy if this kind of approach works for other people. It doesn't work for me. Clearly, God is OK with that.

[hope_for_things]

3 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I know you're not addressing me, but I'll answer. I have never in my entire life prayed about any book, including the Book of Mormon. I feel reasonably confident that if I did, the response would be silence. I'm happy if this kind of approach works for other people. It doesn't work for me. Clearly, God is OK with that.

Interesting, you are definitely the exception to the rule in modern Mormonism.  

[Hamba Tuhan]

47 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Interesting, you are definitely the exception to the rule in modern Mormonism.  

Which, perhaps, illustrates how individualised God is in working with His children. He knows what channels of communication work for me and seems happy and willing to utilise those.

[Jane_Doe]

4 hours ago, cdowis said:

I like it.  As a very active apologist, I deal with this issue almost  every day in the youtube discussions.

Let's take some examples

1. the recitations of the First Vision == an angel, Christ alone, Christ and the Father are reported to have appeared.

2. Mountain Meadows

3. Wives of Joseph Smith who were already married.

4. Nauvoo Expositor

These are not a matter of faith (should poor people pay tithe) but of historical events.  And my responses range  from elementary school to graduate school.

https://mormonhub.com/forums/topic/57532-youtube-apologetics/

 

Yeah, I enjoy reading your posts over there regularly.  Though I'm amazing at your fortitude / insanity to constantly deal with YouTube comments sections.

[Hamba Tuhan]

12 hours ago, cdowis said:

[AntiMormon Critic Relates a Shocking Encounter in a Mormon Temple]

And this is why we're so frustrating to so many. It's not about what's written in a book or what someone might have said or done in the past. It's not some intellectual or philosophical exercise. It's our everyday lived experience.

One of my heroes in the New Testament is the man born blind: 'Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give God the praise: we know that this man [Jesus] is a sinner. He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see'.

[Stargazer]

On 7/25/2018 at 2:28 AM, mfbukowski said:

Wait a minute.....

He's not real?????

 

 

 

[Stargazer]

14 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

I know you're not addressing me, but I'll answer. I have never in my entire life prayed about any book, including the Book of Mormon. I feel reasonably confident that if I did, the response would be silence. I'm happy if this kind of approach works for other people. It doesn't work for me. Clearly, God is OK with that.

 

11 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

Interesting, you are definitely the exception to the rule in modern Mormonism.  

I might be another exception.  Before I embarked on my mission I decided I needed to do what I knew I would be admonishing my investigators to do, which is to pray about the Book of Mormon.  So, for the first time I embarked on a cover-to-cover read.  I had read a lot here and there, and probably had read everything in it over the course of my then 5 years of membership), but never cover-to-cover.  At the end of the read I knelt down and asked if the Book of Mormon were true.  And got nothing.  I was really annoyed with God about that, and prayed each evening for a few days, and always got nothing.  It was then that I realized something: I already knew it was true.  I had known it was true for years.  My annoyance with God was part of the key -- He knew I knew it, I knew he knew I knew it, and giving me an answer like that would be like confirming that the sky is blue, something I already knew.  In fact, when the young man who introduced me to the Church told me about the Book of Mormon for the first time, I believed him instantly.  For some unexplainable reason, it sounded plausible.  I never ever doubted it, and the belief grew into faith and then into certainty.  

I've had some marvelous spiritual experiences over the years, but I was a believer in the Book of Mormon from the beginning.

Oh, and by the way, today, July 30, is the 52nd anniversary of my baptism!!

[hope_for_things]

10 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Which, perhaps, illustrates how individualised God is in working with His children. He knows what channels of communication work for me and seems happy and willing to utilise those.

This is a great assumption and should be given to all people from all stripes of life and religions.  God knows how to communicate and what works for each individual best.  Then we don't have to get into the debates about my answer from God is better than your answer from God.  

[hope_for_things]

5 minutes ago, Stargazer said:

 

I might be another exception.  Before I embarked on my mission I decided I needed to do what I knew I would be admonishing my investigators to do, which is to pray about the Book of Mormon.  So, for the first time I embarked on a cover-to-cover read.  I had read a lot here and there, and probably had read everything in it over the course of my then 5 years of membership), but never cover-to-cover.  At the end of the read I knelt down and asked if the Book of Mormon were true.  And got nothing.  I was really annoyed with God about that, and prayed each evening for a few days, and always got nothing.  It was then that I realized something: I already knew it was true.  I had known it was true for years.  My annoyance with God was part of the key -- He knew I knew it, I knew he knew I knew it, and giving me an answer like that would be like confirming that the sky is blue, something I already knew.  In fact, when the young man who introduced me to the Church told me about the Book of Mormon for the first time, I believed him instantly.  For some unexplainable reason, it sounded plausible.  I never ever doubted it, and the belief grew into faith and then into certainty.  

I've had some marvelous spiritual experiences over the years, but I was a believer in the Book of Mormon from the beginning.

Oh, and by the way, today, July 30, is the 52nd anniversary of my baptism!!

I see your example much more commonly than what Hamba expressed.  You did pray about the BoM, and your answer to that prayer came in the form of a realization that you knew it was true.  I hear that all the time.  I've heard others express that they felt it was true before they finished reading or felt it to be true while reading it.  I consider all those descriptions a form of prayer, don't you?  Prayer doesn't have to be a formal process, isn't that a prayer in our heart anyway?  

I suspect Hamba also had that kind of experience as well, but described his experience as not praying about it.  

The point I'm trying to make is how we feel about the things we read, the sense that when we read or consume some form of media that we feel a certain way towards that content is a normal human experience.  The feelings we have are evidence of how we relate to the content that we're consuming.  Do we agree with it, does it move us to action, what emotions do we feel about it, do we get angry and feel like the content is incorrect and wrong.  This happens with everything we consume, we have some sense as to how we relate towards that content.  This is the same thing as praying or feeling good about the BoM in my opinion.  Yet I don't think most orthodox Mormons would describe this in the same terms.  

 

[hope_for_things]

An interesting podcast discussion where they spend a couple hours analyzing and discussing this interview with Dr. Harper was just released, in case anyone is interested.  

https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/08/how-to-not-answer-questions-on-church-history-with-steven-harper-part-1/

https://mormondiscussionpodcast.org/2018/08/how-to-not-answer-questions-on-church-history-with-steven-harper-part-2/

 

[Meerkat]

On 7/24/2018 at 1:15 PM, hope_for_things said:

For me, I learned that the spiritual experiences I have aren't evidence to confirm historical events.  They are individual and subjective experiences that have value for my personal life, but that they don't tell me facts about history

You have had spiritual experiences and have made a decision to interpret them as valuable, but not necessarily evidence of truth. 

I have had many spiritual experiences about Jesus Christ, the Book of Mormon and the prophet Joseph Smith.  I interpret them as evidence that those things are true. With that faith, I read the scriptures, including the Book of Mormon, and act on what they teach.  That obedience results in further experiences that prove to me that those spiritual experiences testify of truth.  They are foundational in the joy of my overall life experience.  My interpretation of those experiences gives me a framework for a philosophically tidy and deeply meaningful life.  Regarding historical accuracy, I believe a lot of it, probably most is true.  But I also believe the ancient prophets were people like me who sometimes remember inaccurately, or misunderstand what has happened in a given incident.  But those incidents are so minor as to have no impact on my interpretation of spiritual experiences.  I accept their value to me independent of historical accuracy.  That does not discount their historical accuracy to me.

On 7/24/2018 at 1:17 PM, hope_for_things said:

Would you say that there is any way to accurately determine if Joseph Smith experienced a theophany from a factual and historical perspective?  

It's accurate enough in so many ways that have been confirmed to me, I accept it as factual and generally historical, as I do the other scriptures.  The way I have described here proves it to my satisfaction.   When I don't see the accuracy of a scripture, I wait for the flash of inspiration or other evidence to clarify any confusion.  It usually comes.  Where it doesn't, I wait with faith the answer will be revealed eventually.  That's where faith comes in, the evidence of things not seen-- apparently unsupported belief sustained by spiritual experiences.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Meerkat