Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

'Lazy learner'


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

This is something new to me. In this link is evidence that Sarah Pratt was right about JS's relationship with Bennett and the two of them doing things that weren't the best. Need help on if this affidavit is indeed from Hyrum Smith, or am I reading something wrong? https://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paper-summary/times-and-seasons-1-august-1842/8

FAIRLatterDaySaints isn't much help on their response. 

Where is the evidence in the link that Joseph Smith was doing things he shouldn’t have along with Bennett?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Calm said:

Where is the evidence in the link that Joseph Smith was doing things he shouldn’t have along with Bennett?

Just wondered if Hyrum is saying all of it? I'm confused...but that's nothing new. But mgy401 is saying that Bennett said he lied, so I had not read to that part, but will now. I am a lazy learner!

Edited by Tacenda
Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

Is this a concerning statement to anyone:

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2021-10-17/russell-nelson-dieter-uchtdorf-devotional-oklahoma-kansas-native-americans-229800?fbclid=IwAR2l-kVeO81Ycno05xTEUWMf5KsMtZfkGe0FCo0Gr7o7hOcJ7VraClj84n4

President Nelson clarified that the Book of Mormon is not a historical textbook. Instead, it further defines many Bible teachings — while revealing new concepts and refuting many falsehoods, including the notion that revelation ended with the Bible and that one can be saved by grace alone.

Link to comment
34 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Is this a concerning statement to anyone:

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2021-10-17/russell-nelson-dieter-uchtdorf-devotional-oklahoma-kansas-native-americans-229800?fbclid=IwAR2l-kVeO81Ycno05xTEUWMf5KsMtZfkGe0FCo0Gr7o7hOcJ7VraClj84n4

President Nelson clarified that the Book of Mormon is not a historical textbook. Instead, it further defines many Bible teachings — while revealing new concepts and refuting many falsehoods, including the notion that revelation ended with the Bible and that one can be saved by grace alone.

Nope. It makes me smile tho.

I’m glad there is room being made for nuanced faith, even if it comes at a snail’s pace.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Amulek said:

What about it?

Just because something isn't a historical textbook doesn't mean that it never happened or that it is a work of fiction.

 

Is this the way the church is going about it, or an answer for the anachronisms throughout the bom? One little word, "textbook", is probably going to make way for the church to answer the problematic issues in the book I guess. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Is this the way the church is going about it, or an answer for the anachronisms throughout the bom? One little word, "textbook", is probably going to make way for the church to answer the problematic issues in the book I guess. 

A textbook is a book containing a comprehensive compilation of content in a branch of study with the intention of explaining it.  Whether the Bible or the Book of Mormon were written with the intention of explaining the texts in those books is debatable.

Edited by bOObOO
Link to comment
On 7/9/2021 at 12:18 PM, Teancum said:

Come on. The LDS Church has taught since the 1840s that humans can become gods and create and people worlds just like God does.  It is strange to see the dance around this.

I concur.  I was taught this growing up in the 70s and ever since until recently.  It may not be considered an essential doctrine, but it was considered doctrinal nonetheless.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

Is this the way the church is going about it, or an answer for the anachronisms throughout the bom? One little word, "textbook", is probably going to make way for the church to answer the problematic issues in the book I guess. 

My dos pesos about this is the church continues to slowly move away from the historicity of the BoM.  At some point it will be taught that is was received by revelation instead of through magic rocks….  Just like the teachings of becoming gods and getting our own planets. This doctrine is evolving…in fact, I’m not aware of any doctrine unique to Mormonism that hasn’t evolved.

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Going about what?

 

I don't think President Nelson was attempting to address anachronisms with his remark.

 

There will always be reasons to doubt though. Without the possibility of doubt, how could you ever have a free choice to believe?

No, what President Nelson was emphasizing is the purpose of the Book of Mormon. The BOM was never meant (nor does it claim) to be a detailed historical treatise. It was written "to the convincing of Jew and Gentile that JESUS is the CHRIST, the ETERNAL GOD, manifesting himself unto all nations."

If you approach the BOM like a textbook (which it isn't) instead of scripture (as it claims to be) then you very well might end up missing the entire point of having it in the first place.

 

Very true! I guess I'm good at getting good responses like this one. Maybe that's why I'm not banned yet. ;)

Link to comment

I think this is very serious. I just looked up the title page of the Book of Mormon online. It used to read, 'Wherefore, it is an historical textbook of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites', but now the Church has changed it to 'Wherefore, it is an abridgment of the record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites'. Very troubling ...

What's next? 'Wherefore, it is a completely made-up story about the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites'??? :o

Edited by Hamba Tuhan
Link to comment

Couldn't one take the BoM and create a historical textbook from the historical events and people within it? If so I would suggest that it is a religious book that contains within itself a historical textbook. If not, why not?

Edited by CA Steve
Link to comment
26 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Couldn't one take the BoM and create a historical textbook from the historical events and people within it?

I don’t think so, at least not a good one.  I think too little detail is provided for a textbook and there is a massive focus where very little is said about anything  outside that focus.

Link to comment
22 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Couldn't one take the BoM and create a historical textbook from the historical events and people within it? If so I would suggest that it is a religious book that contains within itself a historical textbook. If not, why not?

No one really couldn't do that, and for the same reason that one couldn't take a Holocaust memoir and try to make a historical textbook from it. 

It just wouldn't work. It would contain too many personal beliefs and biased perspectives, while lacking the primary and secondary sources necessary to create a textbook (which by definition means a book that exists for purely educational purposes).  

Someone's personal experience of an event is not the same as the history of an event.

 

Link to comment
On 10/19/2021 at 8:20 PM, CA Steve said:

Couldn't one take the BoM and create a historical textbook from the historical events and people within it? If so I would suggest that it is a religious book that contains within itself a historical textbook. If not, why not?

No, there is not enough data. It would be like trying to write a textbook on the history of the Roman Republic and later Empire based entirely on the New Testament and only the New Testament. You don’t have enough information to draw many conclusions.

Link to comment
On 10/19/2021 at 9:50 PM, Calm said:

I don’t think so, at least not a good one.  I think too little detail is provided for a textbook and there is a massive focus where very little is said about anything  outside that focus.

 

On 10/19/2021 at 9:52 PM, bluebell said:

No one really couldn't do that, and for the same reason that one couldn't take a Holocaust memoir and try to make a historical textbook from it. 

It just wouldn't work. It would contain too many personal beliefs and biased perspectives, while lacking the primary and secondary sources necessary to create a textbook (which by definition means a book that exists for purely educational purposes).  

Someone's personal experience of an event is not the same as the history of an event.

 

15 hours ago, The Nehor said:

No, there is not enough data. It would be like trying to write a textbook on the history of the Roman Republic and later Empire based entirely on the New Testament and only the New Testament. You don’t have enough information to draw many conclusions.

So what is Mormon's Codex: An Ancient American Book?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, CA Steve said:

My understanding of it (haven’t read it or made it to the library, book buying is delayed until I see myself able to concentrate enough) is that it is a compilation of 400 alleged correspondences between the Book of Mormon and Mesoamerica during certain time periods.   It is a book dealing with historical analysis, I assume, but does not appear to match what I would describe as a history textbook…the purpose imo of which is to teach a narrative of history, not to make the argument something belongs in a certain time period. 
 

From Amazon:

Quote

Leading scholar and author John L. Sorenson brilliantly synthesizes in this volume his work from 60 years of academic study of ancient Mesoamerica and its relationship to the Book of Mormon. 

Here Sorenson reveals that the Book of Mormon exhibits what one would expect of a historical document produced in the context of ancient Mesoamerican civilization. He also shows that scholars’ discoveries about Mesoamerica and the contents of the Nephite record are clearly related. Indeed, Sorenson lists more than 400 points where the Book of Mormon text corresponds to characteristic Mesoamerican situations, statements, allusions, and history.

 

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...