"Bible Study": neo-tracting and sneaky Trojan horse?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 6140
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: "Bible Study": neo-tracting and sneaky Trojan horse?

Post by Moksha »

The missionaries might get some neophytes to the Bible and could adequately furnish the basics. A person from Asia who newly moved to North America and wants an overview of the new culture might benefit. If I were moving to the Middle East, I would certainly want to know more about the customs and taboos of Islam. The question is, can the missionaries deliver without breaking into sales mode? Will the high-pressure reputation of the LDS Church precede it or will the name change provide sufficient camouflage?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
IHAQ
God
Posts: 1531
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2020 8:00 am

Re: "Bible Study": neo-tracting and sneaky Trojan horse?

Post by IHAQ »

Given the Church has only one religious objective - that of baptising people, everything of this nature is a Trojan Horse activity. Bible Study is simply the latest iteration of the Baseball/Basketball baptism programmes.
huckelberry
God
Posts: 2745
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: "Bible Study": neo-tracting and sneaky Trojan horse?

Post by huckelberry »

slskipper wrote:
Mon Oct 31, 2022 5:02 am
I got a lot out of studying the Bible. I learned that The Torah was not written by Moses, that Isaiah was the first Bible book written and that Isaiah and his cohort never even heard of Adam and Eve. I learned that there were at least three Isaiahs. I learned that the authors of the Gospels never knew Jesus. I learned that only about half of the Epistles of Paul were written by Paul. I learned that the four Gospels were chosen out of a large set because they supported the institutional church at the expense of individual spiritual growth. So yes, I whole-heartedly approve of Bible study.
Siskipper,
It seems there is some mystery or al least uncertainty in understanding the history of the growth of the Biblical beliefs. I can understand Isaiah as first or at least one of the first(the other early prophets) books written. It does not discuss Adam and Eve. I do not know how one would be sure if that shows whether such a story was known at that time. I would be curious to know.

I am doubtful of the idea that the four gospels were chosen at the expense of individual spiritual growth. We do not have the other first century gospels so it is difficult to determine what spiritual value they contained. Perhaps Thomas is an exception. As far as I have seen its valuable teaching are also to be found in the four standard gospels.
Post Reply