stemelbow wrote:
I have absolutely no support in my own bones for the prop 8 business. I think the Church is somewhat steering away from the “get heavily involved in a state matter like this” since prop 8. As much as I'm all for gay marriage, I also realize the Church will not change its position--that gay marriage should be fought against politically.
You are definitely in the minority at church.
My approach, which is often maligned here, sometimes with good reason, on historical matters is “we simply don’t know as much as we pretend to know”.
Definitely some times with good reason. I find apologists pretending we don't know as much as we do, simply to protect belief.
We really, when it all comes down to it, don’t know the method of translation regarding the Book of Mormon. All we have is a few statements made by people who were witnesses to some extent, but don’t seem to offer much more than their own ideas and assumptions about what Joseph Smith was doing.
Their witnesses represent good evidence that Joseph was putting his head in a hat and and the scribe was writing down what he said. But we have more when we look at the Book of Mormon itself that shows it was not translated, but a 19th century production.
Book of Abraham? We are even less in the know, I’d say.
For how it was claimed to be translated, yes, but who cares. We have so much more like the facsimiles and papyri that shows so much evidence that Joseph was making it up.
Other things like blacks and the priesthood I attribute to error by the leaders of the church. I do not in anyway accept the notion that God withheld the priesthood from blacks—and most specifically not because of some curse pronounced upon them.
I never liked the idea that God would allow such a big mistake that affected so many people, when it would be so easy to stop. It also does not say much about people like the prophets who instituted it without asking God. In reality the evidence points to it being claimed from God by the church. Kimball's revelation supports this.
I don’t really buy into polygamy either. I’m not as harshly against it like I am the priesthood issue, but I really don’t get it.
That should be your first clue it was not from God.
I suppose with polygamy if God truly commanded it of Joseph, I’d say “wow…I really didn’t think that it made any sense at all.” But since it doesn’t really affect my daily worship practice I can’t let it worry me too much.
I think for most it is not polygamy, but how Joseph went about it.
I truly think we, as members of the Church, have to learn to be somewhere else in order for us to receive revelation. I don’t mean physically of course. I’m just plain saying we aren’t quite headed in the direction God needs us to go. Until we realize that, get on track and pursue goodness and love in a more focused way, I don’t think He’ll grace too much with further light and knowledge through revelation. Of course, revelation is often personal and I do believe its given individually. But church-wide? I think its more along the lines of getting the masses motivated and inspired. Its just where we’re at, and probably have been for a long time.
This supports his idea that the church is not being lead by God. :)
I’m personally eager to read the latest work by Brant Gardner. He’s delved into, I understand, the translation possibilities. I’m not quite satisfied with the latest by Skousen on the work being exclusively a tight-control translation. It just doesn’t make sense and one reason I think this is the very thing you mentioned above. This is still something I’ll have to figure out more.
Of course you are not. Skousen is supported by the evidence. Brant's makes most of it up with possibilities without good evidence. We have seen you play the possibility game a lot around here. I respect Skousen for going with the evidence, and not getting into the made up tight/loose translation.
I’m sure you’re in a tough spot and that you’ll be wise about how to proceed. I’m also sure your wife will be defensive and might take this type of news personally depending on how its handled and addressed.
This is why time and information is needed first.
I think being honest and upfront is important.
It would be wise to be honest, but unwise to unload it all at once. He should have involved her from the beginning, but since he has not, she needs time to digest this information without thinking her husband is some evil apostate.
But I think being absolute, negative, brash, and aggressive can cause a wedge to be driven. I mean its all on you, though.
I agree. He should try to give her information devoid of emotions or even his opinion on it, so she can digest it without as much bias as possible.