maklelan wrote:The Church as a whole is learning as it navigates through contemporary Western culture, but putting the onus entirely on the Church is myopic. It cannot actively promote all these things at all times. It has so many different things occupying its attention at any given point. These issues are not really that pressing on a global scale.
Important point. Enjoying this thread. That link you took us to at the beginning of the thread, Makelan, is heavy duty stuff. Looks like you've put your nose to the grindstone with the Book of Abraham.
Sanctorian wrote:A faith crisis rarely stems from a critic.
That's not the only goal of the essays.
Sanctorian wrote:At least that has been my experience. Rather, some life event causes deeper need for spiritual guidance. When you look beyond the correlation manuals for answers and realize there is a slew of information withheld (by omission or some other global distractions as you suggest), a person can have a faith crisis simply by reading church material. Rough Stone Rolling has been the precipice for a lot of faith crisis out there. I know you are not suggesting Bushman to be a critic so why then does his book contain information that causes some to have a faith crisis?
Because a lot of people don't think hard about their faith.
mentalgymnast wrote:That link you took us to at the beginning of the thread, Makelan, is heavy duty stuff. Looks like you've put your nose to the grindstone with the Book of Abraham.
More so a few years ago than now, but I'm still ironing out details when I have the opportunity. I wish I could dedicate a few weeks entirely to just finishing it, but that's not possible right now. It's such a bizarre and unique corpora, and the text-critical dynamics are so multifaceted. It's difficult to figure out how to present my case succinctly and clearly.
mentalgymnast wrote:That link you took us to at the beginning of the thread, Makelan, is heavy duty stuff. Looks like you've put your nose to the grindstone with the Book of Abraham.
More so a few years ago than now, but I'm still ironing out details when I have the opportunity. I wish I could dedicate a few weeks entirely to just finishing it, but that's not possible right now. It's such a bizarre and unique corpora, and the text-critical dynamics are so multifaceted. It's difficult to figure out how to present my case succinctly and clearly.
I have a brother who is a university professor in corpus linguistics. Active LDS and very well read in church history, etc. Has produced some work that is used in academic settings around the world. I don't know zilch about "unique corpora, and the text-critical dynamics", but I'm guessing my brother is trained and/or has knowledge in this area. If you ever get going again on your research and would like a contact that might be able to proof some of your work or whatever, I could get you guys together...at least to see if there might be some type of collaborative work that could be done...even if informal and not overly time intensive, etc. He's a smart guy...and REALLY interested in church history and the unique facets attached to studying the "restoration".
I haven't had much interaction with you on this forum, but I've enjoyed the interchange and bouncing back and forth of ideas between you and other folks here.
mentalgymnast wrote:I haven't had much interaction with you on this forum, but I've enjoyed the interchange and bouncing back and forth of ideas between you and other folks here.
Really? I think maklelan should ignore Sanctorian and Bazooka. I think both of them are beneath him and he shouldn't waste the time. Sure. It is fun to poke holes in their silly statements, but as a certain point you just have to move on.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote: Also, you seem to be dwellings on the second thing. Now, I really don't care if you believe in God, but don't believe he has ever spoken to anyone. Your belief in God is rather pointless. Your God can't interact with anyone so in essence, he might as well not exist. You are an agnostic.
I'm not an agnostic at all. I just don't think it's helpful to create God after the image of man.
Tobin wrote:That is beside the point. I find children's fables interesting as well. I don't argue about them on internet forums. Mormonism is framed on God existing and being able to speak with us. None of the doctrines of Mormonism can stand without that. An atheist brings nothing to the discussion because the automatic assumption is everything is made-up.
That simply isn't true. There is a great deal more to the topic of Mormonism than the question of the existence of Deity. And the subject is certainly open to discussion by believers and non-believers alike
Sanctorian wrote:At least that has been my experience. Rather, some life event causes deeper need for spiritual guidance. When you look beyond the correlation manuals for answers and realize there is a slew of information withheld (by omission or some other global distractions as you suggest), a person can have a faith crisis simply by reading church material. Rough Stone Rolling has been the precipice for a lot of faith crisis out there. I know you are not suggesting Bushman to be a critic so why then does his book contain information that causes some to have a faith crisis?
Because a lot of people don't think hard about their faith.
I think this may be the most accurate statement you have made. A lot of people do not think hard about their faith. If they did, they would likely not be a member of the LDS church. I can say that with some confidence as it seems when people do start to think hard about their faith, they are leaving at numbers greater than those that stay who also begin to think hard about their faith. I can say that with some confidence as Elder Jensens comments suggest once people start thinking hard about their faith, ie. studying the history, they apostatize at a greater rate than they appear to be staying which has given the brethren great concern.
Tobin wrote:Also, you seem to be dwellings on the second thing. Now, I really don't care if you believe in God, but don't believe he has ever spoken to anyone. Your belief in God is rather pointless. Your God can't interact with anyone so in essence, he might as well not exist. You are an agnostic.
I'm not an agnostic at all. I just don't think it's helpful to create God after the image of man.
Well, I'm tired of playing your little game of guess what I am?!? You supposedly believe in a God that has never spoken with anyone which obviously takes Christianity and Islam off the table. Sounds rather like an agnostic to me. When you want to clue as all into your little belief system, please do so.
Gray Ghost wrote:
Tobin wrote:That is beside the point. I find children's fables interesting as well. I don't argue about them on internet forums. Mormonism is framed on God existing and being able to speak with us. None of the doctrines of Mormonism can stand without that. An atheist brings nothing to the discussion because the automatic assumption is everything is made-up.
That simply isn't true. There is a great deal more to the topic of Mormonism than the question of the existence of Deity. And the subject is certainly open to discussion by believers and non-believers alike
How illuminating. I just love people that insist on continuing to reply with generalizations after they are asked for specifics.
Good chat. But let's not continue it because you aren't very interesting to talk to.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote:I just love people that insist on continuing to reply with generalizations after they are asked for specifics.
Okay, when God the space being visited you what, specifically did he look like and what, exactly, did he say to you? (remember, no generalisations)
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)