Page 1 of 3
It was just "political"
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 1:47 am
by _Gadianton
A common apologetic is to refer to the Lamanites and Nephites as just "political" entities in order to evade science. It turns out plenty of other stuff in the scriptures was also just "political" rather than real.
Remember that one about the earth being divided in the "days of peleg"?
Here is Rudolf Siebach from the FAIR blog:
I fondly recall Professors Morris Peterson, Ken Hamblin, Lehi Hintze and others chatting with us students around campfires during geology field trips. I recall them making the point that there were better interpretations than the highly creative interpretation that it was the continents which were divided during the days of Peleg. These professors were the ones that first introduced me to the plainer understanding that “divided” was more likely intended to communicate a political reality ... They reinforced the fact that there is little biblical and no physical evidence to go out on a geological limb to claim that Gen. 10:25 refers to a catastrophic episode of continental drift.
http://www.fairblog.org/2008/12/01/inve ... -in-peleg/(Of a secondary curiosity, are "Morris" and "Ken" call names for the senior apologists we all know, or are they distinct individuals who also teach at BYU? I suppose a further curiosity would be, does there exist a Peterson and Hamblin duo of some sort in many BYU departments?)
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:06 am
by _John Larsen
I think this is just a sign of LDS biblical scholarship growing up. Convention biblical scholars have long interpreted the verse as a political division which makes more sense in context. This is one of those scriptures that Joseph just picked up a weird verse and began riffing in a way that doesn't make any sense from the long view. The problem with taking the conventional interpretation is that it is just another sign the Joseph made up long convoluted and improbable stories at least part of the time--and if part of the time why not all of the time?
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 2:32 am
by _Mercury
This makes perfect MormonSense(Trademark Pending).
You see, revelation that the negro was both blessed and cursed with black skin justified and condemned past racism. This too works for the Book of Mormon as well in that you can just pull crap out f your ass and get the faithful to believe it.
Isn't Mormonism wonderful?
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:10 am
by _Ray A
Gadianton wrote:
Remember that one about the earth being divided in the "days of peleg"?
It hasn't changed much.
The Nephi Project is now promoting the idea that "Book of Mormon lands" were in Peru.
Peru - The Land of the Book of Mormon.
Looks like FARMS will be very busy for some time to come. The workload stemming insider apostasy will become so great that they may no longer have time to answer critics.
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 3:29 pm
by _Tom
Gadianton wrote:(Of a secondary curiosity, are "Morris" and "Ken" call names for the senior apologists we all know, or are they distinct individuals who also teach at BYU? I suppose a further curiosity would be, does there exist a Peterson and Hamblin duo of some sort in many BYU departments?)
Morris is Morris Petersen, author of the short
Ensign article on fossils. No relation to DCP. I would guess that Ken is Bill Hamblin's father.
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 8:13 pm
by _krose
I'm trying to picture how, exactly, Yahweh would have gone about dividing people into different political entities, and I'm not coming up with anything.
If people are separated geographically, political divisions come about naturally, as do language differences.
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 8:29 pm
by _Sethbag
There are really two ways to keep believing, even when your scriptures are shown to be scientifically untenable - either attack the science, or reinterpret the scriptures to remove the scientific impediment.
The
Answers in Genesis people take the former approach, and LDS apologists like to take the latter approach. While I'm happy that LDS apologists do so inasmuch as it points out to their not being totally irrational in the same way the Christian fundies are, I think the reinterpretation to avoid scientific problems eviscerates the claims that this stuff is the word of a God who actually exists.
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:30 am
by _bcspace
A common apologetic is to refer to the Lamanites and Nephites as just "political" entities in order to evade science.
It was just political by the time of Christ and shortly thereafter. But you'd have to have actually read the Book of Mormon to know that......
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:33 am
by _harmony
Sethbag wrote:There are really two ways to keep believing, even when your scriptures are shown to be scientifically untenable - either attack the science, or reinterpret the scriptures to remove the scientific impediment.
Actually there's at least one more way: stay out of the debate.
Re: It was just "political"
Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:39 am
by _bcspace
There are really two ways to keep believing, even when your scriptures are shown to be scientifically untenable - either attack the science, or reinterpret the scriptures to remove the scientific impediment.
Actually there's at least one more way: stay out of the debate.
Since I haven't had to do any of those there is a fourth way...the criticisms are wrong.