The idea of a Restoration of Christ’s New Testament “church” was unoriginal

[Limnor]

The standard in the Old Testament for adultery was that adultery wasn't a moral issue, but a property crime. The woman was the property of her husband so a husband cheating on his wife wasn't adultery unless his partner was also married.

Jesus taught that adultery was a moral issue that applied equally to men and women.

Thanks for your response. I'm curious how you went from "By teaching that men could be guilty of adultery for sleeping with other women, or even marrying a second women after a divorce, "
to interpreting that as an "issue that applied equally to men and women."

I'm not a Bible scholar, so I appreciate you humoring my questions on this, but I don't see Jesus' words as applying equally to men and women when only men's behavior is mentioned.

This is where I’m a little lost too, Paul. Your earlier phrasing (“men could be guilty of adultery… marrying a second woman after a divorce”) focuses entirely on male behavior. That fits the Ehrman-esque apocalyptic-prophet model’s reading of Jesus tightening men’s obligations—but I’m not seeing how that automatically becomes “applied equally to men and women.”

[Limnor]

Jesus' teachings on adultery and divorce were far more egalitarian than what you find in the Old Testament. Basically in the Old Testament married men could sleep with any woman so long as it wasn't a married woman. Married women, not so much. Jesus made it fair for everyone. However the idea that no one should ever remarry after a divorce doesn't seem to really have any value. It's too extreme (Matthew thought so too because he modified that teaching to give an exception in the case of fidelity).

I don’t mind challenging this a bit more as I think some of your readings might be overstating the contrast between Jesus and the Old Testament. For example, Old Testament law doesn’t actually say “men can sleep with any woman they want”; adultery laws were tied to marriage contracts, not male sexual license, and Second Temple Judaism had a much more developed moral framework than the caricature you’re describing.

Similarly, on Jesus’ teachings about family, apocalyptic urgency is a scholarly model (per Ehrman), but it doesn’t explain everything he says, and it isn’t the only way to read those passages.

In short, these topics are more nuanced historically than “blind spots” or simple upgrades, so I’m curious what specific sources or criteria you’re using to draw such sharp conclusions.

[huckelberry]

I had the pleasure one night in early March 2006 in Little Rock AR of seeing Merle Haggard open for the Stones. Second row, center seats. It was an amazing night. And unlike the recently deceased Gene Cook, there is lots of evidence available to confirm my "encounter" with Mick Jagger that night, watching from the 2nd row Jagger perform the Devil's Music.

And I would bet that after 20 years the memory still has real value for you.

[huckelberry]

SockPuppet, I certainly see, can't get no,, satisfaction, as reflecting value and meaning in life. My music ears wander and find meaning in a variety of l
Places. Merl Haggard working man blues?

Generally I have not cared much for Mozart though my father exposed me due to his enjoyment. I remember years ago an occasion driving down the Columbia River gorge where it opens into the lush Willamette valley. I happened to be listening to Mozart and at that moment it performed a magical transformation. Mozart can sound stuffy and bland but the music can also do magical transformations opening one's eyes to the expanse of possibilities of life.

Huck, I really appreciate the imagery here—especially that Mozart moment in the Columbia River gorge. You have a way of describing experiences that seem to sing, almost like meaning rises up out of the setting itself.

If you’re up for it, I’d love to hear a bit more about how you approach meaning these days. Earlier you mentioned stretches when you felt there wasn’t any God at all, and then other times when things felt illuminated again. I’m curious how you make sense of that—no pressure, just genuinely interested in how you hold those shifts together.

And if you’d rather stick with the music angle, I’m all ears there too!

limnor. I was trying to be careful to say that during g times I did not believe in God I was not shut off from the sense that life had meaning and value. But I did mean to point to a difference of awareness i. Things that revealed more of meaning as apposed to such things that corrupt meaning. I see religious meaning in that distinction. It would not be limited to one religion.

I was influenced once long ago when working night shift and eating diner at an all night diner when a young African man who sat down at the counter with me. He presented a religious invitation like many Evangelical messages but he was Muslim. I was not converted but struck with the thought that faith in God is important to all sorts of people all over the world.

[Limnor]

limnor. I was trying to be careful to say that during g times I did not believe in God I was not shut off from the sense that life had meaning and value. But I did mean to point to a difference of awareness i. Things that revealed more of meaning as apposed to such things that corrupt meaning. I see religious meaning in that distinction. It would not be limited to one religion.

I was influenced once long ago when working night shift and eating diner at an all night diner when a young African man who sat down at the counter with me. He presented a religious invitation like many Evangelical messages but he was Muslim. I was not converted but struck with the thought that faith in God is important to all sorts of people all over the world.

Huck, I think you are saying that meaning can be found even during moments of doubt. And yes, I agree that there seems to be a human tendency to look for meaning. Your diner experience provides evidence of this view.

I do wonder, though, whether sincerity in defining meaning is the same thing as revealed truth. Some experiences help us grow, but others can mislead us, so part of the journey is learning to tell the difference.

So I’m curious: how do you tell the difference between an experience that points toward truth and one that only feels meaningful in the moment?

[huckelberry]

limnor. I was trying to be careful to say that during g times I did not believe in God I was not shut off from the sense that life had meaning and value. But I did mean to point to a difference of awareness i. Things that revealed more of meaning as apposed to such things that corrupt meaning. I see religious meaning in that distinction. It would not be limited to one religion.

I was influenced once long ago when working night shift and eating diner at an all night diner when a young African man who sat down at the counter with me. He presented a religious invitation like many Evangelical messages but he was Muslim. I was not converted but struck with the thought that faith in God is important to all sorts of people all over the world.

Huck, I think you are saying that meaning can be found even during moments of doubt. And yes, I agree that there seems to be a human tendency to look for meaning. Your diner experience provides evidence of this view.

I do wonder, though, whether sincerity in defining meaning is the same thing as revealed truth. Some experiences help us grow, but others can mislead us, so part of the journey is learning to tell the difference.

So I’m curious: how do you tell the difference between an experience that points toward truth and one that only feels meaningful in the moment?

Limnor. My post was thinking of meaning as located in experience and action all of the time. That may be related to thinking of things as interconnected. Your query moves the word meaning from direct value to alternate meanings. A sign or symbol has a meaning it refers to. There is also meaning as larger plot and perhaps a message in the story.

I spoke of a time not believing in God. It was over ten years when I thought there was no question, god did not exist. It was a variety of experience and thoughts that started me to question that view. I can think of a few spiritual experiences but I think what those meant to me was filtered, interpreted, by what I knew from experience and reason.

Perhaps your question could be kept simple, experience history and reason are used to make as clear judgements as one can.

[Limnor]

Perhaps your question could be kept simple, experience history and reason are used to make as clear judgements as one can.

Thanks, Huck—that makes sense. I think we’re mostly in agreement that experience, history, and reason shape how we interpret things.

My question comes from a place of understanding how the Mormon (or any) faith system works. I was trying to probe how those interpretations are structured, like why certain experiences get cast as “tests,” others as “concessions,” others as “signs,” and how a person’s prior framework shapes which bucket things fall into.

[huckelberry]

Perhaps your question could be kept simple, experience history and reason are used to make as clear judgements as one can.

Thanks, Huck—that makes sense. I think we’re mostly in agreement that experience, history, and reason shape how we interpret things.

My question comes from a place of understanding how the Mormon (or any) faith system works. I was trying to probe how those interpretations are structured, like why certain experiences get cast as “tests,” others as “concessions,” others as “signs,” and how a person’s prior framework shapes which bucket things fall into.

Maybe with more thought I will find a better response. I last attended a Mormon regular service May 1967. Attended a few funerals since then. I have tried to avoid tests,concessions and for God's sake, signs, as best as I have been able to.

I believe Jesus atonement tells the truth about the human family whether or whether not there is a conscious type God involved.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I will try to expand a bit. I realized the earth is very old and very small in an immense universe by 1963. I was convinced of evolution for history of life on earth by that time. Naturally I have never held to the idea of inerrant scripture so have limited understanding of the multiply test involved in maintaining belief in such dogmas. I suspect social pressure plays a big role in such dogmas.

[Limnor]

Maybe with more thought I will find a better response. I last attended a Mormon regular service May 1967. Attended a few funerals since then. I have tried to avoid tests,concessions and for God's sake, signs, as best as I have been able to.

I believe Jesus atonement tells the truth about the human family whether or whether not there is a conscious type God involved.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I will try to expand a bit. I realized the earth is very old and very small in an immense universe by 1963. I was convinced of evolution for history of life on earth by that time. Naturally I have never held to the idea of inerrant scripture so have limited understanding of the multiply test involved in maintaining belief in such dogmas. I suspect social pressure plays a big role in such dogmas.

Huck, what you’re saying makes sense from a secular view, maybe even humanist. I’m just curious about the vocabulary. Words like “atonement” and “human family” come pre-loaded with very specific meanings in Mormon circles, but you seem to be using them differently. I’d love to hear what those terms mean in your world now—outside the old doctrinal setting.

[huckelberry]

Maybe with more thought I will find a better response. I last attended a Mormon regular service May 1967. Attended a few funerals since then. I have tried to avoid tests,concessions and for God's sake, signs, as best as I have been able to.

I believe Jesus atonement tells the truth about the human family whether or whether not there is a conscious type God involved.

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I will try to expand a bit. I realized the earth is very old and very small in an immense universe by 1963. I was convinced of evolution for history of life on earth by that time. Naturally I have never held to the idea of inerrant scripture so have limited understanding of the multiply test involved in maintaining belief in such dogmas. I suspect social pressure plays a big role in such dogmas.

Huck, what you’re saying makes sense from a secular view, maybe even humanist. I’m just curious about the vocabulary. Words like “atonement” and “human family” come pre-loaded with very specific meanings in Mormon circles, but you seem to be using them differently. I’d love to hear what those terms mean in your world now—outside the old doctrinal setting.

Limnor, I think my views atonement and human family fall in the general area of Christian faith. I think there can be several dimension to atonement. I do not like reducing it to pain paying a price. I see Jesus life teaching and martyrdom as being atonement. We need to be willing to take t on the suffering which is part of forgiving others and being responsible.