For Maklelan: LDS beholden to biblical claims

[_Darth J]

It's right about here that I must conclude that Simon Belmont is deliberately trying to make Mormons look stupid.

You always say that when you don't have an answer to my arguments. It's okay. Maybe next time.

Even your trolling is tedious now. You used to be entertaining sometimes before you had your nervous breakdown.

[_Darth J]

While we're waiting for someone to come up with a story from the Bible that the LDS Church does not teach to have been an actual, historical event, I would like to remind everyone that the story of Job is not an allegory. It really happened.

Examples:

Lesson 32: “I Know That My Redeemer Liveth”, Old Testament Gospel Doctrine Teacher’s Manual

“Lesson 39: Job,” Primary 6: Old Testament, (1996)

L. Tom Perry, July 2003 Ensign

The Lord described Job as a man who was perfect and upright. As Job was suffering untold trials and tribulations, his wife said to him, “Dost thou still retain thine integrity?” (Job 2:9). Even with all his problems and challenges, Job “sinned not” (Job 1:22). And the Lord said, “There is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil … and still he holdeth fast his integrity” (Job 2:3).

When Job’s friends falsely accused him of sin, he said:

“All the while my breath is in me, and the spirit of God is in my nostrils;

“My lips shall not speak wickedness, nor my tongue utter deceit.

“God forbid that I should justify you: till I die I will not remove mine integrity from me.

“My righteousness I hold fast, and will not let it go” (Job 27:3–6).

Job invited judgment from God so “that God may know mine integrity” (Job 31:6). Job’s conscience was clear, for he knew he was honest and upright in all of his endeavors, and he would never compromise his integrity.

Thomas S. Monson, November 2002 Ensign

If any of us feels his challenges are beyond his capacity to meet them, let him or her read of Job. By so doing, there comes the feeling, “If Job could endure and overcome, so will I.”

Job was a “perfect and upright” man who “feared God, and eschewed evil.” Pious in his conduct, prosperous in his fortune, Job was to face a test which could have destroyed anyone. Shorn of his possessions, scorned by his friends, afflicted by his suffering, shattered by the loss of his family, he was urged to “curse God, and die.” He resisted this temptation and declared from the depths of his noble soul, “Behold, my witness is in heaven, and my record is on high.” “I know that my redeemer liveth.”

Job became a model of unlimited patience. To this day we refer to those who are long-suffering as having the patience of Job. He provides an example for us to follow.

[_Drifting]

From the LDS.ORG topical guide for "The Bible"

Like all Christians, Mormons consider the Bible to be a sacred record that includes Heavenly Father's dealings with ancient people who lived in the eastern hemisphere.

There's no escaping literalism.

[_Darth J]

In Genesis 30:31-39, Laban takes away all of the spotted and striped sheep and goats that Jacob wants, leaving Jacob with plain sheep and goats that don't have spots and stripes. So Jacob takes some tree branches and makes them look striped, then puts the tree branches by his flocks so that when they mate, they will see the striped branches and their offspring will have spots and stripes. And his plan works. The flocks look at the branches that appear to have stripes, and then conceive and give birth to lambs/kids that have stripes and spots and speckles.

In other words, you can make sheep and goats have spotted/striped babies by showing them things with stripes on them.

That's not really how genetics work, is it? Surely this is folklore that just found its way into the Old Testament, isn't it?

Nope. It's a true story, as we learn in an official LDS Institute manual.

Old Testament Student Manual, Religion 301, Genesis--2 Samuel, pg. 88

(7-19) Genesis 30:37–43. Did the Peeled Rods
Influence the Conception of the Flocks of Jacob?

Jacob’s peeling of branches and placing them before the animals so that when they conceived they would bear multicolored offspring seems to be a reflection of a common superstition that the conception of offspring is influenced by what the mother experiences or sees at the time of conception. Nothing is known by modern science to explain any relationship between what Jacob did and what happened in the hereditary patterns of the animals. Perhaps something is missing from the text. Perhaps the Lord was just taking advantage of the virility of crossbred animals. Divine intervention certainly played a part. In any event, Jacob’s herds grew and the Lord blessed him. Also, Jacob’s separation of the flocks (v. 40) follows principles of good animal husbandry and would have increased the likelihood of having multi-colored animals.

P.S. For those of you who are just joining us, the topic of this thread is how the LDS Church is most definitely not a biblical literalist religion.

ETA: The Genesis 30 Laban is not the same Laban that Nephi turned into a Pez dispenser. Just thought I should clarify that.

[_Simon Belmont]

While we're waiting for someone to come up with a story from the Bible that the LDS Church does not teach to have been an actual, historical event, I would like to remind everyone that the story of Job is not an allegory. It really happened.

I've refuted each and every one of your points. You ignore what I've said and re-post the same, tired talking points. Why is that?

[_Simon Belmont]

I'm not sure I understand. In terms of how things usually are is there some reason I should think that virgin births caused by divine beings are less unusual than donkeys made to talk by divine beings? Why does one hold more weight than the other such that there's good reason to be skeptical of one and not the other?

It is more likely that God would intervene with a miracle (defined as something outside of natural law) on something as important as the atonement than it is to have a donkey speak Hebrew.

[_sock puppet]

While we're waiting for someone to come up with a story from the Bible that the LDS Church does not teach to have been an actual, historical event, I would like to remind everyone that the story of Job is not an allegory. It really happened.

I've refuted each and every one of your points. You ignore what I've said and re-post the same, tired talking points. Why is that?

Is it your understanding that the LDS Church teaches the story of Job as:

A-an actual, historical event, or

B-an allegory?

[_sock puppet]

I'm not sure I understand. In terms of how things usually are is there some reason I should think that virgin births caused by divine beings are less unusual than donkeys made to talk by divine beings? Why does one hold more weight than the other such that there's good reason to be skeptical of one and not the other?

It is more likely that God would intervene with a miracle (defined as something outside of natural law) on something as important as the atonement than it is to have a donkey speak Hebrew.

Why was it necessary for Jesus to be born of a virgin for the atonement to work?

[_Simon Belmont]

Why was it necessary for Jesus to be born of a virgin for the atonement to work?

Apparently.

[_sock puppet]

Why was it necessary for Jesus to be born of a virgin for the atonement to work?

Apparently.

Simon. That's quite the new avatar. Is it the portrait of the artist as a young man?