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

[Rivendale]

So, today your God is Hari Seldon?

Your argument gets more and more incoherent. If God knows the end from the beginning and can perfectly predict the every flip of a coin, why does he have to rely on “patterns?”

“The time is now.” — Unofficial slogan of Christianity since the 1st Century.

Props for the Asimov reference!

I noticed that also. I suppose the adversary is thrown into the mix to avoid John Calhoon's Universe 25 experimental results. Which conveniently and finally also solves the problem of evil.

[malkie]

Props for the Asimov reference!

I noticed that also. I suppose the adversary is thrown into the mix to avoid John Calhoon's Universe 25 experimental results. Which conveniently and finally also solves the problem of evil.

Off to look for John Calhoon's Universe 25 - thanks!

[MG 2.0]

I'm not claiming that evolution and agency are determinist forces. I'm suggesting that patterns emerge when individual choices are measured against and/or interact with environmental constraints/conditions over time. I think God is BIG. What that actually really means, who knows? What would seem rather obvious though is that God would plan for many different contingencies and outcomes. Not everything always happens for 'the best' in a natural world of agency combined with the world of nature that we live in.

But here's the thing, meaning and purpose can emerge/evolve even from unforeseen events...that is, events not understood/fully seen from the perspective of humans. God, however, knowing the end from the beginning, can call heads or tails every time because He is in and through all things and can perfectly see emerging patterns.

I'm arguing, again, that God/Jesus knew what those emerging patterns would be after Jesus visited and taught the people when he shared His relationship with God with those that would listen and learn. You don't think that Christ knew that the Catholic Church and its offshoots would spread the Good News throughout the world, even if imperfectly?

Faith involves trusting in overall purpose without demanding perfect predictability. I think this is where we can often tie ourselves in knots. Evolution requires time and energy put into the system. Otherwise, entropy takes over.

Latter-day Saints would call this the Restoration. God knowing and recognizing that the time was right to complete the pattern of Christ's gospel and His plan for the salvation/exaltation of all of God's children. It couldn't have happened before. The time is now.

Regards,
MG

So, today your God is Hari Seldon?

Your argument gets more and more incoherent. If God knows the end from the beginning and can perfectly predict the every flip of a coin, why does he have to rely on “patterns?”

“The time is now.” — Unofficial slogan of Christianity since the 1st Century.

The conflict that you seem to see, as far as I can determine, is between models of divine action:

1. Deterministic omniscience-God knows and controls all outcomes.
2. Relational pedagogy- God uses patterns to invite recognition, growth, and choice.

I've seen and observed over time that there seems to be an overall belief among the critics/unbelievers that God ought to 'do this' or 'do that' and materially interfere with the affairs of men at times when we think He ought to . If He doesn't, some folks get pissed off and say, "No God". I don't think that's a fair assessment of things if we consider that God may work His will through the building/patterns of nation building, leaders in those nations/societies/cultures, and just individual people throughout the world through the 'monitor and adjust' method(s) which values the human condition and free will of His children.

Jacob 5 in the Book of Mormon is all about that. God sees and works with the evolutionary patterns that develop over time and then uses those patterns to monitor and adjust and also teach us, through the scriptures, of the value of obeying God's commands and staying on the straight and narrow path...that many wander off of. God using “patterns”, especially in the context of divine foreknowledge, agency, and relational pedagogy is the 'main player' in one of the most interesting allegories in the Book of Mormon, and it models exactly the kind of “monitor and adjust” concept I'm proposing.

Jacob 5 implications:

1. God is the Master Gardener
2. Agency and contingency are at 'the root' of all that God does.
3. The Master sees trends...decay in one part of the vineyard, wild fruit in another...and adjusts accordingly.

This is divine patterning in action, not prediction for its own sake, but a relational response to what's going on 'on the ground' as a result of the natural evolution and progress of human beings making decisions.

Regards,
MG

[malkie]

I noticed that also. I suppose the adversary is thrown into the mix to avoid John Calhoon's Universe 25 experimental results. Which conveniently and finally also solves the problem of evil.

Off to look for John Calhoon's Universe 25 - thanks!

Ahhh - yes - I knew about the study - just didn't remember the name of the experimenter. Actually, I thought it might have been a reference to some good scifi

[Limnor]

Off to look for John Calhoon's Universe 25 - thanks!

Ahhh - yes - I knew about the study - just didn't remember the name of the experimenter. Actually, I thought it might have been a reference to some good scifi

Had to look that up myself—saddest tale about comfort ever.

[huckelberry]

That's what I'm pretty much saying. Jesus planted the seeds knowing that Christianity, as it was and is, would be the result. Through that process, which brought about its own success in the lives of people, the seed was nurtured and matured. When the time and place for the restoration of all things was ripe, then the fullness was able to be 'planted' with the knowledge that there would be no withering away.

Jesus did not forsee Christianity or intend to start a new religion. He was basically just carrying on the work of John the Baptist, preparing the righteous Jewish poor for the imminent arrival of the Son of Man, a powerful angel from heaven who would drive out the Romans and their wealthy collaborators, leaving the land for the poor and downtrodden to enjoy in peace. He did not intend to be murdered by Rome.

PseudoPaul, it is possible that Jesus foresight was limited to what you describe. That would not negate what MG is describing. He is speaking of crucifixion and events after that. He Incudes wrinkles in the history reflecting the Mormon self description.
Seen by LDS or other Christian, what Jesus did was not limited to what Jesus foresaw. I think however that what Jesus foresaw may have not been limited to the one image of the Baptist. That image of divine power delivering from Rome is there throughout the New Testament however. It certainly was important and disappointing.

[Gadianton]

I've seen and observed over time that there seems to be an overall belief among the critics/unbelievers that God ought to 'do this' or 'do that' and materially interfere with the affairs of men at times when we think He ought to . If He doesn't, some folks get pissed off and say, "No God".

Again, the expectations critic's have of Mormon growth is the standard Mormons set for themselves in the 70s and 80s when bragging all the time about being the world's fastest growing religion. Apparently you believed back then that the church was in fact growing at a rate that indicated the Church was true; that we'd expect false church not to grow as fast.

[MG 2.0]

I've seen and observed over time that there seems to be an overall belief among the critics/unbelievers that God ought to 'do this' or 'do that' and materially interfere with the affairs of men at times when we think He ought to . If He doesn't, some folks get pissed off and say, "No God".

Again, the expectations critic's have of Mormon growth is the standard Mormons set for themselves in the 70s and 80s when bragging all the time about being the world's fastest growing religion. Apparently you believed back then that the church was in fact growing at a rate that indicated the Church was true; that we'd expect false church not to grow as fast.

Gadianton, how old were you when you decided the CofJCofLDS was not true? I think you said something about the Book of Mormon being ‘tossed’ without having spent much time with it. Did this correlate chronologically with your stepping away, I assume, because you found/decided that the church, in your opinion, was a fraud?

That the world of the intellect and academia had all the answers needed to answer life’s important questions?

I ask because at times I find what you have to say quite interesting and intrinsically ‘gifted’ and other times, like now, to be essentially non responsive to the overall contextual value of the post(s) you’re responding to. Maybe you’re in a hurry. I get that.

But still.

Regards,
MG

[Gadianton]

I think unless a critic is either being facetious or reflecting the standard LDS set for themselves by their own bragging and holding them to it, it would be ill advised for critics to hold Mormonism to any kind of empirical standard that may indicate it's truthfulness. There are no such standards possible. Obviously. If they claim there to be, then they are wrong.

Mormons themselves are generally the ones making those kinds of claims because shewing forth "good fruits" is part of the proof. You appear to want to avoid admitting that you bragged about the Church's growth back in the day, as most of us did.

Gadianton, how old were you when you decided the CofJCofLDS was not true? I think you said something about the Book of Mormon being ‘tossed’ without having spent much time with it. Did this correlate chronologically with your stepping away, I assume, because you found/decided that the church, in your opinion, was a fraud?

You have a very simplistic, made-for-tv drama view about how people make real world decisions. There is not an identifiable point at which I decided your sect wasn't what it claimed to be. What I told you is that from a young age, I didn't spend much time with the Book of Mormon. Certainly, I didn't spend the time commensurate with my beliefs and claims regarding the book. I doubt you did either. Most people haven't. You try to defend your treating of the Book of Mormon lightly by pointing to all these other things you did. I could defend myself the same way. I read most of High Nibley's collective works including Since Cumorah twice and his Book of Mormon lectures prior to going on a mission. I tried to find ways to make the material interesting while avoiding reading it. Just as you avoid reading it, because it's boring. As an active Mormon I did not spend much time over the years actually reading the Book of Mormon -- this goes for you also, I believe.

No, it did not chronologically fit with my stepping away, as my reading was spotty even during the times of my strongest belief. And thoughts about the Church being a fraud came way, way later, even after I no longer attended. There were several jolts from various angles, and I doubt I am in full understanding of the factors leading to my decision. The strongest intellectual factor that I recall was problems I had with the Bible, not the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, the Church or any of the usual concerns people have.

[PseudoPaul]

Jesus did not forsee Christianity or intend to start a new religion. He was basically just carrying on the work of John the Baptist, preparing the righteous Jewish poor for the imminent arrival of the Son of Man, a powerful angel from heaven who would drive out the Romans and their wealthy collaborators, leaving the land for the poor and downtrodden to enjoy in peace. He did not intend to be murdered by Rome.

To each his own. I believe that Jesus knew His mission of redemption and resurrection and teaching The Way. The seeds were planted. His work on earth as a mortal man was complete when He was crucified by the Romans.

Regards,
MG

Historically speaking, this idea is just not defensible.