After much pondering, Gary Smith favored us with:
EVERY ward or branch has a little old man or lady who speaks in tongues
every fast and testimony meeting! Usually they spew forth sermons about
fire and brimstone. Of course, everyone understands what they are saying
even before they speak, since
The saints tend to magnify the doctrines and truths that the living
prophet does. Pres Hinckley speaks little about fire and brimstone
(except for abusive husbands and fathers), and speaks much on hope and
joy. He is giving us the direction we should generally go, while not
forgetting what his
Marc,
EVERY ward or branch has a little old man or lady who speaks in tongues
every fast and testimony meeting! Usually they spew forth sermons about
fire and brimstone. Of course, everyone understands what they are saying
even before they speak, since we all expect it
So, I don't see your
Although I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your conclusion, the logic begs the
question, since it's scripture quoting scripture. If scripture is written in some kind
of code, or compacted language, then a quote, reference to allusion to another
scripture would follow the same format.
Mark
At 09:31 AM 11/8/2002, you wrote:
I'm not going to say Yes, of
course the actual event happened as described, because it really doesn't
matter. If it did, great; if not _so what_. I refuse to
The Book of Mormon prophets believed that the water actually parted for
the Israelites but then
In other words, we should be concentrating on the spirit of revelation, and not
on events, which are simply that, events.
Steven Montgomery wrote:
At 09:31 AM 11/8/2002, you wrote:
I'm not going to say Yes, of
course the actual event happened as described, because it really doesn't
Paul points out that these types of miracles tend to accompany the very beginning
of a new dispensation, but then are inappropriate (when you read all of I
Corinthians 13 you'll see that he's saying that signs and miracles aren't as
important at that point than Christlike love). I think we see
Marc A. Schindler wrote:
---
What would happen if an elderly lady stood up in your next fast
testimony meeting and started talking in tongues?
---
Unworthy soul that I am, nonetheless I believe I would weep for joy.
This really is a hypothetical, sadly enough. We apparently are not
After much pondering, Jim Cobabe favored us with:
This really is a hypothetical, sadly enough. We apparently are not
currently faithful enough to commonly enjoy such precious manifestations
of the Spirit in our testimony meetings. This is simply a
generalization of the notion I posited earler
On Friday, November 8, 2002, at 06:18 PM, John W. Redelfs wrote:
I agree with this. Next time you are in sacrament meeting, evaluate
each speaker. Ask yourself how effectively he used the scriptures in
his talk. Give him a score on a 1 to 5 spectrum: 1=poor, 2=fair,
3=average, 4=good,
At 07:18 PM 11/8/2002, you wrote:
After much pondering, Jim Cobabe favored us with:
This really is a hypothetical, sadly enough. We apparently are not
currently faithful enough to commonly enjoy such precious manifestations
of the Spirit in our testimony meetings. This is simply a
I don't think our spirituality is the issue. I think if you study the history of
dispensations you will see that things unfold in a certain way, for a certain
reason, and when some gifts are no longer necessary they are no longer manifest.
Or they are manifest in different ways. I was blessed with
Another thing to contemplate if the higher critics haven't gotten around to
this one, let me be the first higher critic of one of them to show how
preposterous some of the tales can be and yet I ought to have my head
examined for believing it because I have believed these individuals to be
Israelites? In what way can it be said how willing and capable God is in
helping you succeed in following His commandments?
Dan:
They overcame the people of Jericho. I do not question that the city of
Jericho, or the people of Jericho were destroyed by the Israelites. God
promised
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
And if they are false in this
instance, they may be false in many others, perhaps most others. And there
goes my confidence in the scriptures. Even the Book of Mormon has a
disclaimer indicating that some things in it might contain
Mark:
I'll answer Marc and Dan together here. Marc didn't address my questions
but Dan does. So, Marc, what's your take on the Red Sea, the walls of
Jericho, et al? Did they happen as described?
Dan's answer has a hint of When the Israelites say they crossed over the
Red Sea on dry ground
Depends on what you mean by happened. I'm with John Widtsoe on this one. Here's how
he answered the question regarding whether the Flood was universal: John A. Widtsoe,
Evidences and Reconciliations, p.126-127
=
The suggestion has been made that the flood filled every hollow and
Sorry, I hit the send button too quickly. The false dichotomy is that it's your
view or your understanding of another's view. I believe the witness of the Holy
Ghost. Period.
John W. Redelfs wrote:
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
And if they are false in this
After much pondering, Dan R Allen favored us with:
I'm saying that it should not be absolutely _necessary_ for God to have
parted the Red Sea, a'la Charlton Heston, to have a testimony that He
guided the Israelites across it. The fact that He helped them cross the Red
Sea is literal, but the
At 06:33 PM 11/7/2002, JWR wrote:
How do you apply this reasoning to Jesus calling Lazarus forth from his
tomb, or raising the daughter of Jairus? Maybe these two were not really
dead, but by the power of God they recovered while if it hadn't been for
the blessing they would have died? Is
We all feel the same joy, John. It might be hard to believe, but the wonder of
the resurrection and the atonement, and the word of God through his scriptures
are just as meaningful to some of us whose views you might look askance at. Let's
just say it takes more than one voice to make a choir, so
Good on ya, mate. Have a root beer for me!
Paul Osborne wrote:
You know what? We could list all the fantastic stories and miracles in
the scriptures and especially from the dreaded Bible and explain them all
away. Then, we could all just quit the church and go have a beer together
and laugh
Or maybe, like a good joke, you just had to be there to get it.
Steven Montgomery wrote:
At 06:33 PM 11/7/2002, JWR wrote:
How do you apply this reasoning to Jesus calling Lazarus forth from his
tomb, or raising the daughter of Jairus? Maybe these two were not really
dead, but by the
- Is it more important that the walls of Jericho fell as described, or
that the people of the covenant were successful as long as they followed
Him?
If the walls of Jericho did not fall as described in the Bible, then in what way were
the covenant people successful? If the Red Sea did
Providing authoratative interpretation of the scriptures is one of the
explict roles of prophets, seers, and revelators who lead the Lord's
people. Followers of academics, apologists, revisionists, agnostics,
and assorted fruits and nuts, will be sadly misled.
---
Mij Ebaboc
What Brigham Young had to say about the symbolic story of Jericho:
If we are the people of God, we are to be the richest people on the
earth, and these riches are to be held in God, not in the devil. God
tells us how we may accomplish this, as plainly and as surely as he told
Joshua and the
Gary Smith wrote:
And I think that Marc and I would agree. The point we are making, is we
need to be careful not to go too far in the other direction, either. We
are not like the evangelist Christian movements out there who are literal
Biblicists. We realize that the Bible is not perfect
He had even stronger language about Bible stories in some discourses. Note though
that the lesson Pres. Young gets out of this isn't that a physical act led to
faith, but that the telling of the story, and the reading of the story, is the
act of faith -- this is what I get out of his likening it
I think your list contains false choices. For an explanation of the difference
between secular and sacred histories, I suggest:
http://www.members.shaw.ca/kschindler/frye_1.htm
Your questions seem to me to proceed from the false assumption that narrative
accounts are to be read in the same manner
Sorry to reply to my own post, but I should add, too, that Hebrews 11 goes on to show
that it is through faith that the actions of the ancients are well-attested. We
accept the stories on faith, not on historicity, because they tell us something
essential, and that something transcends actual
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
That it rewrote the Torah with the issuing of a document scholars think is
the precursor to the modern Deuteronomy (which was later finished by Ezra
after the Exile), is also part of this strange and complex historical soup.
Deuteronomy
Mark:
If the walls of Jericho did not fall as described in the Bible, then in
what way were the covenant people successful? If the Red Sea did not part
then in what way can we say that God's power is great and that He led the
Israelites? In what way can it be said how willing and capable God
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
...one sees echoes of that ancient emnity in the NT). For us LDS this is a
step backwards and in a way represents an excising of a plain and
precious truth. After all, as we'll
all soon be learning about in GD
The 13th chapter of 1
After much pondering, Dan R Allen favored us with:
The tumbling of the walls of Jericho can be seen the same way; it doesn't
particularly matter whether they fell as described, or the Israelites
pushed them down after conquering the city. The fact is that Jericho was
conquered by the Israelites
I Nephi 13 says that the brass plates were *not* the same as what we would call
the OT, actually. Furthermore, it says that the GBC in the days following Christ
removed plain and precious parts from the *Gospel*, not the Pentateuch. By the
time we get to verse 29 it does also include the OT, but
John W. Redelfs wrote:
After much pondering, Dan R Allen favored us with:
The tumbling of the walls of Jericho can be seen the same way; it doesn't
particularly matter whether they fell as described, or the Israelites
pushed them down after conquering the city. The fact is that Jericho was
Cute, but it doesn't say anything. We've been explicitly told that there are all
kinds of things we don't know, that haven't been revealed to us yet.
John W. Redelfs wrote:
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
It's not that the history isn't important, but to get the real
Originally it was written by Moses. However, we do not know how many
iterations it has gone through since then. How often was it translated
and retranslated by Jewish scribes. Which version was found by Josiah's
people in the temple?
There were different versions of ancient writings, depending on
Matter is not empty. Recently it was discovered that Einstein was right
concerning the cosmological constant that maintains the universe
spreading out at an ever increasing speed. This means there is an
invisible force that acts on all matter. I think LDS would call this the
Light of Christ, which
If a testimony is only based on how often the Lord can get me to follow
Him, then I could be in trouble not because of God but because of my
stubborn will. How do I know I'm not at fault? My testimony never alone
rests on my puny experience.
Stacy.
At 05:50 PM 11/05/2002 -0600, you wrote:
There was, in the most recent conference, a reference to the Pentateuch (although
not by that name) as being by Moses, or written according to what had been passed
down to him, so we already know that the Bible wasn't inerrant and hasn't come to
us as originally revealed by God -- that's pretty
On Tue, 05 Nov 2002 00:59:01 -0900 John W. Redelfs
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
After much pondering, Gary Smith favored us with:
Archaeology also shows that Jericho didn't have the walls tumbling
down
when Joshua fought it.
I don't believe archaeology knows what it is talking about. The
At 15:23 11/3/2002 -0600, St Paul (not Minnesota) wrote:
Also, maybe our whole religious experience is self induced with naturally
occurring chemicals in our brains that make us wishy washy? Maybe the
whole thing is a joke?
Well, I see it like this. If my religious experiences are all in mind,
If it is all in your mind, then how about the thousands of others who have
not only experienced God but also written prophecies, etc.?
Stacy.
At 07:36 PM 11/05/2002 +, you wrote:
At 15:23 11/3/2002 -0600, St Paul (not Minnesota) wrote:
Also, maybe our whole religious experience is self
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
People think Churchill's remark that sometimes a truth is so precious that
it has
to be protected by numerous lies is a cynical reading of history, but
there's a
lot of wisdom to that. It doesn't matter when Jericho's walls came
tumbling
After much pondering, Stacy Smith favored us with:
If it is all in your mind, then how about the thousands of others who have
not only experienced God but also written prophecies, etc.?
Maybe they are all part of my vivid dream? --JWR
The resurrection of Christ is not a figure of speech -- there is no slippery
slope here. One just has to realize what the difference between sacred and
secular history is.
John W. Redelfs wrote:
After much pondering, Marc A. Schindler favored us with:
People think Churchill's remark that
After much pondering, Stacy Smith favored us with:
And the prophecies coming to pass? Somewhere we must come down to
objective measurements.
Stacy.
At 11:37 AM 11/05/2002 -0900, you wrote:
After much pondering, Stacy Smith favored us with:
If it is all in your mind, then how about the
Gary Smith wrote:
Elder McConkie wrote that Eve really wasn't created from the rib of Adam,
that it was symbolic of their equality. I guess that means it isn't a
secular history, eh?
SWK also said this. BY was much, much harsher on the 'secular history' of the
Bible. I assume most here on
At 15:23 11/3/2002 -0600, St Paul (not Minnesota) wrote:
Also, maybe our whole religious experience is self induced with naturally
occurring chemicals in our brains that make us wishy washy? Maybe the
whole thing is a joke? Maybe we don't even really exist. Would someone
pinch me please?
-- Elmer L. Fairbank [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
At 15:23 11/3/2002 -0600, St Paul (not Minnesota) wrote:
Also, maybe our whole religious experience is self induced with naturally
occurring chemicals in our brains that make us wishy washy? Maybe the
whole thing is a joke? Maybe we don't
Elder McConkie wrote that Eve really wasn't created from the rib of Adam,
that it was symbolic of their equality. I guess that means it isn't a
secular history, eh?
There is history in the Bible and BoM. However, they weren't written to
be secular histories. They were written primarily to be books
That's exactly what I wrote: I *don't* believe the scriptures are
secular
histories.
If this was so, the apostles and prophets from Joseph Smith on would have
told us so. everything I have ever heard from modern prophets teaches
that the old history of the world is true and historical unless you
Paul Osborne wrote:
---
Maybe we don't even really exist. Would someone
pinch me please?
---
Sure, happy to--
PINCH!
OUCH!! You didn't have to do it so hard, you meanie.
;-)
Paul O
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sign Up for Juno Platinum
Also, maybe our whole religious experience is self induced with
naturally
occurring chemicals in our brains that make us wishy washy? Maybe the
whole thing is a joke? Maybe we don't even really exist. Would someone
pinch me please?
I know I exist, but maybe you're a figment of my imagination .
55 matches
Mail list logo
