Teaching some things that are true, prematurely or at the wrong time, can invite sorrow and heartbreak instead of the joy intended to accompany learning. What is true with these two subjects is, if anything, doubly true in the field of religion. The scriptures teach emphatically that we must give milk before meat.The Lord made it very clear that some things are to be taught selectively and
some things are to be given only to those who are worthy. It matters very much not only what we are told but when we are told it. Be careful that you build faith rather than destroy it."The Mantle Is Far, Far Greater Than The Intellect" given by Boyd Packer at the Fifth Annual Church Educational System Religious Educators' Symposium, 22 August, 1981 at Brigham Young University.Should NEGATIVE History be excised as the General Authorities enforce such? Tell it all & be EX'ed!1981, Apostle Boyd K. Packer made these comments:
There is a temptation for the writer or the teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.
Historians seem to take great pride in publishing something new, particularly if it illustrates a weakness or mistake of a prominent historical figure....
The writer or the teacher who has an exaggerated loyalty to the theory that everything must be told is laying a foundation for his own judgment....
That historian or scholar who delights in pointing out the weaknesses and frailties of present or past leaders destroys faith. A destroyer of faith... places himself in great spiritual jeopardy. He is serving the wrong master, and unless he repents, he will not be among the faithful in the eternities...
In the Church we are not neutral. We are one-sided. There is a war going on and we are engaged in it. (Brigham Young University Studies, Summer 1981, pages 263-64, 266-67)
Oaks " �When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.� In Conference Report, Apr. 1947, p. 24." Address to Church Educational System teachers, Aug. 16, 1985.
Why are documents unaccessable to historians and why a VAULT?
"On Being a Mormon Historian (and its Aftermath)," D. Michael Quinn
President Hinckley telephoned in June 1982 to say that he was sympathetic about a request I had written to obtain access to documents in the First Presidency's vault but that my request could not be granted...
In May 1984 my college dean told me he had been instructed by "higher authority" to ask me not to publish a paper I had just presented to the Mormon History Association. It was a historical survey of the public activity of general authorities in business corporations. The dean apologized for having to make this request. I agreed not to publish my presentation and told no one about the incident.
In 1985, after Dialogue published my article "LDS Church Authority and New Plural Marriages, 1890-1904," three apostles gave orders for my stake president to confiscate my temple recommend.... I was told that three apostles believed I was guilty of "speaking evil of the Lord's anointed." The stake president was also instructed "to take further action" against me if this did not "remedy the situation" of my writing controversial Mormon history.... I told the stake president that this was an obvious effort to intimidate me from doing history that might "offend the Brethren" [i.e., the highest leaders of the church]... The stake president also saw this as a back-door effort to have me fired from BYU....
I find it one of the fundamental ironies of modern Mormonism that the general authorities who praise free agency, also do their best to limit free agency's prerequisites - access to information, uninhibited inquiry, and freedom of _expression_. (Faithful History: Essays on Writing Mormon History, Edited by George D. Smith, 1992, pages 90-93, 95)
General authorities in recent years have criticized Mormon historians for republishing in part or whole out-of-print Church publications such as the 1830 Book of Mormon, the Journal of Discourses (edited and published for thirty-two years under the auspices of the First Presidency), and statements taken from former Church magazines published for the children, youth, and general membership of the Church. It is an odd situation when present general authorities criticize historians for reprinting what previous general authorities regarded not only as faith-promoting but as appropriate for Mormon youth and the newest converts.
Faithful History, pg 103 footnote 22 Michael Quinn called into the office of Apostle Boyd K. Packer:
WHATEVER you do, do not IDOLIZE TRUTH: Truth destroys!!!!!
When Elder Packer interviewed me as a prospective member of Brigham Young University's faculty in 1976, he explained: "I have a hard time with historians because they idolize the truth. The truth is not uplifting; it destroys. I could tell most of the secretaries in the church office building that they are ugly and fat. That would be the truth, but it would hurt and destroy them. Historians should tell only that part of the truth that is inspiring and uplifting."
Dave Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAVEH: Sorry 'bout that, Lance. Let me try it again. You posted negative material relating to the BofM. The author used an example that you disagree with to draw conclusions (detrimental to the BofM) that you do agree with. That seems a bit incongruous to me, so I was wondering if you considered that anomaly when you posted it. Or...perhaps you did not read it before posting....
Lance Muir wrote:You lost me.----- Original Message -----From: Dave HansenSent: May 03, 2005 10:12Subject: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Book of Mormon and the KJV BibleDAVEH: Then does it concern you at all to post his conclusions when they may be based on assumptions to which you do not subscribe?
Lance Muir wrote:Presently, I do not.----- Original Message -----From: Dave HansenTo: TruthTalkSent: May 03, 2005 02:27Subject: [Bulk] Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Book of Mormon and the KJV Bible
DAVEH: Lance, do you (agreeing with the author's assumptions below) believe Jesus did not speak the words of Mk 15-18 as mentioned below?
----- Original Message -----From: Jonathan HughesTo: Lance MuirSent: April 22, 2005 21:27Subject: Book of Mormon and the KJV BibleThe Book of Mormon and the King James Version (1999)
Curt van den Heuvel
Introduction
The King James Version of the Bible is, in all likelihood, the most successful of all the English translations. Volumes have been written on its distinctive and rhythmic style, and it is still regarded as a triumph of modern English literature.
................
A similar problem affects Mormon chapter 9. Verses 22 through 24 read
For behold, thus said Jesus Christ, the Son of God, unto his disciples who should tarry, yea, and also to all his disciples, in the hearing of the multitude: Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature; And he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned; And these signs shall follow them that believe--in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick and they shall recover...Similarly, Ether 4:18 reads
Therefore, repent all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me, and believe in my gospel, and be baptized in my name; for he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned; and signs shall follow them that believe in my name.Both these passages are quotations from Mark 16, verses 15 through 18:
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.The problem here is that these verses are part of the so-called long ending of Mark, generally thought to be a late addition to the Marcan text. Neither the Siniaticus nor the Vaticanus, the two oldest Greek texts, have this ending. (The New International Version has a note which reads `The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20'). If this is true, it is quite impossible for Jesus to have spoken these words.
Conclusion
It is very evident that the Book of Mormon owes much to the King James Version. Since this particular version of the Bible was not translated until 1611, it means that the Book of Mormon cannot be an ancient work as Joseph Smith claimed.
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dave Hansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.langlitz.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If you wish to receive things I find interesting, I maintain six email lists... JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS, STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
