elinz

It's the way that dangerous topics are covered that matters. You can't put your head in the sand, but you can hope that the topics are handled in such a way that the outcome makes a lesson... the right lesson. If someone is doing somthing wrong he needs to be shown as having consequences for his behavior.

As I recall, I talked to him on his message board right before his "apostasy." He was all excited about the revisions he made to his book The Bible Says 1830, which I take is his exposition showing that the Bible has pointed the way and predicted the restoration via the LDS Church's founding in 1830. He was a bit bummed out that scholars thought he was a joke, but enthusiatic and resolved to keep up his work. Next thing you know he is in total meltdown mode and now he says he was never a believer, that his work was an attempt to convince himself. That's dishonest. Why people feel the need to publically deal with all their issue I don't get. I feel for the guy that he has had such a miserable time trying and failing to 'get it,' but have no respect for the way he went about it. That's why I feel bad about it. He was being very inventive and seemed to be having a good time with it all. I like your term "meltdown", it seems to fit well what must have happened. Another term might be "burnout". If after all that work he realized that the church was laughing at him it would simply ruin anyone.

"Blind Faith" is when you believe something in a literal way that contradicts something that science has proven otherwise. Example: Lamanites as Hebrews -> DNA does not match. "Faith" can mean that you understand that the literal truth of the Bible and BoM are not 100% true, but the ideas inside are of value because they define deeper abstract truths. So I have "Faith" in the bible, even if I lack "Blind Faith".

There have been cases of Republican insiders that seemed to be really strongly positive and then they turn out gay or something and they switch sides and are just as skilled going the other way. He's a very talented writer, but it makes you question his whole credibility in "defining" the church. The question is still: Can you be a Mormon and not be a "literalist"? (or is "blind faith" what it's all about?)

"– which is pretty much the Church’s position (each must pursue their own answers) as well but he doesn’t get that part… " That has been the prevailing theme with all the people who leave, that the church is all about "blind faith" in the end. It's so weird. Even his first website stressed that "blind faith" was against church teachings. First it is, then it isn't, argh! I feel a FUD attack has occurred...

Is there a proto-feminist movement going on?A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle?

The city of Rome became a big draw for people of all kinds. Thepractice of free bread and wine during festivals prompted everyone within the city to partake. Maybe in the contryside things were quite, but in Rome, whew, PARTY TIME! And both sexes got perverted. Emperer Tiberious was known for his fondness for young boys...

Are you responding to anything? It's hard to tell...

Early Rome was like early America, women had little freedom.But in late Rome, like in late America, women had freedom. And the Roman women often became "party girls" that skipped having kids (they had birth control secrets) and went to the orgies and boozed it up on wine. "I, Claudius" was a great tv series. "The wives are together in a separate part of the baths getting a rub down. Julia establishes herself as self indulgent and sexually liberal while Antonia is clearly traditional and conservative. Julia implies that Tiberius has deviant sexual tastes, which she could probably stand if only he would pay more attention to her. " http://www.historyinfilm.com/claudius/

The Harlot implies a moral system that becomes obsesseswith material culture and usually money. I'm not sure if that really qualifies on an island. Their sexual mores might have been less strict, but on an island that might make sense. Did people on the island put material possessions above all other things? Don't think so. Did they prostitute themselves to make money? No, it was more "free love". Is a "perfect storm" just a storm... well, yes and no. As for England, they were just starting to get really into humanism before WWII hit. The empire lost just about everything, so the "Beast" got killed before the "Harlot" got much of a ride. With Rome the early years were very conservative, but by the time of Nero and Caligula the culture had gone "San Francisco". There was a great british tv series long ago called "I, Claudius" about the Roman Rule from Augustus through Nero. They decry the end of the conservatives then too. Within one generation the society had produced Nero. Something we too can relate too...

I tend to agree. Obsession about literal truth goes against the spirit of how these things were written. They should have stuck with parables, at least they are honest in what they do...

If it helps any I don't have a literal belief in either the BoM or the Bible. I don't think that were meant to have literal interpretations because they are describing complex and abstract topics. It's like with the show "Joan of Arcadia". Some nut will 100 years from now demand a literal interpretation of the episodes when they were meant as musings. Jesus would have cried if he saw how it all turned out...

If the world is not told there are treasures they might never get the clue to search for them. You overestimate the amount of spiritual thinking out there...

We all build our own testimony, so no one set ofdoctrines must be shared by all. That is the rule is it not? Some doctrines are simply left as "surplus" and ignored by most.

That's a real eye opener!I read through many of the issues he has with the church. He's part Cherokee and his wife is Samoan, that in itself would put some fear in him given the churches history. Plus he finds the idea of male dominance a problem. Much of his thinking seems to be a reaction to his wifes experiences and input. From my perspective I see how far the secular world has pushed women out of the motherly role. I think that it is a mistake for us to be doing this. It smacks of ancient rome. He's also a fourth generation Mormon. That's an awful long time to be in the church. I'm a third generation Californian and sometimes it's nice just to break free of your old identity. If he had the "real life" experiences that I have had in places like San Francicso he would likely see the world differently. I feel sorry for the guy. He seems kind of lost now...

Maybe I'm just showing my spiritual immaturity. 95% of my life has been secular, so there may be many things that I might yet learn as well as things that I will never learn. Intellectually the website matches my instincts of what's going on. If my intuition does not agree with anything I won't "jump" into blind faith. So as of yet I don't get a "literal" affirmation of either the BoM or the Bible. They have "truth", but it seems to be "high level" truth and not narrative "literal" truth. Jesus seems to say that if you connect with the spirit you become connected to everything. So in a sense we all can connect. It's personal and intuitive to be connected. The intellect is the way that we "literalize" our experiences. It seems odd to me to obsess about the intellect because that's never the spirit. So why bother with such an effort to try to make the BoM and Bible literally true? It seems more about "brand loyalty" than anything else. B) But what about the "no official creed" rule?

But what if all the "clues" to the gate were hidden? How many will find the way then? Not many clues on tv. (JoA being the exception)

Really?That would be interesting. I like his style, it's very flowing and flexible and definitely not literal. If anything I would be afraid that he was being more independent minded than the mainstream church. Are you suggesting he's even MORE independent minded than I already sense, or the other way around? He seems to think for himself. More thinking is BETTER in my mind. Does he have any outside websites that show his own private projects? B)

We all bounce back and forth between the extremes of Gnostic indifference and Muslim extremism. To change the world you need to know that the world can be changed. Jesus proved that. The question is always "how best can we make change happen"? (hint: Taking back the media is REAL change)

So you see it? It's complex though, the Beast comes into existence first as a result of good fortune. (WWII for the US) Then the good fortune creates the sense of entitlement. This arrogance grows and creates the Harlot attitude. Have you seen this website? http://www.whyprophets.com/index.htm And specifically: http://www.whyprophets.com/prophets/beast2.htm It's a great LDS website!

That was the criticism of the Gnostics.Gnostisicm, like Buddhism, has no directive to make change in the world. It simply states: "This is it, get used to it". That's why what Jesus did was a conscious desire to CHANGE the world rather than simply observe it. The world did in fact change as a result of his sacrifice, his martyrdom. And, Al Qaeda, in it's strange alien way, is trying to change the world too. We need to understand that it is a radical way to cause change, but given the circumstances it's the way they have chosen. The real question is what happens now? Will we take the lesson as a sign to return to God? Or will we make the martyrs into clowns and go back to our path to increasing liberalism? B)

The narrative style was not the preferred style of Jesus or anyone else back then. That's why the discovery of the Gnostic Gospels (Gospel of Thomas etc..) sheds so much light on the primative church. Parables are in some ways better because they cannot be picked apart. They DEMAND that you rise to the level of the author! But that's the problem, what do you do with the weak minded ones? What can they worship? So you need to tend to the entire flock in one way or the other. Thus the creation of the narrative... B)

And I'd add that if the tv were used in a more positive way like with shows like "Joan of Arcadia" it would help. Too much of the programming makes people feel bad because it portrays life as a series of one liners. And most of the jokes imply that people need to do the wrong thing and get into deeper trouble. Liberalism is poison and it makes people depressed. It's time to take the media back! There is a desperate need for LDS based programming. What about a situation comedy that covers the life of someone at BYU?

All we all clear on "The Harlot" riding on top of "The Beast"? B)

I admire the Muslims, even Al Qaeda and Osama. Osama lived the secular party life and had all the secular riches that any man could want. He made an active choice to oppose the course of history. Anyone seen "The Butterfly Effect"? It's an interesting movie about how a small change can effect the outcome of the future. Think of the effect that the martyrdom of Jesus had on this world! It's huge. And the "magnificent 19" as they are called that did 911 made a huge impact in changing our world too. 911 divided America between the left and the right. The secular and the religious. And this confrontation will likely only increase as the years go on. The days of sleeping are over...