jinc1019
-
Posts
160 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by jinc1019
-
-
These are all fair points and I will try not to take anything out of context, seeking the advice of those who know better than I do prior to making any judgments. I am a pretty fair individual, and when it comes to religion, I am more interested in getting to the truth than I am anything else. The truth is my only agenda so I don't ever intentionally try to reach a conclusion I want.
I started really reading the Book of Mormon from beginning to end a few days ago. So far, several things stand out to me, some support the Mormon claim and some do not. Since this thread is really not about those specific issues, I won't address them here but will instead open another thread when the time is right.
Thanks to everyone again for your help.
Justin
-
All excellent posts. I appreciate everyone's efforts in these discussions. Thanks so much again.
-
After doing a little more digging about the Book of Mormon, I came across a 2002 study that seemed to claim, based on a wordprint study (which analyzes the likelihood that various authors actually wrote particular material), that Joseph Smith, Oliver C., and Sidney Ringdon absolutely did not write the Book of Mormon. However, a Stanford test by three professors, the lead author's name was Jokers, seemed to suggest that Ringdon was definitely the author based on a statistical model in 2008. A BYU study then later debunked this quite successfully in my opinion, but all of these studies leads me to my question:
Why the heck aren't there a lot more wordprint studies? It seems to me this would definitely help resolve any questions about the Book of Mormon, Book of Abraham, etc.
Here is a FAIR Mormon article on wordprint studies and the 2002 study that favors the Mormon position nicely: Book of Mormon/Wordprint studies - FairMormon
-
I recognize others have already answered your question; however, I will answer with my own thoughts to your question. Joseph Smith was a man with his own thoughts, personality, beliefs, etc... As with Moses when God commanded he obeyed and delivered his messages, as given by the Lord to us. As with the children of Israel, we have a choice either to accept or reject the message.
When Joseph Smith received a revelation from God, as with Moses ( or any other prophet ), we as children of God, are under obligation to honor God's servants, otherwise we may receive a consequence we do not like. Example, Noah and the flood, the children of Israel not allowed into the promised land and were condemned to wander for 40 more years in the wilderness, etc...
When Joseph Smith spoke as a man then it we are not under any obligation to follow him, but to think for ourselves. Thus, him being a prophet doesn't dictate automatically that everything he taught was/is true. For example, the quote I previously shared, is not canonical doctrine, but it is a great quote which I believe in and which I believe to be doctrine -- a truth. This quote has been quoted by other prophets, by other apostalic leaders, and general authorities of the Church. Thus, others can probably say what Joseph Smith spoke here was truth although not canonized.
Evidence is dependent upon the viewer. What evidence do we have of Adam and Eve? What evidence do we have of the biblical flood? What evidence do we have that Abraham, Jacob and Isaac even existed and weren't mythological people to create a good story? What evidence do we have of an ark? Because we can say, "Jerusalem exists, and Egypt, and other areas in this hemisphere," it doesn't dictate that these stories are true.
When Jesus asked Peter who he was, we are revealed, instructed, that the witness came from God, not because of evidence of towns, people, or places.
I don't deny anything you say here except that...What do you say to those who never receive a witness of the truth you believe? When you rely so heavily on that witness and it never comes, it seems impossible to believe it.
-
Correct; however, if you come accross scriptures which you are unsure of or what they mean please do not interpret them from your perspective. In order to understand our beliefs make sure you understand our core doctrines.
I, personally, find it very nerving when I read on the internet, or watch a youtube video, and someone tries to twist our doctrine by saying, "You see, this is what Mormons believe, it is in their scripture," and they are interpreting our scripture incorrectly.
So to speak, coming from a skit with a judge and the man says, "Well, I am not a man, who would commit a murder." The judge responds, "Wait, did you say you are 'not a man,' hmm.."
Taking our doctrine out of context doesn't help in learning what we actually believe.
I agree, but it can't be "out of context" if I am reading it from your scriptures in its entirety.
-
Things are getting better:
Evangelical visits to BYU signal a new evangelical-Mormon detente
Good to see.
-
And that answers the question you asked at the beginning of this thread. "Why Believe Smith About Non-Book of Mormon Claims?" because we have what evidence there might for it and then we have asked God and got an answer.
Other people might not like that answer, might disagree with that answer, might claim a different answer. But we don't care, we have our answer, and therefore we believe it to be an objective truth. And we aren't going to let go of that just because someone else thinks we are totally wrong
That's a very fair answer. I will continue to study your scriptures and ask God to bring forth the truth. I am perfectly willing to put the matter in God's hands, but admittedly, I don't expect to get an answer that's clear (which often seems to be the case with my studies).
-
I once (for most of my life) thought Truth was the most important thing ever and always.
Now I realize that as important as truth is, Love is much more to the point, in life.
Have you studied Epistemology?
Too much yes...I don't enjoy it!
-
Apparently I need to learn more about what Mormons actually believe from the BOC, D&C, and Pearl of Great Price. It seems to me that much of what I have heard about Mormonism is largely false or exaggerated or taken to be official doctrine when it is not. Speaking as someone who has never even really known a Mormon personally, you all have really been given the shaft by the general Christian community in America.
-
And then we have to get into a discussion of canonized scripture, official doctrines, and personal revelation.
When we're in the "Learn about the Mormon Church" sub-forum, we have to treat questions as though we are in the Gospel Essentials/Principles class. We need to be clear and careful on how we answer questions.
We believe in personal revelation, yes. We believe in being taught by the ultimate teacher - the Spirit.
The source of our canonized doctrine are the scriptures: The KJV of the Holy Bible, The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine & Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. This is the core and root of our scriptural basis of our faith.
Gospel Principles Chapter 10: Scriptures
We believe in modern day revelation from living Prophets and Apostles. They help lead and guide us along the paths outlined in the Scriptures. We receive advice, guidance, and counsel from them on a continuous basis. However, to differentiate between canonized scripture, the last time we made a change to our canonized scriptures was in 1978 with Official Declaration 2.
Gospel Principles Chapter 9: Prophets of God
However, we also believe in personal revelation and even personal scripture, but it is not binding upon the whole Church. For example, as members of the Church, we can receive a Patriarchal Blessing... a blessing that is essentially personal revelation and scripture for us. That blessing can help us understand more of our eternal nature, our strengths, and our personal gifts of the Spirit.
Gospel Principles Chapter 22: The Gifts of the Spirit
I have a PERSONAL opinion and belief that we have a Heavenly Mother. Why is She not mentioned in ancient scripture? I have a theory. If we look around and hear how often the Lord's name is used in vain, and the Father's name as well... would you want the same to happen to YOUR wife? I know I wouldn't. Maybe that's a weak theory, but I like it. It is in harmony with our beliefs about eternal families.
Why would we strive to have eternal families if the Father didn't have one?
Very nice overview. Thank you so much for providing it.
Justin
-
Your contention is circular. Of course if you don't see a reason you don't have a reason.
But, that is not to mean there isn't a reason. I just gave you a reason. The Spirit. The Spirit is the source of scripture.
-Finrock
You are right. But the problem with this is...if the Spirit doesn't confirm this belief in an individual, which is the case with myself, then there isn't any hope of ever believing it based on that reliance.
-
How do you expect to recognize objective truth when it is presented to you?
The only way to truly KNOW something is objectively true is for God to tell you it is. Otherwise, one must make judgments based on the weight of the evidence. For the most part, that's what I do. If I believe the evidence supports one conclusion over another, I generally accept that conclusion...Unless God tells me otherwise.
-
Good Afternoon jinc1019. Welcome to the forums. I hope you're having a fine day! :)
Me believing in Heavenly Mother is not contingent upon her being referenced in written scripture. I've received my witness from the source of scripture, which is the Spirit. However, there is mention of Her and has been. Many references to Her have been removed, distorted, forgotten, dismissed, ignored, explained away, etc.
But, most important to realize in all of this is that the Spirit is the source of scripture. The Spirit's utterances are scripture.
-Finrock
I appreciate the kind welcome Finrock!
I respect your opinion but respectfully disagree. Without any reason to believe in a Heavenly Mother, I don't really see the reason for doing so.
-
Now _that's_ a very sticky wicket! Did you know Mormons are not Trinitarians? I myself as a mystic am a Panentheist, but most Mormons are Henotheistic.
I did know this yes. Mormons believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three separate beings that together make the Godhead, a unified group (for the lack of a better word) in spirit, desire, action and will. So essentially, they believe in one Godhead but separate Godly entities. I don't necessarily have a problem with this because it's impossible to disprove from the Bible or from any other source. If Joseph Smith saw what he claimed to see, it is likely true.
I don't know what a Panentheist is, could you explain that to me?
-
You seem to be stuck on labeling things... As if the wrong label means everything else about it is wrong. God doesn't see it that way. God sees us as his children and his is willing to guide and help all those that will listen. He works with individuals. If an individual will best develop learn and understand as a Muslim, or a Presbyterian, or a Jew, or a Catholic then that is were God will guide them to. Because God will put the welfare of his struggling child over the importance of any man made label.
As long as the child continues to listen to God, then God will be able to lead them out when he feels the time is right.
I can understand why you would think I am talking about labels, but I am not. I am talking about objective truth. All Mormons' beliefs cannot be right if all the beliefs of the Roman Catholic Church are right. All Mormon beliefs cannot be right if all Muslim beliefs are right. Some church has to be wrong, which is to say have the wrong teachings about who God is, what God wants from us, etc. Even your assessment that we are all God's children is something many would reject in other faiths. My goal is to discover the truth...I don't care at all about labels, which is why I am not a member of any denomination (although I would like to be if the truth was taught there).
-
In the Hebrew language, does the Shekinah have a gender? The Early Church Fathers were patristic, and weren't much on gender equality.
Yes, but they were definitively monotheistic. From what I can tell, there is no mention of more than one deity from the Early Christian Fathers.
-
There is also the Holy Bible as far as it is translated correctly.
But yes, these are the canonized body of doctrine of the Church. Everything else follows from these. Doctrine is a fluid thing when you have a Church that is run by Divine Revelation. We don't have a closed canon.
Okay, proclamations are also called declarations. Besides the one I linked to you on the previous post, here are the others:
Thank you for all of your help. I will read over all of it.
Justin
-
It's one of two reasons, actually--the other, being that after I obtained the statement from Smith, I tried it out for myself and got a spiritual confirmation that it was what God wanted me to be doing.
Re 1): If the seeker has truly gone through all the steps with an open heart/mind, and no manifestation comes, the God holds Himself accountable for that. I do think that, in some isolated cases, God actually feels some specific individuals at a particular time in their lives can do more good outside of Mormonism, than inside of it. When the time is right, the Lord reveals all and we are then expected to change our lives accordingly. Until then, if we've acted in good faith, I believe we are held blameless.
On 2): Some specific scriptures (ie Galatians 5:22-23), in conjunction with a good bit of trial and error.
Incidentally: why would you assume that the "internal feelings" felt by those in other religions, are automatically counterfeit? The Holy Spirit is the spirit of truth, and it will confirm that truth wherever it is to be found.
All good points. I can't dispute any of them logically.
-
I highly recommend a careful reading of the following: Approaching Mormon Doctrine
I will be sure to read this over carefully. Thank you.
-
Thanks for all of the insights. If you believe that there is a Mother in Heaven, why is there no mention of Her anywhere in scripture?
-
That is what is known as a leap of Faith or a trial of Faith. The Lord will give us things to help us build our Faith... but in the end it is our Faith that he is going to test. There are things that we are required to study about and pray about, but until we step out in to the darkness in faith we will not have the knowledge. That the knowledge comes after the test of faith
Fair enough. Perhaps a leap of faith is required. But again, how do you distinguish your leap and the result from it and the leap made by Muslims or Presbyterians or anyone else? It just seems like, at the end of the day, unless you have a religious experience, it's all just up in the air.
-
Joseph Smith also translated the books in the Pearl of Great Price.
Anything that comes from proceeding prophets gets added to D&C or written as Proclamations. An example of which is https://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation which is the latest one that we received from when Gordon B. Hinckley was the prophet back in 1995.
In the early days of the Church, the method of succession was not quite established clearly although guidelines have been laid out. After the death of Joseph Smith, a conference was held in Nauvoo in August 1844 to determine the presiding authority of the Church. In that Conference, the Twelve Apostles (being the ones that held all the keys to the Priesthood) was determined to lead the Church. Joseph Smith III (then 11 years old) do not hold the priesthood. Signey Rigdon, being the sole survivor of the First Presidency after Joseph and Hyrum Smith was killed, claimed that he was given a Revelation to lead the Church. He was not sustained by the Twelve Apostles in the August conference. A vote was made (as is the manner by which we sustain Church leaders) among the members present in the conference and the Twelve Apostles were sustained to lead the Church.
Another conference was held in October 1844. In this Conference, the Twelve Apostles sustained Brigham Young as the President of the Quorom of the Twelve at which time he also was sustained President of the Church.
Today, the Church has over 14 million members in different parts of the world. The order of succession has remained the same. When the President of the Church dies, the First Presidency is dissolved and the 2 counsellors join the Quorom of Twelve Apostles and they all hold the keys to preside over the Church. The President of the Quorum of the Twelves Apostles is then sustained as the President of the Church, the Quorom ordains a Milchezedek Priest to join the Quorom, and the President of the Church then calls his 2 counsellors and the First Presidency is established. Each and every one of these 15 people is then submitted to the entire 14 million+ membership for a sustaining vote and every April of every year, we get to sustain them again. It is the responsibility of each member of the Church to inquire of God and receive personal revelation on the authority of all Church leaders.
Thank you for all of this wonderful information.
Just to be clear though (because I want to be sure I get it absolutely right), the ONLY official doctrine of the LDS Church is held within the Book of Mormon, the D&C, the Pearl of Great Price, and Proclamations, correct? I know where to find the first three, but what about the "Proclamations"? Is there a place where all of the Proclamations not contained within the D&C are listed?
-
The doctrine is that if we are true and faithful then we will inherit all the Father has... And be Co-heirs with Christ. That is powerful stuff, thats scriptural stuff.
Then some people start asking themselves "What is the Father currently doing that we may one day be a part of?" That does become a bit speculative by its very nature... Some people like to speculate and think they got all then details nailed down (and maybe they do), others are less concerned and figure then need to focus on getting there first, and if they do then they can figure it out once they get there.
Ok, so it sounds like you are saying that the actual teaching is quite broad and others have extrapolated, rightly or wrongly, to come to more specific conclusions which could be right or could be wrong. Is that right?
What about the issue about God, the Heavenly Father, having some kind of relationship with a goddess? Is that doctrinal or just a rumor?
-
Simple because if you believe that the Book of Mormon is true then you can exercise some faith that maybe some of the others revelations are true (say like the Word of Wisdom). If you can have a willingness to believe then you study it, you pray about it and you practice it. That is a very powerful combo for a person to find out what kind of fruit such a revelation might bare. And by their fruits you shall know them.
And this fundamentally is the root of your problem. You want to do things your way according to your wisdom and according to what you think God should do. Rather then what God has clearly time and time again showed us. He requires that we trust in his arm and not the arm of the flesh.. and that we exercise faith in him. If there was one clear group then joining that group would not be an act of faith.
While the LDS church does claim to be the true church we also acknowledge that the Elect of God (aka those that are following his spirit) can be found among all the groups of the earth and those faithful are not going to be denied anything in the afterlife just because they were in a different group.
Thus you need to learn to listen to the spirit and follow it where ever it may take you. Anything else and you are trusting in the arm of the flesh.
Perfectly fair suggestion. And for those directives that actually produce fruit, it makes sense. But what about the LDS Church's teachings on the sacraments (such as baptism and the Lord's Supper)? If I practice those sacraments within the LDS Church, how can I "test the fruits" of those teachings? I can't. The LDS Church may be right and it may be wrong on those teachings, but I can't practice those things and then find out after the fact that they were right the same you can with many other teachings that clearly can produce positive outcomes.
The same is true about the LDS' teachings on the afterlife. If the LDS Church is wrong, I won't know until I get there (God willing)!
I agree that faith is more than an academic exercise, and perhaps that's something I need to learn in a practical sense, but believing something before knowing it's true is not something I think I could ever do.
Wordprint Studies? Why aren't more around?
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
Sorry, it was a typo.