Sealing?

[Cal]

Originally posted by Ray+Oct 14 2004, 10:25 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ray @ Oct 14 2004, 10:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Cal@ Oct 11 2004, 06:51 AM

Ray--I figured that last one would stump you. :)

Heh, you figured wrong again. Haven’t I helped you learn anything yet?

I didn’t respond to you before because I’ve been out of town on vacation, or as they seem to say in BC, on holiday. I hadn’t even read your post before today, so how do you suppose I could have been stumped by it?

Now on to your message:

<!--QuoteBegin--Cal

@ Oct 8 2004, 05:40 PM

So, since the JS revised the Bible without changing the parts that sanction slavery, we can be sure that is what YOUR God actually thought?

No, from my perspective, we can’t be sure about anything God thinks or thought by simply reading the scriptures. As I tried to tell you before, the Bible was originally a written record of God’s interaction with Man, with Man in this case referring to some people in what we call the Eastern Hemisphere of the Earth, while also being a record of Man’s interaction with God, AND a record of the history and culture of these people.

With an understanding of these facts we are then faced with a few questions:

1) How do we know if or when the thoughts and ideas expressed by Man in the Bible are the thoughts and ideas of God?

2) How do we know if what Man originally wrote in what later became the “Bible” was or is still contained in the Bible available after those things had been written, such as hundreds or thousands of years later. Or in other words, how do we know that nothing was lost during translation or that nothing was omitted that would have more clearly or accurately conveyed the original message? And btw, these errors wouldn’t necessarily have been caused intentionally. It is simply a fact that words alone often do not express the thoughts and ideas that somebody is or was trying to convey and that it gets even more complicated when translating from one language to another.

3) How do we know whether or not the things God revealed to some particular people in specific circumstances in the past are equally valid for anybody and everybody in every circumstance today?

Now I’ll repeat your last question:

So, since the JS revised the Bible without changing the parts that sanction slavery, we can be sure that is what YOUR God actually thought?

1) How can we, with “we” referring to all of Mankind in general, know that those ideas that “sanction” slavery did indeed come from God?

You seem to be suggesting that Joseph Smith would have or should have edited the Bible to reveal God’s thoughts and ideas about slavery, because that’s what you think he should have done if God felt differently about slavery than those people who wrote about slavery in the Bible. Is this what you intended to suggest, and if so, why? It could be that Joseph Smith only wanted to revise the Bible to clearly show what had originally been written in the Bible by those people who originally wrote the Bible, or in what later became the Bible.

And btw, which scriptures are you referring to which you believe “sanction” slavery? Could it be that God only wanted people to abide by the law of the land instead of coming out in open rebellion against those laws that sanctioned slavery? I believe that it’s usually best to change the laws of a society from within, instead of coming out in open rebellion against that society. I do believe there is a time to go to war, though, but making that distinction is sometimes difficult, which is why we sometimes need God to guide us through revelation in particular circumstances.

Anyway, getting back to the main point in my original line of questioning, I was asking you to tell me how you suggest that I should come to know God? Or in other words, I was asking you to tell me if there are any books I could read to give me an understanding of God and how He interacts with Man? If you believe the Bible is such a book, how do you suggest that I come to know the truth that is in it? If you do NOT believe the Bible is such a book, which book do you recommend? Or in other words, are you suggesting that I should be totally reliant on what you have to say about God, or do you suggest some other way that I can come to know the truth for myself?

And btw, I testify that I have already come to know the truth of many things for myself, and that I received my knowledge from God. I am now asking you to tell me how you have come to know the truth for yourself, which hopefully will lead us to a point we can agree on.

Well Ray, you have managed to convince me that the Bible is indeed quite unreliable as a guide to who God is and what he thinks. Curvy has pretty well trashed your cute little interpretation of the slavery issue. As to the God I know, clearly he doesn't come from the Bible--you have made it quite clear that the Bible is too unreliable to be the source of much of anything, especially something as crucial as the nature and reality of God.

Actually, my feelings about God come from the same place yours do, my own feelings. They are internal to me, and I am open minded enough to not insist that everyone else get acquainted with my God. He's mine, and no one elses, unless someone wants to claim that they know the same God I know; then we are free to rejoyce in the worship of the same God. But if not, that is just fine with me. Most of the Gods I have heard about seem to want basically good things, with a few exceptions.

As to the "truth" of Mormonism in general; IMHO, the Church is true enough to justify doing anything good in its name, but not true enough to justify doing evil in its name.

[Ray]

Heh, instead of thinking that you are deliberately trying to slander what I said or what I meant to say, I will think that you simply failed to understand what I was saying. I was not saying nor did I mean to say that the Bible is unreliable. I was saying that you need the guidance of the Holy Ghost to help you understand the truth that is in the Bible. Without the guidance of the Holy Ghost, you may not properly understand the truth that is in the Bible, or the truth that is anywhere else for that matter. I believe the Bible is a very reliable source of truth, and that there are very few “books” in the world that can help you get to know the TRUE God as well as you can get to know Him through reading the Bible. But a simple reading of the Bible is not enough. As I said before, without the guidance of the Holy Ghost to help you understand what you are reading, you may not see or pick up on the truth that is in the Bible. You might see it as a wonderful literary work, or an interesting story about the lives and beliefs and history of other people, but without the guidance of the Holy Ghost, you will not come to know that the Bible contains TRUTH ABOUT GOD… more truth about God than you will find in just about any other “book” on Earth.

And while there are a few books that can help you get to know God a little better than you can get to know Him through the Bible, those other books do not contradict the truth that is contained in the Bible. The Book of Mormon, for instance, can help you get to know God a little better than you can get to know Him through the Bible alone because the Book of Mormon was passed along from one prophet to another, from Moroni to Joseph Smith, and both of those individuals had the guidance of the Holy Ghost to inspire them to write and translate what they wrote. The Bible, on the other hand, while it may have been passed along by prophets most of the time, was not always in the hands of prophets, such as the men who translated the King James version or the New International version or any of the many other translations of the Bible. I believe the people who wrote and translated the Bible into those versions were trying to do as good a job as they knew how, but those people were not prophets who were guided by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and they didn’t claim to be.

And btw, while “Curvy” may have given another possible interpretation of the slavery issue, I don’t believe that she “pretty well trashed” my interpretation. And I’m not saying that my “cute little interpretation” was the correct interpretation out of all the other possible choices. But I do believe that your point was to suggest that the Bible is teaching that slavery in general is okay, and that is not how I interpret the Bible. That would be like saying that since God told some people to go to war against some people and kill every last woman and child of their enemies, that killing enemy women and children is always an okay thing to do in a war because, after all, God told some people that they should kill women and children before. In other words, I believe you are trying to apply general principles where I am saying that the actions applied in particular circumstances do not always apply to matters in general.