Tyler90AZ Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 I really enjoyed the talk! However, I feel like it will be used as ammo against us. As a non-believer for a short season I can see how people will pick that talk apart. He said either the Book of Mormon is of God or devil. Non-believers will say well he just admitted its of the devil because I don't believe it. Then the comment about those who read the Book of Mormon will automatically believe. There are many who have read the Book of Mormon who don't believe. What does everyone think? I will say that the talk hit home for me and eliminated all middle ground. What an amazing session!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMGuy Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 My personal take is that it is a poor argument. Something does not need to be entirely good, or entirely bad. There are many things that can teach good principles but not be entirely true (Paul Dunn talks anyone). I'm not saying it is or is not what he claimed it to be, but his logical is faulty. Even the analogy of a line between two points. He claimed that the reason we have so many interpretations is because there is only one point (the bible). Yet, if we have two points (bible and book of mormon) then we can have only one interpretation, but then how to explain the Community of Christ, the Strangites, or even Warren Jeffs. In otherwords, we have other faiths that accept the book of mormon, but have a different interpretation of doctrine. I understand what he was getting at, or at least I think I do. That the book of mormon is a good book that brings us nearer to Christ. His logical however is flawed IMO. -RM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason_J Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 My personal take is that it is a poor argument. Something does not need to be entirely good, or entirely bad. There are many things that can teach good principles but not be entirely true (Paul Dunn talks anyone). I'm not saying it is or is not what he claimed it to be, but his logical is faulty. Even the analogy of a line between two points. He claimed that the reason we have so many interpretations is because there is only one point (the bible). Yet, if we have two points (bible and book of mormon) then we can have only one interpretation, but then how to explain the Community of Christ, the Strangites, or even Warren Jeffs. In otherwords, we have other faiths that accept the book of mormon, but have a different interpretation of doctrine. I understand what he was getting at, or at least I think I do. That the book of mormon is a good book that brings us nearer to Christ. His logical however is flawed IMO.-RMI agree. I understand the point he was getting at, but his logic wasn't too sound, and I can already see how the critics will use it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 I understand what he was getting at, or at least I think I do. That the book of mormon is a good book that brings us nearer to Christ. His logical however is flawed IMO.He was not making a logical argument. He was giving an example.You might as well say that Christ was wrong and illogical because people don't grow wool out of their bodies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annewandering Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 I thought it was a great talk. I also think you missed the main point. The Book of Mormon is either true or not true. You really can not have it both ways. If it is not true then who is it from? Well if its not from God then so who is left. I see absolutely nothing wrong with his logic at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RipplecutBuddha Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 he also isn't the first GA to make the statement. Either the Book of Mormon is exactly what we believe it to be, or it is not. I don't see that it's a bad argument at all, it's merely a statement of perfectly rational fact. Just because some people not of our faith won't like it makes no difference to me. Truth is not something to be tailored to agree with popular sentiment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beefche Posted October 2, 2011 Report Share Posted October 2, 2011 Critics may use Elder Callister's talk, but who cares? Sis. Beck's and Elder Packer's previous talks caused chatter among critics. And as if that is the first time anyone has given a powerful testimony with bold words of the Book of Mormon? I still think Elder Holland has given one of the most powerful testimonies of the Book of Mormon--boldly, without apology, and emphatically.Safety for the Soul - general-conference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.