Liu Cixin testifies of Christ? What on earth?

[_huckelberry]

The universe of many modern intellectuals and materialists seems to offer no purpose beyond propagating random genes

How is that ultimately different from Joseph Smith's materialist universe, which seems to offer no purpose beyond propagating random gods?

It might depend upon how much similarity one sees in Mormon understanding of God and a pale gray member of a ruling party seeking to maintain complete control.

[_Gadianton]

I hope not to derail the thread, but I guess I'll have to give a lot more thought to how Joseph Smith's cosmology and theology "represent profound and original breakthroughs in thought, solving significant problems in the world’s views on life and the cosmos."

It's difficult to fathom the compartmentalization that goes on. In the comments, one of the moths following the glow of pseudoscience expressed his beliefs about an electric universe, and Lindsay produced a swatter the size of a box fan to dispense with that nonsense. I mean, don't say Lindsay isn't capable when the subject changes from Joseph Smith to something else.

It reminds me of a well-known article -- it may have been the first article actually -- on the Bad Astronomy blog, where Hoagland is dealt with, and the author points out that Hoagland is actually a solid researcher if he needs to be. The author claimed Hoagland wrote a great article debunking the "we never went to the moon" conspiracy theory. The BA blog author also wrote an article debunking the same theory, but claimed Hoagland's article brought up valid points that he himself had not considered. Well, we can't have people believing we never went to the moon if we're claiming to have found sprawling moon cities in covered-up NASA photos.

How is that ultimately different from Joseph Smith's materialist universe, which seems to offer no purpose beyond propagating random gods?

It doesn't, and random gods reduce to random genes anyway. Smith's universe is an abomination, where the exalted human phenotype has no natural predators, and thus is an inter-galactic invasive species. It's the darkest universe imaginable, unless you just happen to be either an exalted human or one waiting on exaltation any day. It's a good time for the winners in Liu's books too.

[_The Dude]

It's a long article, because Jeff Lindsay is obviously passionate about these two science fiction books, The Three Body Problem and The Heart of the Milky Way. He says,

Reading these two books resulted in more continuous contemplation of Gospel principles than I have experienced in reading almost anything else outside of the scriptures and books overtly dealing with Gospel topics.

He's passionate, but not too passionate. I mean, Joseph Smith will always be the best author.

[_Doctor Scratch]

It's a long article, because Jeff Lindsay is obviously passionate about these two science fiction books, The Three Body Problem and The Heart of the Milky Way. He says,

Reading these two books resulted in more continuous contemplation of Gospel principles than I have experienced in reading almost anything else outside of the scriptures and books overtly dealing with Gospel topics.

He's passionate, but not too passionate. I mean, Joseph Smith will always be the best author.

They are hamstrung by the directive that the Book of Mormon must be the "greatest" book ever written: both as scripture, and as literature. I don't know if you remember, Dude, but Dr. Peterson was vexed--incredibly, incredibly vexed over our assertions that the apologists' ability to fully enjoy art, literature, films, music, and so on, has been hampered by their adherence to Mormonism. But you point to one of the main reasons why we are correct: they are pretty much forced into saying that Joseph Smith is the "best" author of all time. Melville, Shakespeare, Austen, or Conrad? Forget it! None of them can hold a candle to Joseph Smith! Of course, the more self-aware among the Mopologists know that this is silly and they feel embarrassed about the fact that they're basically required to think this way, and that they have to toe the party line on the matter in public.

So, what you get are these hilarious excursions--such as Lindsay's--where, hey: it's not the Book of Mormon, exactly--we can admit that it's Sci Fi, but that's okay! Because when you dig down, you can find that it is almost--almost--as edifying as the scriptures. Anything is okay so long as you can spin it to seem like it squares with the gospel, right?

I am waiting for the day when an apologist writes up an article explaining how something like, oh, I don't know.... Slouching Towards Bethlehem or (can you just imagine?) N.W.A's Straight Outta Compton are in keeping with gospel teachings. Or what about Roots, or Native Son--or virtually anything from the African American literary canon? Is Bigger Thomas an analog for Nephi? Or what about something like Henry Miller's Tropic of Cancer? Or anything by Hunter S. Thompson? The mind reels at the possibilities....

[_Kishkumen]

How is that ultimately different from Joseph Smith's materialist universe, which seems to offer no purpose beyond propagating random gods?

Clash of the Titans?

Ragnarok?

You’ve gotta breed lotsa gods for the ultimate divine king of the multi-verse competition!

What if Elohim is building a giant army of gods to invade another universe and conquer it?

What if the real Armageddon takes place in space, with all the gods from all of the universes duking it out?

Don’t you want to be there on that epic day (1000 years earth time) when King Jesus kicks infinite ass and takes no prisoners?

Maybe you could be his Homeric bard!

[_Philo Sofee]

Gad
And it's unbelievable that a man as otherwise intelligent as Lindsay completely misses the entire point.

Not really. It isn't that he misses the point, it's that he pulls a Mentalgymnast and redirects the point into positive spin exalting, once again, the great vision of redemption of Joseph Smith, while all such visions, ideas and imaginations of anyone else is clearly inferior to the great Gospel polymath Smith. No one can equal the grandeur, the glorious, the Godly of said Smith. All others are lame apostate attempts to try and climb the pyramid of Godliness where Smith (for apologists) continually inhabits the point by sitting on it, stuck there forever as the greatest the world has ever known, never overthrown by anyone. All else pales in comparison, though the hues are sometimes greater, sometimes less, but never as bright, optimistic, all encompassing, exalting, glorious, spiritually fulfilling as said Smith's. That yardstick can never be matched in apologetics minds. It's simple not allowed to be, it is verboten.

[_Gadianton]

Bump for Philo. You commented here but wasn't sure if you remembered it.

How is that ultimately different from Joseph Smith's materialist universe, which seems to offer no purpose beyond propagating random gods?

I need to re-applaud this statement by Symmachus, given that at the time I reviewed this article, I was unaware of the apologist love for the book Added Upon. If Liu had told the story from the Trisolaran perspective, it would have essentially just been Added Upon with different scenery.

[_Philo Sofee]

Ah excellent. Thanks man, you are a true pal.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

Coming soon to the Interpreter:

"Dungeons & Dragons Also Testifies of Christ"

[_consiglieri]

Don't forget Uranus.