Having met a number of folks here in real life, and knowing my own journey, I’m willing to start by assuming everyone here has done their due diligence. I hope you would do the same.
I try to although at times I read something someone says and can’t help but think otherwise. But I’m sure there are those that question whether or not I’ve done due diligence. To them I would say, “I’m a work in progress”. I don’t claim to have all the answers. I would hope that’s the case with most of the folks here although there are always going to be some ‘know it alls’, right?
By the way, that’s where faith comes in, when one doesn’t know it all.
Wayment’s co author and former student researcher, Haley Wilson Lemmon, appeared on Mormon Stories yesterday. I am just opening the podcast. It’s close to 3 hours.
Now i realize that most members don't bother to read the church essays and even fewer will follow the links, but they do not have to layout $45 for a PB or $70 for a Hunter Biden (by the way that price is probably that high because it is being printed at a University press) to find out Joseph Smith was using Clarke to revise the Bible. This new information may take a while to seep in but eventually we will be hearing from members trying to gaslight us who will say the church has always known that Joseph Smith took from sources around him, so what's the big deal?
The days where members can take comfort in thinking Joseph Smith was an ordinary man who solely through divine assistance produced scripture, are numbered.
So what IS the big deal? Were you one of those who believed Joseph or any of the other modern prophets did their work “solely through divine assistance”? Admittedly, I can see how this would have been difficult for you to wrap your mind around to find out that he didn’t. The question is whether your expectations were flawed and/or unrealistic.
A common thread here seems to be a certain sense of rigidity in viewing, well, just about everything. Expectations not met can be a real downer.
On another thread I stated that my belief is that experimentation plays a part in the restoration just as it does in many other areas of the operations of this world. I mean, what was the KEP all about? Examples are all over the place. Cannot God be directing His work without being involved at the micro level at/in every instance? I’m much more comfortable with a God that operates at the macro level than the micro. The Book of Mormon uses the language “to act” and not be acted upon.
Regards,
MG
Wow. I’ve been out for a while, but is this kind of gaslighting and rewriting history that it takes to now defend the lds church? Unbelievable.
Aren't all of these theories also against the grain of the Ghost Committee theory?
"This new evidence effectively forces a reconsideration of Smith's translation projects, particularly his Bible revision, and how he used a scholarly source while simultaneously melding his own prophetic inspiration into the resulting text."
That seems to cover the attitude of all the new stuff coming out. Totally different than producing the Book of Mormon by reading words off a stone.
Exactly. I seem to remember an apologetic argument that discounted all discussions where multiple different explanations were suggested. By Peterson’s argument, if some argue Early Modern English and others argue loose or tight translations, then the fact that multiple explanations exist means none are valid.
Now i realize that most members don't bother to read the church essays and even fewer will follow the links, but they do not have to layout $45 for a PB or $70 for a Hunter Biden (by the way that price is probably that high because it is being printed at a University press) to find out Joseph Smith was using Clarke to revise the Bible. This new information may take a while to seep in but eventually we will be hearing from members trying to gaslight us who will say the church has always known that Joseph Smith took from sources around him, so what's the big deal?
The days where members can take comfort in thinking Joseph Smith was an ordinary man who solely through divine assistance produced scripture, are numbered.
So what IS the big deal? Were you one of those who believed Joseph or any of the other modern prophets did their work “solely through divine assistance”? Admittedly, I can see how this would have been difficult for you to wrap your mind around to find out that he didn’t. The question is whether your expectations were flawed and/or unrealistic.
A common thread here seems to be a certain sense of rigidity in viewing, well, just about everything. Expectations not met can be a real downer.
On another thread I stated that my belief is that experimentation plays a part in the restoration just as it does in many other areas of the operations of this world. I mean, what was the KEP all about? Examples are all over the place. Cannot God be directing His work without being involved at the micro level at/in every instance? I’m much more comfortable with a God that operates at the macro level than the micro. The Book of Mormon uses the language “to act” and not be acted upon.
Regards,
MG
I think people expected Joseph Smith was telling the truth when he said that the Bible revision was inspired and not lifted from Clarke, without proper attribution. Silly members. What were they thinking? It is obviously their fault when they leave and not the apologist gaslighters' fault.
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen
A note here that you can get a 20% discount on Producing Ancient Scripture if you enter "mha2020" (without the quotation marks) as the promo code here.
“A scholar said he could not read the Book of Mormon, so we shouldn’t be shocked that scholars say the papyri don’t translate and/or relate to the Book of Abraham. Doesn’t change anything. It’s ancient and historical.” ~ Hanna Seariac