tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post2705452486261929953..comments2024-03-21T10:33:24.876-07:00Comments on Articuli Fidei: Early Mormon history: an important paradigm shift - Part 2David Waltzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-32263829548871909982018-02-21T10:24:59.302-08:002018-02-21T10:24:59.302-08:00Hi Tom,
Thanks much for taking the time to reply ...Hi Tom,<br /><br />Thanks much for taking the time to reply to my questions. You wrote:<br /><br />==The “devil did it” makes sense with only a few truths. One would be a fairly strong “no salvation outside the Catholic Church.” Perhaps the devils purpose was to create a competitor for Catholic truth claims. Without the CoJCoLDS I think I would be Catholic. Another would be a radical anti-works gospel that is usually associated with strong Calvinism. Associated or not, this anti-works gospel damns most Catholics, most LDS, and most Protestants. Perhaps some LDS would have found the anti-works gospel without the CoJCoLDS and the devil was after this attack. But, producing a BOM that speaks about Christ as the BOM does is a pretty radical plan on the adversaries part. ==<br /><br />Interesting take; my thoughts concerning the "devil did it" are much more pervasive than yours, and in a real sense reflect the position on this issue that is presented in the BoM. Note the following:<br /><br />9 And it came to pass that he said unto me: Look, and behold that great and abominable church, which is the mother of abominations, whose founder is the devil.<br />10 And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.<br />11 And it came to pass that I looked and beheld the whore of all the earth, and she sat upon many waters; and she had dominion over all the earth, among all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people.<br />12 And it came to pass that I beheld the church of the Lamb of God, and its numbers were few, because of the wickedness and abominations of the whore who sat upon many waters; nevertheless, I beheld that the church of the Lamb, who were the saints of God, were also upon all the face of the earth; and their dominions upon the face of the earth were small, because of the wickedness of the great whore whom I saw. (1 Nephi 14)<br /><br />As you well know, my quandary concerns the true identity of "the church of the Lamb of God".<br /><br />== So, I think some of the New History is accurate and some probably is not. But, if the radically magical or the very little magical is true, I still must say that if God will allow the adversary to produce the BOM to lead me away from Him, prayer can be the only solution to which God desires me to resort. And the radically magical or very little magical does not convinced me that it SIMPLY must be the devil who produced the BOM.==<br /><br />Understood. The following thoughts from Joseph Fielding Smith ring true to me:<br /><br />Very few among us read too much; most of us read too little. The Lord has said: “And as all have not faith, seek ye diligently and teach one another words of wisdom; yea, seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom, seek learning even by study and also by faith.” [D&C 88:118; 109:7.]<br /><br />We are expected to study and learn all we can by research and analysis. But there are limits to our learning abilities in the realms of reason and study. The things of God can be known only by the Spirit of God. We must gain knowledge by faith.<br /><br />Men may search, they may study, they may learn, of course, a great many things; they may lay up a great fund of information, but they will never be able to come to the fulness of truth . . . unless they are guided by the Spirit of truth, the Holy Ghost, and keep the commandments of God. (Teachings of Presidents of the Church - Joseph Fielding Smith, pp. 145, 146.)<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04577758667034909467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-81315773146159504222018-02-20T22:46:48.927-08:002018-02-20T22:46:48.927-08:00Hello Steve,
I think I would mostly echo David’s r...Hello Steve,<br />I think I would mostly echo David’s response. I have spent a great deal of time weighing and sifting the Book of Mormon. I do not know what “horses” in the BOM were, but I find the answers that preserve a traditional view of the BOM to be available and reasonable. I think Nahom is remarkably at the right place and right time. There are numerous somewhat negative and somewhat positive evidences in the BOM, but I find the believers explanation for the negative reasonable and the rarely offered critics explanations for the positives to be inadequate. When I am done with this, the BOM is very positive evidence of the supernatural.<br />When I look at witness statements (the 8 and the 3) and other witnesses of various things, I find this to be compelling evidence that something supernatural happened and there were real plates of some sort. <br />I agree with numerous non-believers that Joseph Smith was sincere and was not some conscious huckster. I do not think the historical record aligns well with a conscious fraud theory. I do not think his experiences were the product of profound delusions. Believer and non-believer, friend and foe, often found him to be a reasonable fellow with a compelling narrative. So something supernatural happened to Joseph Smith that lead him to lead a church.<br />I think the above is similar to David’s answer, but it is what came to me.<br />Charity, TOmTOmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12511360918671604918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-42772407544512248192018-02-20T09:38:06.904-08:002018-02-20T09:38:06.904-08:00The question that I ask determine which data is mo...The question that I ask determine which data is most important. I left behind the idea that there is no God long ago, so the question is where and how does God want me to follow Him.<br /><br />The “devil did it” makes sense with only a few truths. One would be a fairly strong “no salvation outside the Catholic Church.” Perhaps the devils purpose was to create a competitor for Catholic truth claims. Without the CoJCoLDS I think I would be Catholic. Another would be a radical anti-works gospel that is usually associated with strong Calvinism. Associated or not, this anti-works gospel damns most Catholics, most LDS, and most Protestants. Perhaps some LDS would have found the anti-works gospel without the CoJCoLDS and the devil was after this attack. But, producing a BOM that speaks about Christ as the BOM does is a pretty radical plan on the adversaries part. <br /><br />Pope Francis disturbs me because the “no salvation outside the Catholic Church” paradigm is impacted by his teachings. I am trying to compare Best to Best, and perhaps the SSPX version of Catholicism and its rejection of the teachings of Pope Francis is the best, but I considered it quite a bit weaker than the Pope JPII or Pope Benedict Catholicism and it has not gotten stronger only the alternatives weaker.<br /><br />And I still fall back on the idea that my attempts at sincere prayers must be able to help adjudicate between God and the adversary if God will allow the adversary to produce the BOM to lead me away from Him. In fact, if the BOM is from the devil, it seems clear to me that prayer to God is the ONLY way to adjudicate such a question. I want to me in a church with folks who do not read history, think about theology, and … because they are busy with life, busy with loving other, or just not intellectually curious (or capable). The gospel is for thinkers like David Waltz and simple folks who just believe IMO. <br /><br />So, I think some of the New History is accurate and some probably is not. But, if the radically magical or the very little magical is true, I still must say that if God will allow the adversary to produce the BOM to lead me away from Him, prayer can be the only solution to which God desires me to resort. And the radically magical or very little magical does not convinced me that it SIMPLY must be the devil who produced the BOM.<br />Charity, TOmTOmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12511360918671604918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-50188355799579111392018-02-20T09:37:30.446-08:002018-02-20T09:37:30.446-08:00David,
You asked:
Now, with that said, I have a co...David,<br />You asked:<br />Now, with that said, I have a couple of questions for you: first, do you believe that the 'new history' paradigm shift is factual enough that it can no longer be denied? And second, if this is so, what is your view of magical/occult practices that do not have God's approval/command?<br /><br /><br />My “new history paradigm” has distilled upon me a little differently. Some period of time ago there were folks who didn’t read books (and didn’t closely follow Ensign articles). They “knew” things that were not true. I remember reading through Todd Compton’s book in a LDS book store. This happened after 1996, but not much after. I remember thinking that this questions the practice of polygamy, but it must be part of LDS thought as it was in the LDS bookstore. I found out about Mountain Meadows online, but I do not remember being scandalized. Over the last 2 years, I have been a little surprised to discover that Richard Bushman the Patriarch for his Stake is part of the new history paradigm.<br /><br />I think it most likely that there was a stone in a hat that was associated with the translation of the BOM. <br />As I read through the “Caul” stories in Ashurst-McGee’s Master thesis, I remember thinking this is pretty thin evidence and I doubt it was significant in Joseph or his families ideas concerning his calling.<br />I think things between these are true and false. <br /><br />I want to believe the truth. The most important truth is where should I worship (and serve) and how should this impact my relationship with God. The strongest view of Mormonism I know includes a BOA production that is a problem, some magical thinking that I expect is part of the reality of Joseph Smith’s life (especially before 1830), a priesthood ban that I think was a product of racist ideas and Brigham Young who was a little more racist than your average 1850’s fellow, and polygamy that I believe was born of revelation but was both imperfectly practiced AND embellished in incorrect and negative ways by critics. This strongest view is combined with the BOM, the witnesses of the BOM, the practices of the church today, actions where power and supernatural power was spread rather than held only by Joseph, ideas “restored” that were prevalent in the Early Church, but not common in Joseph’s day (like deification), and other things. I think this produces a compelling case for both the divinity of the CoJCoLDS and the supernatural origins of the CoJCoLDS.<br />cont…TOmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12511360918671604918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-15064644133617989942018-02-14T10:51:45.945-08:002018-02-14T10:51:45.945-08:00Hi Steve,
Good question. My conclusion is derived...Hi Steve,<br /><br />Good question. My conclusion is derived from three major lines of evidences: first, all of the numerous naturalistic explanations that have been proposed over the last 180+ years have been debunked to the point that to adopt any of them requires a massive 'leap of faith'. Second, the Book of Mormon; after 30 years of study and reflection, I have come to believe that it was virtually impossible for Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery to produced such a work within the relatively brief time frame (less than 3 months)—that all sides of the issue agree upon—via natural means alone. Third, the supernatural events that seem to have permeated the early years of the CoJCoLDS (see <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=ROp_24jZV5kC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow">THIS BOOK</a>, and <a href="http://scottwoodward.org/miracles_modernexamples.html" rel="nofollow">THIS WEBSITE</a> for examples).<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04577758667034909467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-84618657061571984442018-02-13T10:22:52.428-08:002018-02-13T10:22:52.428-08:00Tom and Dave,
I would be interested in hearing wh...Tom and Dave, <br />I would be interested in hearing why you guys feel that Mormonism must have supernatural origins.<br /><br />ThanksStevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10478365664202149335noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-22370142488331096432018-02-12T16:40:45.781-08:002018-02-12T16:40:45.781-08:00Hi Tom,
Thanks much for taking the time to share ...Hi Tom,<br /><br />Thanks much for taking the time to share some of your thoughts on the content of this thread. You wrote:<br /><br />==I attempt to use my reason to determine if Mormonism comes from man, but when my reason indicates that it cannot come from man; I am left with two choices God or the Adversary. How will I adjudicate between these two?==<br /><br />I have been asking myself the same question for just over 30 years now. Though for not as long, I ask the same question concerning the Qur'an and the Kitab-i-Iqan.<br /><br />== I suppose one answer from the Supernatural B. crowd is, “See occult practices, know these are always and forever from the adversary and anti-God, and reject Mormonism.” No need to pray to God for truth. In fact if you have already missed this obvious truth, you need to know that the answers to your prayers also came from the adversary.<br />Well, I see problems in both halves of this apologetic.<br />First, I very much disagree that the Bible makes it clear that there are God things and magic things and it is obvious which is which.==<br /><br />Two points; first, my take is a bit different in that I fully acknowledge that there are a number of practices in the Bible when used with God's approval/command are seen in a positive light, while the same practices when used without God's approval/command are seen in a negative light, becoming identified with occultic terminology. And second, some important LDS authorities and scholars have not been convinced that the 'new history' paradigm shift is accurate.<br /><br />Now, with that said, I have a couple of questions for you: first, do you believe that the 'new history' paradigm shift is factual enough that it can no longer be denied? And second, if this is so, what is your view of magical/occult practices that do not have God's approval/command?<br /><br /><br />Grace and peace,<br /><br />David<br />David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04577758667034909467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-820459601294243792018-02-11T23:01:59.064-08:002018-02-11T23:01:59.064-08:00David,
As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I real...David,<br />As I mentioned in an earlier thread, I really do not know what to do with the idea that perhaps all that appears as beyond human/supernatural/unexplainable within Mormonism is a product of the adversary not God. I attempt to use my reason to determine if Mormonism comes from man, but when my reason indicates that it cannot come from man; I am left with two choices God or the Adversary. How will I adjudicate between these two?<br />I suppose one answer from the Supernatural B. crowd is, “See occult practices, know these are always and forever from the adversary and anti-God, and reject Mormonism.” No need to pray to God for truth. In fact if you have already missed this obvious truth, you need to know that the answers to your prayers also came from the adversary.<br />Well, I see problems in both halves of this apologetic.<br />First, I very much disagree that the Bible makes it clear that there are God things and magic things and it is obvious which is which. Robert’s list is good so I will just reproduce it:<br />That ought to be a dead giveaway to you that it is entirely relative to the person whether it is of Satan or of God. After all, the seer stone in Joseph's hat is divine, even if Hiram Page's is not. The same applies to the Mosaic Nehushtan fiery-serpent-talisman, which gives life when looked upon by the Israelites, and is also a holy type of Jesus (the antitype) who likewise gives life from the Cross, yet it is finally destroyed as evil in II Kings 18:4. So too with the contest of serpents between the magicians of Pharaoh and Moses & Aaron. Indeed, to add even more confusion, the serpent is fully Satanic elsewhere (Gen 3:13-15, Rev 12:7-9, 20:2). We likewise have Joseph who was sold into Egypt practicing lecanoscopy (divination/prophecy via a cup of water, Gen 44:2,5), the Israelite High Priest consulting Urim & Thummim. These procedures are used by other, neighboring cultures, yet are considered pagan in those instances.<br />What of the rods/staffs possessed by Moses & Aaron, which could turn into snakes, and which were used for other miracles (parting of the Reed Sea, water from a rock, etc.)? How is it that Orson Hyde used his rod to witch the location for his prayer of dedication of Palestine to the Gathering of the Jews in 1841, or Brigham used Oliver's rod to witch the location for the Salt Lake Temple July 28, 1847? <br /><br />I think we see two things in the Bible. We see a real distinction between magic like things that come from God and magic like things that come from the adversary. And we see ancient tribalism. The magic things for the them must be bad and the magic things of the us must be good. <br /><br />The other half that I should not believe God can answer prayers or I should assume that my prayers are not sincere also doesn’t work well for me. Unless I go full Calvinist, I cannot see an inability of me to seek God and find Him in the Bible. And if the Calvinist is correct, I will be saved or damned and I do not need to concern myself with this as I have ZERO influence or control. So, I think it only rational for me to attempt to adjudicated between Mormonism is from God or Mormonism is from the adversary by praying to know God’s will. So that is what I do/did.<br /><br />And of course there are other tools to adjudicate, "by their fruits" is one that comes to mind.<br /><br />Charity, TOm<br />TOmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12511360918671604918noreply@blogger.com