- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
So this guy claims it is all a big misunderstanding…for you Abraham scholars does this fix things for you? http://mormonchallenges.org/abraham-papyri-found/http://mormonchallenges.org/abraham-papyri-found/” class=”bbcode_url”> I’m no BoA scholar, but I can see how difficult and complex this entire issue is. I thought he made some interesting points in this video – but if I was going to seriously address the topic and try to make the most sense out of both sides I would want to see his entire position in detail and with references. My sense is the apologists and Egyptologists tend to talk past each other, one making “apple” points while the other talks “oranges.” While the broad interpretations of facsimiles may be subject to some interpretation I wonder if the actual language in the diagram was commonly applied symbolically to different personalities. If I caught his point correctly I think he was saying the Egyptian name that was written on the page could be applied to Abraham with some precedence. That is the type of documentation and explanation with views from both sides that I would like to see.
Funny thing is the BofA got me into this crisis and now it is one of the smallest issues Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2
I thought it was weak. I am not a scholar and yet I could easily poke a couple of holes in his theory. johnh wrote:Funny thing is the BofA got me into this crisis and now it is one of the smallest issues
This made me smile. I totally know what you mean. I nearly handed in my resignation letter 6 months ago over seer stones/head in a hat.
These days I’m driving home with the kids after church chatting about how the plates weren’t in the room, head in hat etc etc. Maybe I missed my chance and now the ludicrous seems too normal to do anything about it.
I’m at a stage where even if Joseph was improvising (or riffing, as someone on here called it) with some old documents, Joseph produced (in Book of Moses and Book of Abraham) two volumes that have some massive answers to the big questions of who God is, where we come from, what the Eden story teaches us about our own nature and why we are here.
The Book of Mormon teaches how to ‘be’ while we’re here. The PoGP teaches us why.
These were fairly radical departures for 19th C Christian received wisdom on the fall and God’s nature. Perhaps the 19th Mormons needed the dead prophets of Moses, Enoch and Abraham to be perceived to say such ‘big picture’ messages and to illustrate they were eternal, but lost, truths. A restoration not a first revelation.
What The God who Weeps does excellently (sorry, another plug) is to show that the ‘big, eternal picture’ of mormonism is found mainly in POGP and D&C (while the day-to-day living stuff is in the NT and BoM). Many of the ideas about where we come from/where we go etc have existed through the ages… They were often fringe thinking or heretics.
Might Joseph have been seen as a heretic for saying he was revealing what would have been seen as ‘new news’ when instead he could say he was translating the ‘old news’ that’s still ‘good news.’
Maybe Moses, Enoch and Abraham didn’t write the originals that Joseph claims to have re-visioned/translated. Maybe they’re mythological creations even in the OT.
But the big picture answers that the POGP gives of from where we are, who we are and why we are, still resonate with me as answers to life’s big questions.
mackay11 wrote:johnh wrote:Funny thing is the BofA got me into this crisis and now it is one of the smallest issues
This made me smile. I totally know what you mean. I nearly handed in my resignation letter 6 months ago over seer stones/head in a hat.
These days I’m driving home with the kids after church chatting about how the plates weren’t in the room, head in hat etc etc. Maybe I missed my chance and now the ludicrous seems too normal to do anything about it.
I’m at a stage where even if Joseph was improvising (or riffing, as someone on here called it) with some old documents, Joseph produced (in Book of Moses and Book of Abraham) two volumes that have some massive answers to the big questions of who God is, where we come from, what the Eden story teaches us about our own nature and why we are here.
The Book of Mormon teaches how to ‘be’ while we’re here. The PoGP teaches us why.
These were fairly radical departures for 19th C Christian received wisdom on the fall and God’s nature. Perhaps the 19th Mormons needed the dead prophets of Moses, Enoch and Abraham to be perceived to say such ‘big picture’ messages and to illustrate they were eternal, but lost, truths. A restoration not a first revelation.
What The God who Weeps does excellently (sorry, another plug) is to show that the ‘big, eternal picture’ of mormonism is found mainly in POGP and D&C (while the day-to-day living stuff is in the NT and BoM). Many of the ideas about where we come from/where we go etc have existed through the ages… They were often fringe thinking or heretics.
Might Joseph have been seen as a heretic for saying he was revealing what would have been seen as ‘new news’ when instead he could say he was translating the ‘old news’ that’s still ‘good news.’
Maybe Moses, Enoch and Abraham didn’t write the originals that Joseph claims to have re-visioned/translated. Maybe they’re mythological creations even in the OT.
But the big picture answers that the POGP gives of from where we are, who we are and why we are, still resonate with me as answers to life’s big questions.
+1 to all of this.
And +1 to the God Who Weeps.
Macky11 the PofGP and D&C do not answer anything. They propose a theory at best of what the nature of our existence is but they do not provide any tangible evidence to support the theory. Now you may like that theory, but liking does not make it so. I still like the theory and adhere to it to some degree but I also admit it is most likely wrong or at least incomplete. Cadence wrote:Macky11 the PofGP and D&C do not answer anything. They propose a theory at best of what the nature of our existence is but they do not provide any tangible evidence to support the theory. Now you may like that theory, but liking does not make it so. I still like the theory and adhere to it to some degree but I also admit it is most likely wrong or at least incomplete.
I suppose we have a different perspective on what ‘an answer’ is.
If a question is posed ‘who is God, where did we come from, why are we here?’… Then many can answer. The answer could equally be ‘there is none, we came from conception, to live… And then die.’ That’s still an answer. Saying ‘I don’t know’ x 3 is still answering the question.
So when I say the POGP and D&C answer the question I’m not saying it’s the answer that ends all other questions and answer, nor the only answer. But it does provide an answer. And it’s an answer that works for me more than the others at present.
mackay11 wrote:Cadence wrote:Macky11 the PofGP and D&C do not answer anything. They propose a theory at best of what the nature of our existence is but they do not provide any tangible evidence to support the theory. Now you may like that theory, but liking does not make it so. I still like the theory and adhere to it to some degree but I also admit it is most likely wrong or at least incomplete.
I suppose we have a different perspective on what ‘an answer’ is.
If a question is posed ‘who is God, where did we come from, why are we here?’… Then many can answer. The answer could equally be ‘there is none, we came from conception, to live… And then die.’ That’s still an answer. Saying ‘I don’t know’ x 3 is still answering the question.
So when I say the POGP and D&C answer the question I’m not saying it’s the answer that ends all other questions and answer, nor the only answer. But it does provide an answer. And it’s an answer that works for me more than the others at present.
Ok I guess I was referring to specific answers. If you take it in a very broad sense then sure an answer can be many things depending on what you are looking for
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.