What's new
By:

Joseph Smith taught that the moon was inhabited by people that live to be 1000 years old?

PKM said:
Have any of you guys read the (Deseret approved) book, "Rough Stone Rolling?"
Click to expand...

Yes. It's very good. Bushman is a really smart author and historian. Most of the articles coming out about church history stuff (polygamy, black people in the church, Joseph smiths first vision,etc) he had a lot to do with. It's a good read because he does not glorify Joseph smith, just explains historically what happened.



Also, I think joseph smith might have been schizophrenic. Just throwing that out there.
 
Stifle Tower said:
Prophets and apostles have expoused many theories. I think they're humans just like the rest of us. Unfortunately, these ponderings are often accepted as doctrine, even if it is not spoken as such. If you do any research, you will find a wide variety of opinions on Evolution/Creationism amongst the apostles and prophets over the last 150+ years.
Click to expand...

Not Mormon, so i may be off-kilter with this... but isn't the whole point behind a prophet is that they have reciprocal communication with god? Couldn't they just ask him if there are people on the moon, if evolution is true, etc etc instead of having a variety of theories passed out to be interpreted by their following?
 
jope said:
Not Mormon, so i may be off-kilter with this... but isn't the whole point behind a prophet is that they have reciprocal communication with god? Couldn't they just ask him if there are people on the moon, if evolution is true, etc etc instead of having a variety of theories passed out to be interpreted by their following?
Click to expand...

Except there is almost nothing to show that he seriously believed it as a theory, let alone doctrine. I think people get confused, or want to be confused, in considering prophets to be deity. They are not. Some prophets were barely adequate (Jonah comes to mind) but had the trait or presence needed when the Lord needed something done. This is true for probably a majority of people with callings in the LDS church. Joseph Smith could not have done what Brigham Young did and vice-versa. . .
 
framer said:
Except there is almost nothing to show that he seriously believed it as a theory, let alone doctrine. I think people get confused, or want to be confused, in considering prophets to be deity. They are not. Some prophets were barely adequate (Jonah comes to mind) but had the trait or presence needed when the Lord needed something done. This is true for probably a majority of people with callings in the LDS church. Joseph Smith could not have done what Brigham Young did and vice-versa. . .
Click to expand...

JonahHill-43_250h2.jpg
 
AKMVP said:
I am no hater. I am non believer/skeptic.
Click to expand...

You are also judgemental. People arent always bringing up how you spend your time heckling Australian basketball players in meaningless summer games, yet you respond with snark in a conversation that was perfectly fine without you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVP
So this is old stuff.

But hey, somehow I missed this thread???? Maybe I did comment on it a few years ago.

Well, the LDS Church has long distanced itself from a lot of this sort of stuff with elaborate qualifier statements, and procedures such as requiring a member vote on new "scripture", disclaimers about having no official position on a statement or issue, and a new formula for faith that displaces old scriptures or quotes in favor of current leaders, and intraorganizational policies of now requiring conference talks and other talks to be be submitted in advance for professional review by a panel of sociologists and historians, anthropologists, and media specialists, even ad agency professionals. . . . . and evaluated for their public impact on several levels. . . . before a general authority, even the Prophet, can have his remarks approved.

I could debate the merits of the new policies vis a vis the old all day long.

The later evils have displaced the former virtues. . . ..organizational rigidity vs. imaginative and creative spontaneous thought. . . . all day long.

God is going to judge us all, saying he's tried everything possible to reach us, and we will not be able to blame anyone else for what we believed or didn't believe about Him.

It's likely that all of our "scripture" has a sort of stamp on it demonstrative of human failings, one way or another.

It's unlikely that our modern sophistry, our modern science, or our modern government can create policies or standardized beliefs that aren't going to prove just as feeble, just as foolish, just as ignorant, just as damaging, just as damning. Even with thousands of times so many words. . . . . if not because of having so much more written down.
 
b_line said:
You are also judgemental. People arent always bringing up how you spend your time heckling Australian basketball players in meaningless summer games, yet you respond with snark in a conversation that was perfectly fine without you.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with being judgmental. We all do it, and we do it all the time. In fact, by insisting that AKMVP was the one who heckled Exum in Vegas (despite him denying it) you're projecting what you think AKMVP did based solely on what you think of his views and personality. In other words, you're judging him.
 
colton said:
Yes, and I thought it was outstanding. Highly recommended.
Click to expand...

PKM - I noticed you liked my post. Does that mean you have read Rough Stone Rolling yourself? I'd like to get an opinion on it from a non-LDS. From my perspective, I thought Bushman did a great job explaining the historical perspective while treating seriously the LDS religion itself. But I've wondered if a non-believer would find it too overtly religious.
 
He also was a known con-man so this should surprise no one.

*I just jumped into this thread and have no idea what has been talked about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top