More Isaiah.
There's not really much here. It's a nearly-identical transcription of Isaiah chapter 2, with a few extra words thrown in to make it seem like there was a point to its reproduction. It's more filler that imparts very little of importance over its repetitive, poetry-embellished 22 verses.
I don't really have anything to say about this chapter beyond that, but I'm discussing each chapter, so I can't just skip it.
Wednesday, July 11, 2012
Saturday, July 7, 2012
2 Nephi 11: Logic and Revelation
Chapter 11 is only 8 verses long, and it's pretty light on the earth-shattering doctrines. But there are two things about this chapter I'd like to mention: revelation and the mess that is verse 7.
No More Revelation
In verses 2 and 3, Nephi mentions that both he and his brother Jacob have physically seen Jesus. Nephi and his brother were among the spiritual leadership of their society. But this bold, direct claim stands in contrast to recent actions of the current church leadership. When is the last time a Mormon prophet explicitly claimed to have a face-to-face meeting with a member of the godhead? And let's not forget the change to chapter 14 of Gospel Principles which describes an Apostle as being "a special witness of the name of Jesus Christ," implying that an Apostle is not a physical eyewitness of Jesus Christ's existence.
This is reminiscent of a part of the Joseph Smith story--young Joseph was told by local religious leaders that he could not have seen a vision of God because there are no more visions or revelation in the modern age. But a church that teaches that divine revelation is just as alive today as it was in the Bible is suspiciously shy of addressing the subject directly.
Unlucky Verse Seven
Nephi makes an interesting series of assumptions in verse 7:
1. "If there be no Christ there be no God"
Isn't it the other way around? Besides, there are plenty of religions that teach belief in a supreme being and don't teach of Christ. This is not the strongest case you can make for the existence of Christ.
2. "If there be no God we are not, for there could have been no creation."
This is far from an original argument, but I guess I'll cut Nephi some slack, considering he was writing it in 600 BC. Smith does not get the benefit of the doubt, because I'm pretty sure this was an overused concept even in 1830. But what I really dislike about this sentence is its connection to the previous claim. The objective here is to claim that if there was no Christ we wouldn't exist, therefore Christ must exist. This is horrible logic.
3. "There is a God, and he is Christ"
Wait...I thought Christ was the son of God. This is pretty important to Mormon Doctrine--they don't buy into the whole Trinity thing. I've heard apostles (I want to say...Russell M. Nelson in particular) explain things like this away by saying that "god" is a title and even though God is our God, Christ is also a god. This is a sloppy, hair-splitting, retrofitted teaching.
Pretty much what happened here was Joseph Smith made some outlandish claims and tried to pass them off as logic, and then he proceeded to destroy his own church's doctrines about the nature of the godhead.
Good going.
No More Revelation
In verses 2 and 3, Nephi mentions that both he and his brother Jacob have physically seen Jesus. Nephi and his brother were among the spiritual leadership of their society. But this bold, direct claim stands in contrast to recent actions of the current church leadership. When is the last time a Mormon prophet explicitly claimed to have a face-to-face meeting with a member of the godhead? And let's not forget the change to chapter 14 of Gospel Principles which describes an Apostle as being "a special witness of the name of Jesus Christ," implying that an Apostle is not a physical eyewitness of Jesus Christ's existence.
This is reminiscent of a part of the Joseph Smith story--young Joseph was told by local religious leaders that he could not have seen a vision of God because there are no more visions or revelation in the modern age. But a church that teaches that divine revelation is just as alive today as it was in the Bible is suspiciously shy of addressing the subject directly.
Unlucky Verse Seven
Nephi makes an interesting series of assumptions in verse 7:
1. "If there be no Christ there be no God"
Isn't it the other way around? Besides, there are plenty of religions that teach belief in a supreme being and don't teach of Christ. This is not the strongest case you can make for the existence of Christ.
2. "If there be no God we are not, for there could have been no creation."
This is far from an original argument, but I guess I'll cut Nephi some slack, considering he was writing it in 600 BC. Smith does not get the benefit of the doubt, because I'm pretty sure this was an overused concept even in 1830. But what I really dislike about this sentence is its connection to the previous claim. The objective here is to claim that if there was no Christ we wouldn't exist, therefore Christ must exist. This is horrible logic.
3. "There is a God, and he is Christ"
Wait...I thought Christ was the son of God. This is pretty important to Mormon Doctrine--they don't buy into the whole Trinity thing. I've heard apostles (I want to say...Russell M. Nelson in particular) explain things like this away by saying that "god" is a title and even though God is our God, Christ is also a god. This is a sloppy, hair-splitting, retrofitted teaching.
Pretty much what happened here was Joseph Smith made some outlandish claims and tried to pass them off as logic, and then he proceeded to destroy his own church's doctrines about the nature of the godhead.
Good going.
Monday, July 2, 2012
Mormon-Themed Memes
I had a day off, and I had three hours during which I was not in a Mormon meetinghouse, so I spent the time as wisely as I thought possible: I went to QuickMeme.com and starting making fun of Mormonism. What better way is there to spend a Sabbath?
Saturday, June 30, 2012
The Disney-McKay Connection
I had dinner with some of my family tonight. My mom, my dad, my oldest sister and her husband were there. That made me and my nevermo girlfriend the only non-Mormons in the room.
My mother mentioned that she'd recently read a quote from Walt Disney that went along the lines of "neglecting your family in favor of your career is bad." (According to BrainyQuote.com, it's "A man should never neglect his family for business.") And my sister said it reminded her of a quote from one of the Presidents of the Church about how "no success can compensate for failure in the home."
They had a brief discussion about which prophet said that, and, as I listened silently, they arrived at the correct consensus of David O. McKay. None of them had any clue that McKay's famous quote was lifted from Benjamin Disraeli. I didn't bother mentioning it because I have no proof and it wouldn't really change their minds about anything anyway. Also I'd prefer to avoid straining the relationships even more.
But to me, it's pretty clear: a prophet of God has no need for plagiarism. If he speaks the word of God, he doesn't need to speak the words of another man. And if he plagiarized "as a man," a phrase often used to dismiss poor actions taken by church authorities, then I find it highly suspect that God would allow such a dishonest man to be his mouthpiece to the masses.
This is far from the only example of a Mormon authority lifting his teachings from another source. And that does not seem right to me.
My mother mentioned that she'd recently read a quote from Walt Disney that went along the lines of "neglecting your family in favor of your career is bad." (According to BrainyQuote.com, it's "A man should never neglect his family for business.") And my sister said it reminded her of a quote from one of the Presidents of the Church about how "no success can compensate for failure in the home."
They had a brief discussion about which prophet said that, and, as I listened silently, they arrived at the correct consensus of David O. McKay. None of them had any clue that McKay's famous quote was lifted from Benjamin Disraeli. I didn't bother mentioning it because I have no proof and it wouldn't really change their minds about anything anyway. Also I'd prefer to avoid straining the relationships even more.
But to me, it's pretty clear: a prophet of God has no need for plagiarism. If he speaks the word of God, he doesn't need to speak the words of another man. And if he plagiarized "as a man," a phrase often used to dismiss poor actions taken by church authorities, then I find it highly suspect that God would allow such a dishonest man to be his mouthpiece to the masses.
This is far from the only example of a Mormon authority lifting his teachings from another source. And that does not seem right to me.
2 Nephi 10: Jacob and his Prophesying
Jacob continues his epic, multi-chapter speech. The Book of Mormon is fond of epic, multi-chapter speeches.
He preaches about the fate of the Jews, the fate of the Gentiles and the role of the American continent in God's master plan. But a little weirdness does arise in Jacob's sweeping summary of the next few thousand years.
Continuity Is Everything
Joseph Smith sloppily sidesteps an error in verse 3:
I imagine Joseph may have misspoken as he was dictating this stuff off the top of his head to his dutiful scribe. Rather than go back and make it sound like he wasn't translating by the perfect power of God, he figured it would be easier to just cover his butt and explain it away.
Prophesying Backwards
Jacob also makes more of Smith's trademarked Already-Fulfilled Prophecies starting around verse 11:
I will, however, award Jacob a half point for the next verse, in which he states that God will "fortify this land against all other nations." Sure, the US had won its independence and survived going up against the British again in 1812, but this was all before the World Wars and all that messed up crap from the following century...through which the United States emerged pretty safe from enemy invasion. The only exception is Pearl Harbor, which was a mistake that nobody has made since. The only real war that befell the "promised land" was the American Civil War. And this may be semantics, but God didn't say he was going to fortify this nation against itself.
So props to Smith for making a decent educated guess about the future of the United States.
For and Against
Verse 16 is dangerous:
Scriptures such as this one preach an attitude that, cemented by Mormonism's persecution during its early history and maintained by under-the-radar status during the modern era, has evolved into a very unhealthy mentality of Mormons versus Non-Mormons. Righteous People versus The Worldly Sinners. The Enlightened versus The Rabble. The Blessed versus The Ignorant.
But at the same time church members are expected to be missionaries and spread the gospel to the people whom they simultaneously feel pitted against. Maybe that contradictory message is what makes most missionary work see such little success. How do you share the gospel with someone you consider to be actively opposing you? How do you gain the trust of someone you can't help but feel you're supposed to be better than?
Jacob Manipulates the Masses
Near the chapter's closing, Jacob imparts a few last bits of advice. Among them is this devious little comment:
Similarly, Smith gets his readers to worry about their salvation, almost allowing them to skip the part where they decide whether or not they believe him. The sharp contrast and the dramatically jarring claim that their fates are a simple, binary choice hook them.
And before they know it, they're freezing to death in a handcart company somewhere in the wilderness of Wyoming.
He preaches about the fate of the Jews, the fate of the Gentiles and the role of the American continent in God's master plan. But a little weirdness does arise in Jacob's sweeping summary of the next few thousand years.
Continuity Is Everything
Joseph Smith sloppily sidesteps an error in verse 3:
Wherefore, as I said unto you, it must needs be expedient that Christ should come among the Jews...But, of course, Jacob should have no knowledge of the Messiah's actual name yet. So a quick comment is tossed into the middle of that sentence:
Wherefore, as I said unto you, it must needs be expedient that Christ—for in the last night the angel spake unto me that this should be his name—should come among the Jews...Wow. It feels just like a moment from one of those horrible, low-budget, made-for-TV movies when you can tell that someone, during production, said, "Hey, this script doesn't make any sense!" and a brief line of awkward dialogue was hastily thrown in to explain away some bizarre event.
I imagine Joseph may have misspoken as he was dictating this stuff off the top of his head to his dutiful scribe. Rather than go back and make it sound like he wasn't translating by the perfect power of God, he figured it would be easier to just cover his butt and explain it away.
Prophesying Backwards
Jacob also makes more of Smith's trademarked Already-Fulfilled Prophecies starting around verse 11:
And this land shall be a land of liberty unto the Gentiles, and there shall be no kings upon the land, who shall raise up unto the Gentiles.Okay, at this point, anybody reading this book when it was first published in 1830 already knows that North America was settled by Gentiles. The whole representative democracy thing is pretty well established and the Bill of Rights is old news by now. So this verse contains three astonishing prophecies that have long since come true and really mean nothing to anyone because their purported origins can't be proven.
I will, however, award Jacob a half point for the next verse, in which he states that God will "fortify this land against all other nations." Sure, the US had won its independence and survived going up against the British again in 1812, but this was all before the World Wars and all that messed up crap from the following century...through which the United States emerged pretty safe from enemy invasion. The only exception is Pearl Harbor, which was a mistake that nobody has made since. The only real war that befell the "promised land" was the American Civil War. And this may be semantics, but God didn't say he was going to fortify this nation against itself.
So props to Smith for making a decent educated guess about the future of the United States.
For and Against
Verse 16 is dangerous:
Wherefore, he that fighteth against Zion, both Jew and Gentile, both bond and free, both male and female, shall perish; for they are they who are the whore of all the earth; for they who are not for me are against me, saith our God.Here we have another example of a horrible, horrible Us-Versus-Them attitude. The beginning of the verse was fine—oppose God's people and God will punish you. But the ending takes it too far—to the point where anyone not supporting God's people are considered to be opposing them. How is that fair? That sounds like the spiritual equivalent of shooting civilians in battle.
Scriptures such as this one preach an attitude that, cemented by Mormonism's persecution during its early history and maintained by under-the-radar status during the modern era, has evolved into a very unhealthy mentality of Mormons versus Non-Mormons. Righteous People versus The Worldly Sinners. The Enlightened versus The Rabble. The Blessed versus The Ignorant.
But at the same time church members are expected to be missionaries and spread the gospel to the people whom they simultaneously feel pitted against. Maybe that contradictory message is what makes most missionary work see such little success. How do you share the gospel with someone you consider to be actively opposing you? How do you gain the trust of someone you can't help but feel you're supposed to be better than?
Jacob Manipulates the Masses
Near the chapter's closing, Jacob imparts a few last bits of advice. Among them is this devious little comment:
Therefore, cheer up your hearts, and remember that ye are free to act for yourselves—to choose the way of everlasting death or the way of eternal life.This is an old trick. Jacob takes the entire gospel and boils it down to a simple choice between two starkly contrasting options. One option is clearly good and the other option scares the crap out of you. If you've believed anything he's said in the last few chapters, suddenly you're so focused on the possibility of everlasting death that instead of assessing whether or not what he claims is true, you're trying to figure out how you can avoid the undesirable outcome.
Similarly, Smith gets his readers to worry about their salvation, almost allowing them to skip the part where they decide whether or not they believe him. The sharp contrast and the dramatically jarring claim that their fates are a simple, binary choice hook them.
And before they know it, they're freezing to death in a handcart company somewhere in the wilderness of Wyoming.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)