Hi Karen, I read your post before you edited it and then drove a distance to come home, giving me time to ponder your words. I want to tell you that I feel your dedication to persevere through timed, public computers demonstrates a faithfulness to fellowship that is commendable. Thank you for being a faithful, forum, friend.karenprtlnd wrote:Or, in other words, isn't the new testament,already approved and read by both?The question of the hour as posed by Selah for karenprtlnd:
What writings did the Creator of the Universe give us to rule our thinking and actions?
As to what writings, karenprtlnd wrote- :
"How about a NT based conversation. I think we can already agree on the NT writings. However, if the KJV looks like it may become a problem for many on this forum, would someone like to make another suggestion at this point?"
Selah then wrote:
Who says the BoM can give you instructions for your thoughts and actions?" (No one). "....for your very life?!" (No one). Who said "the glorified man" can give you instructions for your thoughts and actions?" (No one). "....for your very life?" (No one). Nor a church. Nor the tv or radio. Nor the media only. and No. I am not trying to change the subject. Nor would I enjoy listening to "green fairy" woman.
Your last post has given me much to think about. The first thing I would like to do is to affirm our similarities: I believe we both want fellowship; you want fellowship with "evangelicals" and I want fellowship with LDS. I believe we both want to love and obey God and we both read the NT. I think it is fine that you want us to both read the NT and discuss it.
I would like to explain where I have been coming from: On a thread named "By What Authority," I expected to discuss evidence which "proves" the Authority. Did we have different expectations?
My apologies, I see that you don't want to engage in detailed conversation aboutSelah, I am suggesting to you that not by man will we find agreement here, but by the NT as an already common authority as a basis for LDS/Evangelical dialogue.
you feel the NT has authority in your life. That's okay; I abandon that plan. We can talk about the NT if you want to. Can we agree the NT is a trusted text that God uses to tell us who He is, what He wants us to think, and what He wants us to do?why
No, I did not mean "Evidence Demands a Verdict" is a Bible verse. I probably should underline book titles. I think that is the correct way to refer to a book. sorry. We could review Lee Strobel's work if you want to, but we can study the NT if you want to also. I'll talk about just about anything you want to.You brought up Lee Strobel's book "Evidence Demands a Verdict" as if the title itself is a Bible verse that has now become some kind of theme for your personal presentation style. You've mentioned his name now several times, and that you would like us to review it together. No. Lee Strobel was, an almost atheist, working at the Chicogo Tribune which afforded him some access and already had proffesional level investigative skills. He was married to a Baptist. In his narrative he shares his personal struggle with the Bible. He share his findings with us in book form for the public. That is all.
You are right, Lee Strobel was an atheist. He was an educated attorney so yes, he was a professional investigator before becoming a pastor. However, there was more to his work on The Case for Christ than what you said. He did not just share about his personal struggle with the Bible.
To begin, Lee Strobel investigated Jesus Christ by using the same skills he would have used in investigating crimes, mysteries or puzzling news stories. He traveled to numerous experts in the fields of biology, archeology,and history, etc. He interviewed these experts and treated the process as if it were a trial investigation. Near the end of his investigation, he did (in the last chapter) discuss his struggle because as I recall he stated that there is no proof of Jesus, but there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Once the evidence reached a certain tipping point, he began to struggle with his unbelief. He ended the book by sharing the beginnning of his new life in Jesus. He believed in Jesus by faith, but the scientific and prophetic evidence convinced him that, in as much as a trial lawyer can be convinced of a defendants innocense or guilt, that Jesus was God in the flesh.
You brought up Steve Greggs work "The Authority of Scripture", and I couldn't agree with that title more. The Narrow Path live radio show, I found, as an LDS listener, interesting, in that he not only proves he has read the Bible, by his great lucidity and capacity to correlate huge blocks of text, but also his personal congeniality with such a broad listening audiance.
I like TNP too, and I agree that Steve Gregg has wonderful communication skills with his callers. but my understanding of his teaching about the "Authority of Scripture" is focused on compelling evidence. Have you listened to his teachings on the subject? It has been a while since I listened, but if my memory serves me correctly, I believe he teaches evidence by which we can trust that the scriptures are true (not fiction). Please read this explanation as a loose paraphrase, okay? because his way of explaining the "Authority of Scripture" teaching would probably be better than my explanation.
Well, first, to my discredit, I think calling myself a "skeptic" may lead the reader to think that I have no faith. But in my effort to help you understand my (past) desire to look at scientific and prophetic evidence, I chose the best word I could think of.You mentioned that you were a "skeptic Christian". Then you would not find me a very fun audience. However you do ask "Where in the Bible does it say that?" I find myself very similar in this. TEXT has a very solid and stable foundational quality to it. It doesn't move around on the page like we as people do. I suggested the NT. I read the KJV, but I am open. What do you think about this?
The fact is that because I have faith, I ask the question we both ask, "Where in the Bible does it say that?" Perhaps we should start a thread called that! (I browsed the forum before starting this post in the hopes of finding a thread where we could study the NT in the way that you want to. Since I don't know how to start a thread, would you like to start one and name it whatever you want to?)
Now, I don't understand what you meant by talking about text not moving on the page and stuff. I don't understand. I DO see that you suggest the NT and that you read the KJV. What do I think about this? Yeah, I'm happy to discuss the NT and read the KJV with you.
Karen, Your quote does not sound like LDS thinking to me! Most generational LDS that I have talked with can't find selected scripture within the NT, much less find solace in it. My experience of LDS is that if they turn to scripture, they choose BoM or D&C...You imlied that if you don't base every thought on Jesus Christ, you find yourself in a state of anarchy. I might agree. That outside of this one TEXT, that there is an infinity of ideas constantly pressing in upon us. One can find a kind of peace in this text. I have found it to be an enduring and stablizing
resort, in, as you implied, in a day of fanciful babblings.
...............................Okay.You mentioned a list of requirements for the LDS to consider:
---"verses from the Bible stating the theology the LDS believe"
I suggested that we can agree both on the NT as a basis, in order to reveal these sorts of things, in time, by using something we both already have in common. The NT.
..................Some scripture within the NT tells of the fulfillment of OT prophesy. If one believes in the NT, then it follows that they believe in prophesy and it's fulfillment. How can fulfilled prophesy be disqualified?---"prophesies within the BoM that have come true."
The Birth of Christ, The Coming of the Messiah, The end of this one people, for instance.
However, prophecy within itself would have to be considered "self referenced" and disqualified.
.......................I don't know about the Kenya Man or Kenewick but I have notes about DNA research testing Native Americans and middle easterners. Obviously, DNA research is fairly contemporary scientific research. I can give you more details later if you want more.---"secular historical documents...(as DNA, archeological digs, places, peoples, poetry, etc)
By who, or by which group. From what scientific era, or limitations of that era. How about the Kenya Man...... (What ABOUT the Kenya Man). Or was it Kenewick.
...........................I do not trust JSHC. His "translation work" reminds me of the author of the Winnie the Pooh series. The author had visits from a spiritual being while the author sat typing at his typewriter. He said the spirit guide sat on top of the desk, or something like that. The spirit had an agenda to distract children (therefore adults since children grow up), to distract children from the real Jesus Christ. Another example is the "little green fairy woman." My point? We have to test the spirits to see if they are true. There is a scripture in the NT that tells to.---old BoM plates, manuscripts, etc. anything to indicate that the book is NOT fantasy.
All of this, the tracking of both the plates and the UT, can be found in volume 1 of JSHC. JS writes that it was the same messenger which had met him at the original site of the plates, and it was by this same messenger who, as Joseph Smith recorded, is the same messenger as came to retreive these items on the various occasions. It is quite interesting actually......
Please know that anyone at any time can call upon the missionaries, recieve a free book of Mormon, or pose questions to the missionaries
I went through the six week study two separate times about 20 years ago. Wow! I'm getting old! I didn't realize it has been that long!
................I am very sorry if I caused you pain. Really I am. Let's move off the "Authority" thread okay?Selah, just a pointer. The courtroom style of prosecution attorney demanding evidence, may have been cute for Lee Stobel, and by profession James R. White. Both could describe the intensity and tension that is involved in this kind of investigative styling. Political dabate is not for the squeemish, nor for the uninformed. It is also a very painful style to have had to endure as well.
I'm not sure Lee Strobel would agree it was "cute." He seemed to take it very seriously. I've never heard of James R. White. Anyway, why don't you state your expectations for discussion within the NT. What would you like to show me from the NT?
Oh, i have to tell you, my two main objectives as a Christian are as follows: (1) to obey Jesus Christ and (2) to know who He is. Theology is secondary to me. So if you want to jump into theology, you may not hear much passion. I have thoughts about it but no convictions like I do on the subject of obedience and relationship with the Lord. My first and foremost inquiry as a Christian was "who are you and what do you want?" From there, I am learning to obey Him and honor Him.
Karen, this day, knowing you, the Holy Spirit has shown me (again) Prov 3: 5b, 6 "Lean not on your own understanding, in all your ways acknowledge Him and He shall direct your paths."