Christian: The Need for a Fresh Word from God

[doppelganger]

In my twisted thought world, I think that there is some room in Christian orthodoxy for this. In both the East and West, Holy Tradition supplements Scripture, allowing for prophesy to continue. It's taking a good long while for the Church to catch up regarding philosophy, ethics, and justice, but there certainly is potential - and some of this has been realized within orthodoxy - for a forward thinking spiritual leader to emerge within Christianity itself.

I would take it one huge step further than Baha'i myself and suggest that each person is their own prophet, bringing the meaning to the mythology, poetry and art based on their own experiences, culture and time. That's largely what happens anyway. Every person is a context and a world unto his or her self, and the "God's word" must be made meaningful within that context. An external "prophet" might provide some guidance (and being from the same time and culture increases the likelihood of the communication of meaning being complete), but the circle must be closed by the observer of the symbols.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I would take it one huge step further than Baha'i myself and suggest that each person is their own prophet, bringing the meaning to the mythology, poetry and art based on their own experiences, culture and time. That's largely what happens anyway. Every person is a context and a world unto his or her self, and the "God's word" must be made meaningful within that context. An external "prophet" might provide some guidance (and being from the same time and culture increases the likelihood of the communication of meaning being complete), but the circle must be closed by the observer of the symbols.

That's what good Protestants do.

 

[blackout]

I would take it one huge step further than Baha'i myself and suggest that each person is their own prophet, bringing the meaning to the mythology, poetry and art based on their own experiences, culture and time. That's largely what happens anyway. Every person is a context and a world unto his or her self, and the "God's word" must be made meaningful within that context. An external "prophet" might provide some guidance (and being from the same time and culture increases the likelihood of the communication of meaning being complete), but the circle must be closed by the observer of the symbols.

Yes, Yes, & Yes!

 

[doppelganger]

That's what good Protestants do.

What do the bad ones do?

 

[YmirGF]

I would take it one huge step further than Baha'i myself and suggest that each person is their own prophet, bringing the meaning to the mythology, poetry and art based on their own experiences, culture and time. That's largely what happens anyway. Every person is a context and a world unto his or her self, and the "God's word" must be made meaningful within that context. An external "prophet" might provide some guidance (and being from the same time and culture increases the likelihood of the communication of meaning being complete), but the circle must be closed by the observer of the symbols.

It is no surprise that I would buy into this thinking, Dopp. I could be wrong and no doubt some still require an external source to buttress their thinking, but I would say that we have outgrown our need for "prophets" who supply all the answers and all the sheep must do is lick their bowls clean and then go back to playtime. Spirituality is a "hands on" affair and if folks want others to do their heavy lifting then they simply stunt their own growth. I doubt I could say it any plainer, without resorting to unseemly expletives, that is. To my way other thinking it has long been time for the human animal to take responsibility for their own "souls" and stop resting on their laurels, navel gazing at the belly button lint seemingly put there by others.

 

[Scuba Pete]

I would take it one huge step further than Baha'i myself and suggest that each person is their own prophet, bringing the meaning to the mythology, poetry and art based on their own experiences, culture and time. That's largely what happens anyway. Every person is a context and a world unto his or her self, and the "God's word" must be made meaningful within that context. An external "prophet" might provide some guidance (and being from the same time and culture increases the likelihood of the communication of meaning being complete), but the circle must be closed by the observer of the symbols.

Doctrinally, you have just described the Spirit's role in our lives. Good job, that! Frubals on your head!

 

[YmirGF]

What do the bad ones do?

Picket funerals for slain members of the armed forces? Go shopping at Wal-mart? Smile affectionately at pliable choirboys?

 

[doppelganger]

To my way other thinking it has long been time for the human animal to take responsibility for their own "souls" and stop resting on their laurels, navel gazing at the belly button lint seemingly put there by others.

Ever read Kafka's parable "Before the Law"? I think you'd like it.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What do the bad ones do?

Not admit that they do it. :yes:

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Not admit that they do it. :yes:

Or more precisely, make up stuff and pretend like it came from God.

 

[Comprehend]

I think he is referring to ideas that would have been thought by an ancient writer of the time of the Bible in regards to certain matters, perhaps geocentrism and creationism, just off the top of my head, that would have still been incorrectly thought to be the truth by a person of Joseph Smith's time. Or at least that's my interpretation of it.

B.

LDS do believe in a creation of some sort but everyone believes in a creation of some sort.

We certainly never believed or taught geocentrism...

 

[Comprehend]

I'm sorry, I'm simply not interested in this right now. Reading Plato's Timaeus and comparing it with what you understand LDS theology to be may be constructive.

Ok. I guess I can't force you defend the comment.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Ok. I guess I can't force you defend the comment.

I believe I have good reason. As I said before...

Read Plato's Timaeus and compare it to what you believe. Nailing down precisely what LDS theology is is fairly difficult, so I won't try. What I've heard, however, is thoroughly Platonic.

The Internet Classics Archive | Timaeus by Plato

 

[Comprehend]

Perhaps cosmology... (Plato's Timaeus) :angel2: and the LDS fixation on the ancient family structure (eg, Plato's Republic).

I am quite familiar with the Republic and I do not see how our family structure resembles that laid out in the Republic at all.

We certainly do not have our wives and children in common. We do not have arranged unions, we do not try to pair up similarly situated individuals (good with good, bad with bad) and we do not select which children are to be educated in which way. We definitely want the parents to know who their children are and we want them to be raised and cared for by the parents not by the "village".

Are there similarities I am missing?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

I am quite familiar with the Republic and I do not see how our family structure resembles that laid out in the Republic at all.

We certainly do not have our wives and children in common. We do not have arranged unions, we do not try to pair up similarly situated individuals (good with good, bad with bad) and we do not select which children are to be educated in which way. We definitely want the parents to know who their children are and we want them to be raised and cared for by the parents not by the "village".

Are there similarities I am missing?

Perhaps...

 

[doppelganger]

Or more precisely, make up stuff and pretend like it came from God.

For them, it does.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

For them, it does.

 

[Comprehend]

-Plato, Timaeus

This reminds me a great deal of Joseph Smith:

(D&C 93).

Yes, and the Bible also:

Matt 6:19-21
19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal:
20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.

But the idea conveyed there is to keep your mind on loftier things than the material world around you. Somehow I don't think AE would disagree with that idea and I fail to see how that would disqualify the LDS religion from what AE was looking for.

Would you say that what is taught there is bad or wrong or in someway disqualifies the LDS religion as not having modern prophets?

 

[doppelganger]

Would you say that what is taught there is bad or wrong or in someway disqualifies the LDS religion as not having modern prophets?

No. "Prophets" are in the eye of the beholder. I don't get much out of LDS theology, cosmology or doctrine, personally. I don't subscribe to the "this is a prophet and that isn't a prophet" approach anyway. Everyone says some things that I'll find "prophetic" and other things I won't find "prophetic." And sometimes the things I think are prophetic now, I won't find prophetic at some other time, and vice versa.

 

[Comprehend]

Perhaps...

The differences I have pointed out are major. If you don't care to provide any similarities then I guess we have settled the claim?

(or you could point out some similarities)