posted
I missed a lot of conference, first because the local TV station that has always carried it on tape-delay unexpectedly carried it live this year, and second because my small kids just don't allow me to sit in front of the TV quietly for four two-hour stretches in a weekend. I look forward to perusing the Conference Ensign in the privacy of my own bathroom.
I did hear a chunk of Ballard's talk, and really liked what he had to say about what constitutes an appropriate testimony at Testimony Meeting on Fast Sunday. I have half a mind to be the first one up next Fast Sunday and read the talk verbatim. But, of course, that itself would not be in keeping with the message of the talk.
Posts: 1652 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is the first time I've actually been able to sit down and WATCH conference instead of reading it a month later in the Ensign. It's so much nicer to watch it. I really enjoyed the talks, (especially Elder Ballard's and Elder Eyring's), but what made me the happiest was to see President Bednar as he was called to be in the Quorum of the Twelve.
I was at Ricks College when President Bednar was inaugurated as president. I sang in the choir, so I had a great seat. I was there for two years and President and Sister Bednar's talks will always stay with me. He has a way of making you feel like he knows you personally and loves you like one of his kids. I felt like he was my mission president. I am really excited that the rest of the world gets to hear him speak and receive visits from him because of his new calling.
Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
Lindsay's archeological evidence may be of interest to some and ignored or discounted by others -- I don't really care one way or the other. But what I love about him is that he's one of the few Mormon apologists with a great sense of humor.
Click on the "Humor" and "Mormanity Blog" links on the top nav to see what I mean. Jeff is no master comedian, but some of his stuff is quite funny.
Posts: 3423 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
My buddy says he left the Church after studying Central American archaeology at the university for several years and not finding any correlation between the Book of Mormon account and discovered artifacts (it didn't help that he was also diddling the neighbor lady).
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
My point was that I didn't think the Church itself had made any direct archeological claims. I conceded that there are aspects of LDS theology that do have implicit archeological implications.
I certainly do not deny that there are (misguided, IMO) members of the LDS Church who DO make archeological claims. I think that these are sometimes interesting, sometimes amusing, often ridiculous, and always beside the point.
Posts: 1652 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
First of all, I wasn't proclaiming that link to be endorsed by the Church. The site states plain and simple that it is not.
quote: I think that these are sometimes interesting, sometimes amusing, often ridiculous, and always beside the point.
I agree with that for the most part, but will add that to some, seeing even a small bit of plausibility in a stream of much outspoken talk of implausibility can sometimes open one's mind a little bit.
The site I linked to itself agrees when it says:
quote:Such evidence does not and should not equal "proof," but represents indications of plausibility that demand further attention
.
So once again, they aren't making claims - they're providing what they see as evidence for the 'archaeological implications' stated within. As many have said before, you can't scientifically prove spiritual matters - however, if keying up of unexpected physical and archeological elements that appear to correspond to a written record of those accounts (especially one such as the Book of Mormon, which many claim to be simply the work of an American farm boy's imagination) are elements that can allow an individual to take a closer look at a work - then I wouldn't say it's a completely worthless venture at all.
But it's true - having physical evidences is nice, but it's not by far a definitive prerequisite for faith.
I'm in the group who find those litle tidbits in the "Oh Cool", category, rather than the "Testimony Building" category - the former being where they should certainly belong.