Comments on: Evil https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/ Thought-provoking commentary on life, politics, religion and social issues. Mon, 21 Sep 2015 03:59:57 +0000 hourly 1 By: ltbugaf https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4246 Tue, 14 Feb 2006 02:20:09 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4246 Kim, although I understand from comment 38 that you believe the Prophet’s interpretation of the Book of Mormon is uninspired and probably false (as to Columbus), there are still some gaps I’m trying to fill in:

You say when the Prophet is inspired he will either back up his words with scripture or announce that he’s giving new revelation. But what if he’s giving interpretation of scripture? Isn’t that, by definition, backed by scripture? So how can one say that his interpretation of scripture has no scriptural support?

Also, I would still like to understand (1) how you define the syndrome of “American-centrism” and to know (2) why you apparently believe that Gordon B. Hinckley, Ezra Taft Benson, Wilford Woodruff, Marion G. Romney, N. Eldon Tanner, George Q. Cannon, Robert D. Hales, Bruce R. McConkie, Jeffrey R. Holland, and L. Tom Perry have all suffered from it.

]]> By: Julie https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4203 Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:11:11 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4203 You are funny!

]]> By: rick https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4184 Mon, 13 Feb 2006 16:21:38 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4184 s?" Yes. Kim is much more trustworthy. ...and I've had lunch with him. That Hinckley guy? He's never so much as dropped me a line or sent me an email.]]> “Is there any reason I should prefer your interpretation of the scriptures to President Hinckley’s?”

Yes.
Kim is much more trustworthy.

…and I’ve had lunch with him.

That Hinckley guy? He’s never so much as dropped me a line or sent me an email.

]]> By: ltbugaf https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4169 Mon, 13 Feb 2006 01:43:53 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4169 Kim, you’ve directed me to comments indicating that you’re confident none of the Prophets who identify Columbus was inspired. Are you similarly confident that their interpretations of the Word of Wisdom are inspired? Have we been wrong all this time? Should I be offering lattes at the next ward gathering? Or should I be throwing away my hot chocolate mix? Is there any reason I should believe your opinion that they’re all wrong? Is there any reason I should prefer your interpretation of the scriptures to President Hinckley’s?

]]> By: ltbugaf https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4167 Mon, 13 Feb 2006 01:38:48 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4167 The issue of Columbus being a “discoverer” of anything has nothing to do with whether he is the man identified in 1 Nephi. However, the words of the Prophets cited do have a great deal to do with that question, since they are authorized interpreters of the Book of Mormon for the whole Church.

]]> By: Mary Siever https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4139 Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:46:54 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4139 ok, yeah, well THAT’S true.

Europeans/white north americans have a tendency to think they have a monopoly on progression.

]]> By: Kim Siever https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4138 Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:44:47 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4138 t discover North America, just South America." Technically, he didn't discover anything (except that he was wrong about China) since the people who were already living here would have discovered it before he had.]]> “What many people also seem to forget is that Columbus didn’t discover North America, just South America.”

Technically, he didn’t discover anything (except that he was wrong about China) since the people who were already living here would have discovered it before he had.

]]> By: Kim Siever https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4137 Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:42:51 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4137 ltbugaf, you can read the comments here , here, here, here, here, here, here and here for my response to 23-24.

]]> By: Mary Siever https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4136 Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:28:45 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4136 Also, he isn’t saying there is no reason to believe Columbus is being talked about, really, you need to read what he says more carefully. What he is SAYING is that the Book of Mormon doesn’t SAY that Columbus was the man they were talking about. But everyone ASSUMES he was the one. That said, there were more explorers.

Oh and I forgot, there was a previous discoverer of North America. Settler too, from Wales. This was well before either Columbus or Drake. For the life of me I can’t remember his name right now though. Which is why many Mandans have blue eyes.

At least that’s what I learned. Correct me if I am wrong. Sigh, I need to read more history again.

]]> By: Mary Siever https://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/comment-page-1/#comment-4135 Fri, 10 Feb 2006 21:23:55 +0000 http://www.ourthoughts.ca/2006/02/07/evil/#comment-4135 ltbugaf,

No you misunderstand. It isn’t pro-American bigotry. He’s just talking about American tradition. What many people also seem to forget is that Columbus didn’t discover North America, just South America. Sir Francis Drake discovered North America. At least if I am remembering grade 4 Social Studies correctly, that was the case.

]]>