If he doesn't show up tomorrow,

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Solon

You're oversimplifying, and your weak-sauce insult is lame. Of course I've heard of a conditional statement. There's more to it, as the context demonstrates. But you probably skipped that part.

Been reading long?

I read the whole thing, and I have my own personal copy of Words of Joseph Smith too. I don't read it the way you do either.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Solon

You're oversimplifying, and your weak-sauce insult is lame. Of course I've heard of a conditional statement. There's more to it, as the context demonstrates. But you probably skipped that part.

Been reading long?

Insult? Are you talking about my comment aimed at fusnik because I certainly didn't insult you.

So you're going to ignore my comments about the places where Joseph clearly states and demonstrates he was filling in the blanks?

If God really meant to state that the timetable was independent of Joseph Smith's longevity, wouldn't he have simply stated 1890 instead of making some if-then statement?

[Solon]

Originally Posted by Tex

I read the whole thing, and I have my own personal copy of Words of Joseph Smith too. I don't read it the way you do either.

I don't think I've really decided which way I read it.

I think it's an interesting "soft prophecy" - if I can call it that - one that is seized upon by anti-Mormons as a sign of false prophecy, and one that LDS often explain by claiming that when Joseph died, all bets were off.

Of course, this is no problem in LDS theology, since God's timetable is obviously flexible (e.g. D&C 102.1-13), depending on the actions of humans.

I think it's extremely interesting that Joseph Smith was part of this 19th century millenialist tendency to pin down the second coming of Christ, even if his was mainly a reactionary position indicating when he would not come. His little hints about 56 years, and that some alive would see it betray, in my opinion, a personal belief, perhaps, of when he thought the event would come.

In many ways LDS seem to have deviated from their millenarian roots. I think this grayish, neither-black-nor-white semi-prophecy is an interesting glimpse into the time and place of the early LDS, and it also betrays a sense of urgency that has, in my opinion, somewhat dissipated.

I wasn't trying to troll by posting this; I'm well aware of the standard LDS explanation of D&C 130, but I think the issue is more nuanced than "if Joseph lives, it happens; if not, then who knows?" But that's just me.

PS - Tex, hold onto that book. It's worth hundreds. One of my biggest regrets is not buying two (at retail cost) when I had the chance:
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/Sear...&sts=t&x=0&y=0

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Insult? Are you talking about my comment aimed at fusnik because I certainly didn't insult you.

And Indy, if you didn't mean "Have you heard of a conditional statement before?" as an insult, then I sincerely apologize for taking it as such.

But I didn't post this stuff as an excuse for me to wax poetic with my thoughts. I was interested in others' reactions, even if they're not identical to mine.

[MikeWaters]

I am guessing the millenist fervor of Mormons in general have died. I am guessing that 50 years ago, a person receiving a patriarchal blessing was much more likely to be told that they would be alive when Christ returned, than now. Just a guess.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Solon

But I didn't post this stuff as an excuse for me to wax poetic with my thoughts. I was interested in others' reactions, even if they're not identical to mine.

While I don't have much to add, I have enjoyed your thoughts on the topic. Thanks for posting.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by fusnik11

That's the FAIR response.

The irony of being an apologist is amazing to me. One is astounded by the amount of mental gymnastics it requires to be a believer of a different religion and yet one is a better gymnast than Miss Johnson.

I love the "mental gymnastics" argument. Do you have any idea how much mental gymnastics has gone into now commonly accepted scientific theories?

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

While I don't have much to add, I have enjoyed your thoughts on the topic. Thanks for posting.

I agree, Solon. I didn't post not because it's not interesting material, but because I have nothing interesting to add.

Kind of like this post...

[creekster]

I have heard the analysis that all bets were off when Joseph died before, but I have a hard time buying it, quite frankly, because it makes God look rather bad. If God knows everything, then he knows Joseph is going to die in 1844 so why would he tease him with this prophecy? I think the "fill in the blanks" idea, combined with a fervent desire to experience the end as well as the general millennialist fever of the times among the religious sects pushes Joseph to make these sort of proclamations, but I ma not sure that God ever told him the date.

I guess it doesn't matter to me too much, either (testimony wise, I mean). I do appreciate your post, Solon. Even when you don't get much feedback, I assure you that many here like reading your thoughts and the gems you find.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by creekster

I have heard the analysis that all bets were off when Joseph died before, but I have a hard time buying it, quite frankly, because it makes God look rather bad. If God knows everything, then he knows Joseph is going to die in 1844 so why would he tease him with this prophecy? I think the "fill in the blanks" idea, combined with a fervent desire to experience the end as well as the general millennialist fever of the times among the religious sects pushes Joseph to make these sort of proclamations, but I ma not sure that God ever told him the date.

I guess it doesn't matter to me too much, either (testimony wise, I mean). I do appreciate your post, Solon. Even when you don't get much feedback, I assure you that many here like reading your thoughts and the gems you find.

My thoughts exactly. Thanks.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Solon

I don't think I've really decided which way I read it.

I think it's an interesting "soft prophecy" - if I can call it that - one that is seized upon by anti-Mormons as a sign of false prophecy, and one that LDS often explain by claiming that when Joseph died, all bets were off.

Of course, this is no problem in LDS theology, since God's timetable is obviously flexible (e.g. D&C 102.1-13), depending on the actions of humans.

I think it's extremely interesting that Joseph Smith was part of this 19th century millenialist tendency to pin down the second coming of Christ, even if his was mainly a reactionary position indicating when he would not come. His little hints about 56 years, and that some alive would see it betray, in my opinion, a personal belief, perhaps, of when he thought the event would come.

In many ways LDS seem to have deviated from their millenarian roots. I think this grayish, neither-black-nor-white semi-prophecy is an interesting glimpse into the time and place of the early LDS, and it also betrays a sense of urgency that has, in my opinion, somewhat dissipated.

I wasn't trying to troll by posting this; I'm well aware of the standard LDS explanation of D&C 130, but I think the issue is more nuanced than "if Joseph lives, it happens; if not, then who knows?" But that's just me.

I agree that Joseph was clearly influenced by a millennial spirit, though I'm not sure if that's so much a result of the milieu of the day than of the fact that he'd had about a thousand visions/visitations. Certainly the early Saints seemed to feel it was at hand.

I find the loss of emphasis on the Second Coming disappointing, but I suppose I'm not surprised given modern society's secular view of such expectations.

Originally Posted by Solon

PS - Tex, hold onto that book. It's worth hundreds. One of my biggest regrets is not buying two (at retail cost) when I had the chance:
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/Sear...&sts=t&x=0&y=0

Wow, I had no idea. It may be the most favorite book in my collection. Looking at the source material for so much of the later D&C sections and Joseph's Nauvoo teachings is fascinating.