Comments on Mormon Transhumanist Association Blogs

Comment on Temple Square by Susan

Susan at www.rogerhansen.org — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 10:01:12 -0700

When I went (about 10 years ago) for the first time, I was totally blown away. We had taken the prep classes, but they did not in any way prepare me for what took place. I didn’t get it. I do not wish to sound negative. But it was not what I was expecting. Some members have said, “keep going, and soon it will make sense”. So I kept going, and kept going. Eventually, rather than continue going and participating in something that clearly was beyond me, I stopped. I respect everyone’s right to go, I don’t discuss it with anyone, but I don’t regret the fact that I no longer go. To each his/her own.

Chris, I think perhaps you are right that my argum...

bradcarmack at bradcarmack.blogspot.com — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 11:41:13 -0700

Chris, I think perhaps you are right that my argument jumps the gun because 1) it fails to explicitly recognize the assumed foundation of belief and 2) I presume the historicity of the scriptures in a literalistic way which may not be merited. Even some of those working from a foundation of belief would part ways with me there. Also, as you note, my second tenet does rely on the prophetic recording; thus, the tenet is upset if prophetic infallibility fails.

Alas.

Thanks for pointing those out.

Comment on Mormon Images of Christ by Roger Hansen

Roger Hansen at www.rogerhansen.org — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 08:57:01 -0700

dor, In regards to your first comment, I think we do need visual images of Christ. We need them as illustrations of biblical stories. Mormons particularly need them because of our belief in anthropomorphic deities.

I totally agree that missionary work should first begin with ourselves. Your comments sound a little process theology. And I agree that the new colonialism is rich over poor. But there is still some of the old colonialism around. When I’m in Africa, I seem to be treated different. I don’t know if that’s from residual feelings from the old colonialism or from the impression that I’m rich. When in Africa, it is obvious that I’m a visitor and that might also have something to do with my treatment also.

Comment on Mormon Images of Christ by Roger Hansen

Roger Hansen at www.rogerhansen.org — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 08:49:17 -0700

Carl Y’s comments back:

” . . . not sure if I mind Christ looking like a movie star although perhaps it could be toned down a little. Our biology is hard-wire to pick up on beauty. There is a huge human bias towards it. I don’t have a problem with it as long as it’s not too overdone. Though I admit that some of the Church’s art definitely falls in the category of “overdone.”

Our greatest Advocate (see the WWJD post) once sai...

Thoughtful at bradcarmack.blogspot.com — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:04:50 -0700

Our greatest Advocate (see the WWJD post) once said, and I think it is applicable to each one of us, "Father, forgive them: for they know not what they do..." Luke 23:24. Somehow the Lord knows the inner workings of each of our minds. He knows WHY we make the decisions that we do and I truly believe he will be more merciful, yet just, than we can ever imagine.

Clearly I'm not the only person that considers thi...

Lincoln Cannon at lincoln.metacannon.net at feeds.metacannon.net — Tue, 31 Aug 2010 02:48:15 -0700

Clearly I'm not the only person that considers this speculation worthy of consideration. Check out this article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/7972538/Are-we-living-in-a-designer-universe.html

In addition, Brad, I don't think your second tenet...

Christopher Bradford (Grasshopper) at bradcarmack.blogspot.com — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 08:23:14 -0700

In addition, Brad, I don't think your second tenet survives the problem of prophetic infallibility. Who wrote the scriptures?

Brad, I think you have a major problem with your a...

Chris at bradcarmack.blogspot.com — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 08:00:02 -0700

Brad, I think you have a major problem with your argument here, because your approach to the events in question needs to be defined first before you examine their impact.

I don't think that it is obvious to anyone that Yahweh's actions in any of the cases you cite are indicative of "an admirable way of being." I understand that you come from a foundation of belief, but this claim is difficult to swallow. There is good reason to doubt that these events even happened historically, as Carl pointed out.

I would like you to provide an apologetic to these cases before you use them to gain insights about God's nature. You seem to be jumping the gun, as it were.

I also think that WWJD is used to represent "maximum altruistic behavior" instead of referencing Christ's life in particular.

Comment on Mormon Images of Christ by Roger Hansen

Roger Hansen at www.rogerhansen.org — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 14:50:09 -0700

My response to Carl: I understand that all cultures and races relate better to a Christ who looks like them. But the Mormon Church is projected to have the majority of its membership in developing countries by 2025. If you want to be an international church, which racial/facial image of Christ are you going to chose? IMO, a more Mediterranean Christ might be a good compromise. It would be more historically accurate also.

There is also the problem with Christ looking like a movie star. Since most of us don’t have star qualities, doesn’t that make it harder for us to relate to him, not easier?

Comment on Mormon Images of Christ by dor

dor at www.rogerhansen.org — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:41:13 -0700

Yes, interesting. The issues you raise are related to approachability and validation. Because I can see a Jesus that looks like me, I can more fully identify with that image.
The question then is is it equally important for those who are on the top of the class pyramid as it is for those at the base of the pyramid? What is the American ethnicity?
When it comes to gender, we’ve learned to be cautious of always using the male pronoun, lest women feel viscerally, if not consciously, that they are not intended to identify. In secular culture, when forced to use a pronoun, using “she” helps to foster inclusiveness. In a global, interconnected world, does not the same go for the image of Christ?
As transhumanists, we must be very, very aware of the images we use. (The fruit which led to the fall in Genesis is never called an apple. We se it as such because artistic images convey it as such). The images create a meta-narrative. If we are to ensure that a transhuman society is egalitarian, we need to be very careful to avoid the mistakes of history that saw genetic manipulation as “tied to ethnocentrism and the blindness of class interests” (Ted Peters, “Playing God?”).
If images are to be used, they should represent the “ideal human” in a way that fosters inclusiveness. Do the blond, light-skinned depictions mentioned by Roger do that?

I would agree that prophetic infallibility is not ...

Brad Carmack at bradcarmack.blogspot.com — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:41:04 -0700

I would agree that prophetic infallibility is not LDS doctrine. You may note my qualifying phrase, "LDS divine command theorists." It seems that many church members are divine command theorists that rely without much question on prophetic declarations, but that doesn't mean necessarily that they're in line with LDS doctrine. To the contrary, I think that such a position is largely incompatible with LDS doctrine (http://www.lds-mormon.com/mothink.shtml).

I don't agree with you yet that 1) Woodruff was incorrect or that 2) OT barbarism doesn't elicit apologetics or that 3) the Bible's historicity is tenuous- perhaps this reflects my as-yet tenacious grip on Newtonian Mormonism. However, you're certainly not alone in these three camps, and I may join them all sooner or later.

As mentioned in my comment above, my second tenet survives to support my thesis even if prophetic infallibility fails.

By the way, the two references I usually use to ar...

Carl Youngblood at bradcarmack.blogspot.com — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 00:18:05 -0700

By the way, the two references I usually use to argue against prophetic infallibility are Mosiah 27:13 (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/mosiah/27/13#12) and D&C 124:32 (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/124/32#31). Both of these scriptures point to transgression of commandments as a potential means of overthrowing God's church. I don't think this possibility ever completely goes away.

Comment on Mormon Images of Christ by Roger Hansen

Roger Hansen at www.rogerhansen.org — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 06:07:02 -0700

The following email was emailed to me by fellow transhumanist Carl Y:

“I think you raise a good pooint but I disagree on the particulars. I too am tired of the idealistic glossy portrayals that are anything but artistic. On the other hand, I have no problem with the fact that every culture seems to depict Jesus in its own ethnicity. To me this just becomes another way of showing him as the ideal human–that goal towards which we should all strive. Making him look like you/me is IMO a good way of helping people relate to him and channel their own innate godliness. Artists from other cultures do the sme thing. Have you ever heard Alfred Burt’s carol “Some Children See Him”? (http://bit.ly/c0/Fz7)

My understanding was that prophetic infallibility ...

Carl Youngblood at bradcarmack.blogspot.com — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 21:07:27 -0700

My understanding was that prophetic infallibility was not LDS doctrine. In fact, all sort so of caveats have been placed around this by other leaders who have explained that a prophet is only a prophet when speaking as such, etc etc. Regardless, I have other LDS quotes, arguably from weightier authorities like JS, that repudiate this notion, if you're interested in playing prophet poker. But for me, I feel comfortable in saying that I simply don't think it's right or true. I don't think that Wilford Woodruff was correct when he said that the prophet could not lead the Church astray. I think it's possible and it largely depends on what we desire as a people. That's my opinion.

I equally think that it is not necessary for us to engage in apologetics for OT barbarism. While I believe God would theoretically approve of the use of physical force in many different circumstances, I don't think that all of the circumstances in the Bible were anywhere remotely close to his will. In fact, I don't even think that many of them happened. I think they consist of gloss upon gloss of oral history to the point where the reality is probably very far from the current myth.

Comment on Mormon Images of Christ by dor

dor at www.rogerhansen.org — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 10:53:51 -0700

There was the Jesus of history and the Christ of spirit. So many of our images of Christ come not from the gospels, but from artist renditions. The Bible doesn’t have very much narrative about what Jesus looked like. In the gospel, deeds, teaching wisdom was what was important to preserve.

The Christ of Spirit is each of us. Christ is male and female, straight and gay, European and African. More importantly, Christ is action, service and witnessing.

What if our images reflected not the personage of Jesus, but the Spirit of Christ? What if we moved away from the Jesus who has become an idol to the Christ that is the inheritance? What if we saw evangelism to be as much about learning and ourselves being changed rather than seeing it as a way to change others? What if the Christ who we worship is the spirit of unity that comes from learning, hearing and embracing God in the infinite images that come from plurality? What if the “tower of Babel” isn’t about human language but about the language we use to know God? What if the diversity of the God image is indeed, God?

If we focus on the Spirit of Christ — the reaching out, the healing, the eating - avoid images altogether, avoid attention on the person of Christ, might that itself not lead to an end of colonialism?

And why is ending colonialism important?

The new colonialism is the not the rift between East and West, global north and global south. The new colonialism is the rift between the wealthy (in every nation) and the poor. It is the rift between the corporate/market economies that value production and the traditional, community economies that value relationship. Colonialism today is about supporting empire.

It is the gospel, and the spirit of Christ, that allows us to see empire for what it is — a false God and a system of injustice. To use Christ to support it is a very grave sin indeed.

Comment on George Orwell, Rejected by Main Street Plaza » Sunday in Outer Blogness: funnies and stories edition!

Sun, 29 Aug 2010 09:33:17 -0700

[...] vicarious anecdotes, there’s one about George Orwell and one about some guy who hurt his back doing baptisms for the dead. Daniel wrote two interesting [...]

Comment on Movie Magic by Roger Hansen

Roger Hansen at www.rogerhansen.org — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 09:28:28 -0700

In favorite classics (or lesser knowns) there is: Get Low (Aaron Schneider director) 2010.

I 'science can explain everything' how come it can...

muzuzuzus at giulioprisco.blogspot.com — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 01:39:30 -0700

I 'science can explain everything' how come it cannot explain either 'matter' or 'consciousness'?

How come the natural world is being attacked with the cutting extincting of other species, the mass deforestation, ruination of soil, and of soul--IF 'scinece knows everything'?

Didn't that what was said bout 'God' PRE-'science'

Comment on Green Meetinghouses by Roger Hansen

Roger Hansen at www.rogerhansen.org — Sun, 29 Aug 2010 06:48:27 -0700

According to the “Ensign” (Sep 2010):

“Think of the new meeting house in Farmingon, Utah, USA–complete with solar panels and wider hallways–as a test drive.

The building, along with four others in Utah and Nevada, is part of a new pilot program that will influence future building designs. They were built to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Enviromental Design) certification requirements, designed to reduce water use, waste and pollution. The solar panels will prevent two million pounds of carbon dioxide pollution over the next 25 years, and the other buildings have special light-colored roofs that will reduce cooling costs.”

Not entirely. You sound like another friend of mi...

bradcarmack at bradcarmack.blogspot.com — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 11:16:44 -0700

Not entirely. You sound like another friend of mine, a certain Judge Griffith, who is also hesitant to ascribe the slaughter of many innocents to Jesus. I would back off a little bit on some of the prophetic action (i.e. to allow for human error), but would maintain my position based on two LDS tenets.
1) Prophetic infallibility- it is a central dogma of LDS divine command theorists that God will not permit the prophet to lead the church astray. Now perhaps this allows for a lot of leeway, as long as the prophet is not way off course in leading the church; however, in substantive movements such as commanding the Israelite army to sack the Midianites, this caveat seems less tenable as an explanation.
2) Many of my other examples are more direct (no prophet intermediary) and bring about results we consider to be good and/or necessary. Additional ones: We have reason to think that God commanded Abraham to kill his innocent son; we have reason to believe a voice in Nephi's head (the Spirit) specifically told him to slay an unconscious, defenseless man. The law of Moses, which in many instances requires homicide, is considered very direct from Jehovah. Jesus takes direct credit for natural disasters resulting in genocide, such as Noah's flood. Taken together these pieces of evidence show that Jesus is not averse to killing individuals or masses in at least many instances. Other harsh examples could be proffered (such as the carrying off to Babylon of Israel), but death is sufficiently harsh to illustrate the thesis. Further, the other cited examples evince my point that Jesus is no different than God, and that both are appear in many instances to be quite stern.