RFM celebrates his 150th episode! Deep gratitude to all of you who have made this possible! Today we continue with RFM’s original research into the Savior’s visit to the Americas as recorded in the Book of Mormon. But first, some important announcements!
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Petersons state haven’t been abandoned. President Oaks said, “In ways that have not been revealed, our actions in the spirit world have influenced our circumstances in mortality.” During his conference.
Good catch!
That Elder Oaks. Once again he wants to surreptitiously promote the idea that the priesthood and temple ban on blacks was from God, only those reasons haven’t been revealed.
Well, they had certainly been revealed as far as Elder Mark E. Peterson was concerned.
And I am pretty sure they were considered revealed by the First Presidency in 1949 when they called the idea “doctrine” and not “policy.”
If past prophets and apostles were squirrels, Elder Oaks is the bus driver gleefully running them down in the highway.
RFM
Congratulations on your 150th milestone! Will you be releasing a proclamation??? LOL.
Just a side note on this podcast…I know it’s not your point but I wanted to make a huge Christian correction for Joseph Smith and his contrivances of prophetic fulfillment from the Old Testament…
He really gives himself and his massive ego away on this one, always counting on his followers to take him at his word. I speak of his use of Malichi in 3Nephi as you described. He might be clever in his literary layering but its rather unimpressive when he misses the mark so utterly on a universally understood prophesy by all of the top Christian scriptorians.
To briefly explain….when Christ was being judged by the Jewish High Priests, they were incensed by what they deemed blasphemy when Jesus said he would destroy the temple and bring it back in three days. He was referring to himself and his resurrection., the temple being His body.
When Malachi spoke, he was referring to Christs resurrection as well when he said that He would return to the temple.
Temples were done away with once Christ performed his passion, as evidenced by the temple veil being rent at his crucifixion. Now all could come directly to Christ.
The LDS claim that Christs church is restored by them is ridiculous , as the temple is no longer relevant with Christ, nor was it used , when in use, the way they use it now.
Mormons truly are not considered Christians, and this is one of the huge blunders Joseph made in ‘sealing’ that division. ( and his whole massive temple focus) The Jesus Christ he wrote about can not and is not considered the same Christ as the the biblical one. It’s embarrassing. The Christian world has been very patient with Mormons!…as they pretend to borrow their God….
I have taken the audacity to therefore rename the ‘Book Mormon’ more accurately to “The Book of Mormon..A Testament of ANOTHER Jesus Christ”
You speak for me, Angie. Smith was not a visionary. He borrowed and tweeked but as you say he missed the mark. Ole Joe wanted to make money as others were doing coming up with another story about the Israelite being Native American. Smith didn’t understand the Bible well enough to use it effectively except on those who are credulous or ignorant. I’ve been both.
RFM…..I do love your podcasts yet this one has your mancrush for Smith out front and center. The best that can be said about him was he loved ideas out of the norm but he also was a complete pervert. He was evil. He should have been in prison. If Grant Palmer’s research is correct, he was a murderer. He stole. He robbed others. He cheated people. He used people. He abused women. Lying was easy for him. And the church covers it all up. He’s revered. He is worshipped.
Hail to the man who communed with thieves. He was right about a few things…you can buy anything in this world for money….especially integrity. Those men in Salt Lake have all been bought with money. So now they lie and cheat people. Yea…quite a legacy from Smith.
Hi, K!
I really don’t have a man crush on Joseph Smith. Honest! Though I do have a definite attraction to the young Mel Gibson. But we don’t have to go into that here.
All I am trying to do is analyze the literary structure of a certain section of the Book of Mormon.
It really doesn’t matter who wrote it. And it may not have been Joseph Smith at all!
Maybe my man crush extends to Sidney Rigdon?
Nah! That is definitely not happening!
Thanks for bearing with me while I went through this three-part episode (which is actually based on original research I did back in 2008 as it turns out).
Next week I hope to get to some more discussion of last General Conference.
For such an unremarkable General Conference, there is actually quite a bit to talk about if I look closely enough.
Have a great weekend!
See you (or talk to you) then!
RFM
Amen to all that Sista!……Like you, I’m not critical of RFM…its kinda fun to go down his old apologetic memory lane with his new post mormon perspectives.
If anything , I like him so much, it sickens me a bit to see the efforts he’s gone to in the past for the sake of the church, …just like we all have…..sigh
I’m more protective of him than anything…
Hands off!!!….He’s ours now!!!! LOLOLOLOLOL!!!
Thanks for your comments, Angie!
You may be more of a believer in Jesus Christ and in the prophetic abilities of Old Testament prophets than I am at this point in my life, but I always appreciate hearing your perspective nonetheless.
I am glad you listen to my podcast!
RFM
Yes, it has come after much thorough research of the actual considerable evidence of His existence and particularly His resurrection.
It irks me to no end how Joseph Smith has highjacked a truly singular, unmatched figure of history and given Him a script in his mormon play.
I don’t mean to get into it here except to say that what I do or do not believe does not change the fact that Joseph Smith and his fantasies aren’t even close to the same ballpark as verifiable human history, places and events.
If he had presented his Book of Mormon as an inspiring fiction, it would be a different story.
I understand and appreciate what you’re doing here with your podcast and I enjoy it immensely. May I say however, at the risk of being misunderstood that I think your talents are being sorely wasted on this book and all the baggage that goes with it.
I’m sounding harsher than is accurate….I’m pretty easy to get along with. LOL.
Bring on the conference review…love that stuff..and you:)
I get where you are coming from, I think.
You will be glad to know that General Conference season has officially commenced with today’s podcast!
I hope you like it!
RFM
P.S.
RFM… I would just add that i understand your intention was to critique the literary style, and that’s it, but you’re dealing with betrayed people…harder for us to subtract the man or whoever he had ghost write it. It’s a tall order! hahaha
I love you RFM!
Are you kidding me? You helped me leave this cult. I even mention you in my interview with Earl Erskine in Jan 2019.
I am just not like anyone else. I hated mormon doctrine for 55 years. I am thrilled it’s a lie. Cognitive dissonance was my normal and I always felt instable. This Tribe idea does not fit for me.
My birthday is Monday. 2 years free. I’ve never been happier. And Mel Gibson was dreamy. I’m getting ready to listen to your next part so gotta go.
I had never heard of Earl Erskine until you mentioned his name and then I did a little googling.
He does interviews of people who have left the LDS Church?
And you mentioned me during the interview?
I am honored! Thanks for the plug!
I am sincerely glad you have never been happier since leaving the LDS Church and you celebrate your second year of freedom . . . today!
Congratulations!
I hope you have a great birthday!
RFM
Hey RFM, great job on the podcasts during our shelter-in-homes situation. Actually, I’ve enjoyed every one of them. I started from the beginning after John Dehlin introduced you to his audience.
Thought you might be interested to know that the version of “Sukiyaki” that you played at the end of this one, recorded by the group 4 P.M., i.e. “for positive music,” has an LDS connection. At least 2 of it’s members, Ray and Roberto Peña, were Mormon. They may still be. Ray and his family were in our stake here in Baltimore. I never met Roberto but Ray is one of the nicest people I’ve ever met. Not sure where they are now.
Keep up the great work!
No way! I had no idea that two members of 4 P.M. were Mormons!
If they are no longer active, but post-Mormons, that could be what the P.M. stands for!
Of course, then there would need to be four of them.
But I digress.
I did know about The Jets back in the 1980s being Mormon, but 4 P.M. must have slipped by me.
Thanks for listening!
I must remember to thank John Dehlin for the intro!
RFM
RFM, I want to first say thank you for all of your content and hard work. You are entertaining and have great quality content.
These last three episodes on 3 Nephi with the savior visiting the Americas have been a pretty rough listen, but I get that you are interested in these literary complexities in the BOM. I for one think you might be over polishing/waxing these cars and giving a bit more credit than is deserved literarily, but I am fine agreeing to disagree. I get that you are not defending the bom as a divine book, but rather trying to impart findings that you see as interesting. I for one fall on the side that Joseph’s reimagined sermon here is full of obvious mistakes that make no sense and would have no place among these nephites, and what complexities you see are probably more accidental and part of your own creation more than Joseph’s.
For instance, Joseph once again makes obvious timeline errors such as copying a sermon from peter in acts 3:22 that he has yet to give at Pentecost or copying from 1 Corinthians 11:29 that Paul has yet to pen.
3rd Nephi 12:41 gives us a reference to Roman law, where Roman soldiers had within their rights to require a Jew to carry his belongings for up to one mile. This Roman law as analogy would be lost on the nephites. Also, with the talk of sheep and shepherds to a people that had no sheep, one might wonder why the lord couldn’t impart a sermon more tailored to his audience.
Anyways. Just my two cents. Maybe the author did intend these examples that you find to be well layered literary complexities, but if so, he failed to see an opportunity to showcase a more tailored and better planned sermon to the nephites.
Alright. Enough of my rant. All the best to you RFM. Again, very grateful for your podcast that has kept me entertained while I travel for work. Have a great week!
I really appreciate your suffering through these last three episodes, RLeeG.
I know it has been a rough go for some of my listeners and for that I do apologize.
You make excellent points about additional tell-tale signs that the Book of Mormon is a late product brimming with material no doubt taken from Joseph Smith’s time and culture.
You are correct that I am not trying to argue complexity shows authenticity, or ancientness.
You will be glad to know, I hope, that I am up and running in customary form with the latest release that just went up a few minutes ago!
Thanks for listening!
RFM
Brother RFM, I wonder if the idea of “covenant” and its numerous references are is also an indication that the BoM is a modern production. From the book: [i]Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America[/i] by David Hackett Fischer, the puritan culture of New England, very much turned on the idea of covenant, family and genealogy. Obviously, the was JS’s backyard.
See the references here:
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Albion_s_Seed/GOYg58I7g30C?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=covenant
Thanks for listening, Stephen, and for the great comment and reference!
RFM
It was on my first week out in the field in Ohio in 1980 that my companion shared the paper of Mark E. Peterson’s view on race. At the time I took from it that Caucasians were the most valiant, followed by Asians with the Blacks pulling up the rear. Although this was the first time that I heard per-existance valor applied to race, this paper was in wide circulation across the mission and since Peterson was an apostle it was taken as doctrine.
I was not aware it had so much circulation! But then, we weren’t aware of a lot of stuff over in Japan!
Glad to see that particular teaching in the rear view mirror!
Although it would be better if the church identified the talk and specifically rejected it.
Instead of just sort of waving its hand at unnamed theories by anonymous church leaders in support of the ban and saying, “Yeah, we reject all that stuff.”