Anubis says: “hey, what happened to my head?”
what do you make of this? are the apologists slowly retreating from defending the Book of Hor’s holiness as canonical scripture?
“So if what is most important needs to be defended, what are some of the things that need to be defended?” he asked.
He suggested six: God exists; Jesus Christ is His Son; God talked and still talks with men through the power of the Holy Ghost; Jesus Christ atoned for the sins of the world; the Atonement is available to those who trust Jesus, turn from sin, make and keep sacred covenants, and follow the course throughout their lives; and the Book of Mormon is true, an authentic record of God’s interactions with actual ancient people.
“Now, we may be called upon to defend smaller points than these, but if these six things are not true, there is no point in the rest,” Brother Gee said.
so, just bat your eyes in ignorance at your critical friend/family member and defend instead these six things. if the critic insists on looking at the scientific evidence, point out they are caring more about man’s “evidence” and “science” rather than god’s holy church.
oh, also amazing is how the church’s most prominent BOA defender, Gee, totally distances himself and the LDS Church away from accepting the BOA as an important part of mormon doctrine:
“Now where is the Book of Abraham in this?” he asked. “It isn’t. The Book of Abraham is not central to the restored gospel of Christ.”
To illustrate, he said that of all the scriptural citations in general conference since 1942, the Book of Abraham has been cited less than 1 percent of the time. Most of those citations are the seven verses in Abraham 3:22-29, which tell of the pre-mortal existence. [yes, the other verses in the BOA are ideas which have since been thrown out of LDS belief, namely: polygamy, lying for the lord, and the origin of Ham (the negro’s) black curse- all gone, just like that]
*i say “the church’s” retreat because i don’t see anyone else alive today who could be considered as the main apologist of the BOA, other than the author of the church news’ article, john gee.
It sure sounds like Gee is trying to cut a whole in the wall, to make a door to escape from having to defend the Book of Abraham any longer. “The Church does not rise and fall on the veracity of the BOA.” That sure sounds like an escape hatch the church would be happy to use. Could this be a foreshadowing of how the church will someday treat the Book of Abraham?