First of all, this is an extremely well-made and tightly-edited video. You obviously take pride in your work and make sure that every frame matches your vision, which is impressive. If you weren't doing videos on such a niche topic, I think you would get more views. I find your video compelling as a distillation of many of the aspects of LDS speculation that I place myself in opposition to. As you mention, current LDS leadership does not comment much on these topics, but they are very popular at the folk-mormon level (I mean that you encounter these ideas a lot when you talk to regular mormons). Although everything you cite is correct, I think it is important to distinguish the canon from everything else Joseph Smith and his successors have written. It is not canon to say that God the Father was once a man like us. It is not canon to have a neo-pagan view of a multiplicity of gods. It is not canon to attack the orthodox concept of the trinity. It is not canon to speak of a Heavenly Mother (unless you consider the Proclamations to be canon--so it's close). I don't disagree with any of these positions on logical grounds, but emphasizing these points drives deeper divisions between mormons and other christians. I think the LDS church leadership has had good reason to try to remove barriers to cooperation with other christians and has attempted to gain full acceptance within the wider christian community. In the modern era when christianity and religions writ-large are continually challenged and weakened by popular culture, I think it is more important to seek allies than to emphasize differences. But these questions do matter, and I wish the LDS leadership would spend a bit more time working out the specifics of what we should regard as official LDS theology. Maybe that would encourage them to publish new revelations. Looking forward to your future videos.
Do you think if Friedrich Nietzsche and a Christian had a child, you would get a Latter Day Saint? It seems like we take the best of both worlds, right?
"time is cyclical, it has to be, otherwise it would not be eternal" is false. Time doesn't have to be cyclical to be eternal, it can instead be infinite and aperiodic.
The way I understand it, if time does go on forever and stretch infinitely into the past then eventually everything that is happening to you will cycle through and happen to you again. Hence time is cyclical.
First of all, this is an extremely well-made and tightly-edited video. You obviously take pride in your work and make sure that every frame matches your vision, which is impressive. If you weren't doing videos on such a niche topic, I think you would get more views.
I find your video compelling as a distillation of many of the aspects of LDS speculation that I place myself in opposition to. As you mention, current LDS leadership does not comment much on these topics, but they are very popular at the folk-mormon level (I mean that you encounter these ideas a lot when you talk to regular mormons). Although everything you cite is correct, I think it is important to distinguish the canon from everything else Joseph Smith and his successors have written. It is not canon to say that God the Father was once a man like us. It is not canon to have a neo-pagan view of a multiplicity of gods. It is not canon to attack the orthodox concept of the trinity. It is not canon to speak of a Heavenly Mother (unless you consider the Proclamations to be canon--so it's close).
I don't disagree with any of these positions on logical grounds, but emphasizing these points drives deeper divisions between mormons and other christians. I think the LDS church leadership has had good reason to try to remove barriers to cooperation with other christians and has attempted to gain full acceptance within the wider christian community. In the modern era when christianity and religions writ-large are continually challenged and weakened by popular culture, I think it is more important to seek allies than to emphasize differences. But these questions do matter, and I wish the LDS leadership would spend a bit more time working out the specifics of what we should regard as official LDS theology. Maybe that would encourage them to publish new revelations.
Looking forward to your future videos.
Thanks for the comment!
LETS GOOOOO
Do you think if Friedrich Nietzsche and a Christian had a child, you would get a Latter Day Saint? It seems like we take the best of both worlds, right?
The audio was so poor!
"time is cyclical, it has to be, otherwise it would not be eternal" is false. Time doesn't have to be cyclical to be eternal, it can instead be infinite and aperiodic.
The way I understand it, if time does go on forever and stretch infinitely into the past then eventually everything that is happening to you will cycle through and happen to you again. Hence time is cyclical.
Awsome. I thought i was first to discover this unity of nietchze and smith.
you have a knack for making a mortal think of a higher purpose in their being human.
It's Barker, not baker.
This reminds me of season 2 Loki someway. Y'all haven't watched it I would recommend it.
I have seen Loki season 2. The ending was wild
@@ThisSaintsTheory yeah it was good