https://www.reddit.com/r/latterdaysaint ... ivens_ama/
Does this strike anyone else as just a repetition of standard non-answer that falls under the general category of the catylist theory? Does Givens understand that there is no way to support such a theory? That it should be named the Catalyst Excuse?"Abraham's teachings and writings on the creation, the priesthood, and the resurrection were adopted and integrated by the Egyptians into derivative writings in their own sacred burial texts discussing immortality and the afterlife, which were adapted and corrupted over time resulting in a version of the Book of Breathings that Joseph obtained. Then Joseph translated it to extract the original truths in Abraham's gospel teachings that influenced the Egyptian writings."
He seems to be trying to establish the catalyst theory as the official answer and he sides with Hauglid (who he names as the primary inspiration and information source for the book) in accepting that there was no lost scroll. Givens actually refers to the process as "channeling." Using such a loaded term seems like an intentional act of moving even further away from empirical thinking and deeper into magical thinking.
Here's an interesting observation that Givens makes:
It sounds like he's saying wall-jello is now the standard for doctrinal exegesis and that you should just be open to going along with whatever flavor they're tossing out today, curious sure, but more importantly, intellectually submissive.Many who stay do so because they are intellectually incurious and not apt to be troubled by new developments or discoveries. And many who leave do so because they are intellectually curious, but not intellectually open enough to reformulations of faith paradigms. So we may be losing the moderate middle?
When someone brought up the fact that the main problems still exist, like the embarrassingly bad translations of the facsimiles, Givens said:
If I'm following where he's going with all of this and other statements on the AMA, Givens seems to be saying that Joseph believed what he was translating was correct, and even though it wasn't that's okay because he was channeling information from an outside source to restore what the papyri really SHOULD have said.The process was not what we thought, but has no bearing on the validity of the product.
What this is really all about, if you ask me, is that the BoA has become a total trainwreck for the church and they need someone to step in and put a fresh coat of paint on it with eloquent language about overlooking the concrete problems to find the nebulous meaning behind the meaning that will resonate with the bigger message of the church, which is "don't worry your little brain, we've got it covered." What that really means for most members is that they can say, "hey, Terryl Givens is a really smart guy, so smart I couldn't even get through any of his other books. He must have some really good answers, which takes the heat off me having to deal with it myself."