Darn, I thought I was getting it. :confused: I don't understand how the inspiration of translating a tablet that was written by God is different from the inspiration of translating the bible from one language to another, or really different from giving a sermon under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
What you have yet to grasp is the concept of prophecy and how this is regarded as the litteral word of God. The prophet speaks things they cannot know. This is a gift from God, one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit has been inspiring people to speak for a very long time.
The tablets Joseph Smith claimed to find and translate are unknown, The language they are claimed to have been written is unknown, we don't know if they were written by God, and beyond his testimony whether they even existed. He claimed to have been assisted by an angel to translate them. There is a great deal of difference from words that have been spoken out and recorded in front of a number of people in a known language and which have been later translated. Prophecy is not a sermon, it is a fothtelling of what God is saying. God is speaking to us all the time, the question is whether we are hearing what he is saying.
I am more interested in understanding the IDEA of the literal word of God, rather than the test of whether something is or is not the word of the TRUE God (or the True word of God if that is different). My religion does not have a concept of the literal word of God, and I have a hard time imagining what that might be.
Here we come to a central part of the Christian experience, Faith and the question of whether we have the litteral word of God is a question of what we take on Faith and believe without further evidence and what we do not.
As I have said the words of prophecy recorded in the Bible are the litteral word of God, the words of Jesus recored in the Bible are the litteral word of God, The words inspired by the Holy Spirit recorded in the Bible are the litteral word of God. These are things God wanted us to know for his own purposes and so we are instructed.
When the Bible indicates that a prophet spoke forth words indicating that they were from God or that the words recorded are the words of Jesus we take that on Faith. We expect that we are being told the truth. When a apostle writes to us explaining a part of our belief we also take on Faith that such writings are inspired by the Holy Spirit. Part of this experience is also that a number of us have also had the experience of speaking prophetic words or being inspired to write, so that these things are not unique to the Bible
I can understand what it is to be inspired by god, but it seems like Christians are using the term a little differently when they talk about being inspired by God. For example, one can be inspired by the sea to write a poem, or give an inspired performance. But again, you seem to use the word a in a difference sense. Is this true? And, if so, can you explain the difference to me?
The difficulty in this is you are trying to reason because you have no way to experience what we say. To have the same understanding as we do you must have the measure of Faith. How prophecy works for me is I hear a sentence in my mind and if I speak those words the prophesy flows, I am inspired to speak, I have not prepared to speak and what I speak about I have not thought about.
Likewise, looking up "Unction of the Holy Spirit", I find that unction is an anointing which in turn means to dab with oil as a symbol of divine connection. I assume the anointing here used metaphorically? Can other people see the unction happen? Clearly, I am confused. Can you explain this to me in simple language?
I am using the word unction both in the sense of anointing and in the sense of pressure or a gentle urging. The anointing of the Holy Spirit can be felt in a physical sense. The presence of God can be felt or sensed
I am happy to continue this discussion with you but I can do so more fully if our contact is direct. Please email me
[email protected]